How far back do you want to go? Before we gave a crap about the disabled we would lock 'em in a sanitarium - but they got that lucky if their family could afford it.
Cute. No, actually, it's not a good starting point at all, regardless of whether the Earth goes boom. This idea is crap. It's a needlessly brittle way of providing first responders with important medical information. Simpler, more reliable ways of doing that already exist, including the whole database aspect of it. The new ideas here are using a QR code and a smartphone with proprietary software to access the database. Reliable operation depends heavily on uninterested third parties.
I would kill to be able to carve out an extra five hours a week for aerobic exercise. However, that would mean giving up either my job, giving up sleep, giving up (at least) one of my hobbies, or never watching another minute of TV for the rest of my life.
Everybody is busy. It's a question of priorities. For you, exercise ranks below all of the things you mention there. For me, it ranks above TV, and it counts as a hobby. I have enough fat relatives to have a good idea of what will happen if I don't stay active, and it isn't pretty.
GP could have least done the source blog the courtesy of a link (maybe NSFW). The point being made there is a rebuttal to the claim that 3D "makes the characters and environments more believable".
Oh, BTW, since I personally cannot name characters in just about any movie, does that mean they are all gimmicky crap? Or just that I've watched Empire Strikes Back many times since it came out, including when I was an impressionable kid, and read the LOTR in book form decades before the movie, versus watching Avatar a total of once?
Interesting. Perhaps part of the reason you've watched Empire Strikes Back so many times is that you enjoyed the story? I mean, I don't think we're breaking new ground here if we say that special effects (e.g. explosions, 3D, explosions in 3D) don't make up for flat characters or a weak story.
Bad and Wrong. Your wife and kids don't need your resentment. You do no one any favors by framing your working habits as a trade-off between your self-respect and their well-being.
Hate to break your heart here, but there's no need for a technological solution. Deterrence works fine. Fines, points, suspension of license, double-secret probation, etc.
OK, let me reword that a little: "...Telling someone who trusts you that you're giving them medicine, when you know you’re not, because you want their money, isn’t just lying--it’s like an example you’d make up if you had to illustrate for cheekyjohnson why lying is wrong."
http://xkcd.com/971/
Not usually a fan, but the caption is worthwhile: "...Telling someone who trusts you that you're giving them medicine, when you know you’re not, because you want their money, isn’t just lying--it’s like an example you’d make up if you had to illustrate for a child why lying is wrong."
On paper it may seem like they have more failures than NASA or the ESA
When things don't work, it's a failure. Doesn't matter how much you did or didn't spend. There's no "on paper" involved. ($170M is really cheap, though.)
they spend less time testing on the ground and more time testing in space.
Testing after launch isn't called "testing" anymore. It's called "really hoping things go well on this crap shoot" followed by "failure". That's why this stuff is expensive, by the way: You either do it right, or you get nothing. Well, maybe you get a fireball or a crater, but you don't get any science.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanksgiving: It's like the /. comments, but with turkey and alcohol.
Fixed it for you.
Not even alcohol can fix it. Not even alcohol.
Thanksgiving: It's like the /. comments, but with turkey.
The financial press is probably a lot less concerned about a few fires, and a lot more concerned about funky accounting.
He did face charges, but they were surprisingly light in retrospect.
I believe Millikan was found guilty of manipulating oil.
Who is going to stop them once they're up there anyway?
The spacecraft is "up there". "They" are actually down here, well within the reach of Buzz Aldrin's fists.
A riot was asked what they didn't like about the video...
"Attempting to interview a riot" sounds like a it should have been a Python skit. I'm picturing Cleese for the job.
moderation undone.
How far back do you want to go? Before we gave a crap about the disabled we would lock 'em in a sanitarium - but they got that lucky if their family could afford it.
Cute. No, actually, it's not a good starting point at all, regardless of whether the Earth goes boom. This idea is crap. It's a needlessly brittle way of providing first responders with important medical information. Simpler, more reliable ways of doing that already exist, including the whole database aspect of it. The new ideas here are using a QR code and a smartphone with proprietary software to access the database. Reliable operation depends heavily on uninterested third parties.
It's almost like a bunch of people that enjoy making money off of smartphone and social networking technology decided to shoehorn that same thinking into emergency services. [sarcasm]How could you lose when you combine two hot, growing markets like smartphones and healthcare? It's a definite win-win.[/sarcasm]
Yes, cause there's no such thing as areas without coverage, network errors, database failures, ...
Even if you don't need to connect, the equipment and software can still crap out. Such a bad idea.
I would kill to be able to carve out an extra five hours a week for aerobic exercise. However, that would mean giving up either my job, giving up sleep, giving up (at least) one of my hobbies, or never watching another minute of TV for the rest of my life.
Everybody is busy. It's a question of priorities. For you, exercise ranks below all of the things you mention there. For me, it ranks above TV, and it counts as a hobby. I have enough fat relatives to have a good idea of what will happen if I don't stay active, and it isn't pretty.
Oh, BTW, since I personally cannot name characters in just about any movie, does that mean they are all gimmicky crap? Or just that I've watched Empire Strikes Back many times since it came out, including when I was an impressionable kid, and read the LOTR in book form decades before the movie, versus watching Avatar a total of once?
Interesting. Perhaps part of the reason you've watched Empire Strikes Back so many times is that you enjoyed the story? I mean, I don't think we're breaking new ground here if we say that special effects (e.g. explosions, 3D, explosions in 3D) don't make up for flat characters or a weak story.
Bad and Wrong. Your wife and kids don't need your resentment. You do no one any favors by framing your working habits as a trade-off between your self-respect and their well-being.
I actually heard her momma say "stranger danger". Well needless to say I went off like an atom bomb
Hilarious. Sounds like momma's got a sixth sense about people.
It's easy to get rid of - just think of the game over music: Dunn-dunn-dunn-dunnnnnnnn...
In soviet russia...
Hate to break your heart here, but there's no need for a technological solution. Deterrence works fine. Fines, points, suspension of license, double-secret probation, etc.
More likely scenario: if I put a key into the car's ignition and before it started it gave me a 30 second ad by the car manufacturer...
I won't hear that ad, because I'll be outside scraping the ice off the windshield.
Ryan, some things in here don't react well to bullets.
OK, let me reword that a little: "...Telling someone who trusts you that you're giving them medicine, when you know you’re not, because you want their money, isn’t just lying--it’s like an example you’d make up if you had to illustrate for cheekyjohnson why lying is wrong."
http://xkcd.com/971/
Not usually a fan, but the caption is worthwhile: "...Telling someone who trusts you that you're giving them medicine, when you know you’re not, because you want their money, isn’t just lying--it’s like an example you’d make up if you had to illustrate for a child why lying is wrong."
*the crowd goes wild*
Well yes, obviously the roads, the roads go without saying.
On paper it may seem like they have more failures than NASA or the ESA
When things don't work, it's a failure. Doesn't matter how much you did or didn't spend. There's no "on paper" involved. ($170M is really cheap, though.)
they spend less time testing on the ground and more time testing in space.
Testing after launch isn't called "testing" anymore. It's called "really hoping things go well on this crap shoot" followed by "failure". That's why this stuff is expensive, by the way: You either do it right, or you get nothing. Well, maybe you get a fireball or a crater, but you don't get any science.