No its not. To my knowledge, macroevolution, that is, an exclusively breeding new species developing, has never been observed. Microevolution on the other hand has been observed.
Please, this ace inventor is obviously doing his best to jack up the total payment to 10 diamonds. He is entitled to do whatever suits him with his patents, but this makes him seem more like a joker than anything else.
As Ron Paul once said, if we want wars all over the planet and want the government babying people from cradle to grave - then we must have an IRS and massive debt. But if we want freedom and liberty, then yes we can get rid of them.
I cannot speak about the economics of wars in an educated fashion, but I can say that the government babying people is cheaper than the alternative. Leave aside the fact that the government will step in later, at the nine stitches mark, instead of earlier, at the stitch in time mark. The government babying people is really a derogertory way to talk about the government assuming risk. Centralizing and sharing risk decreases costs.
But what else can you expect from someone who wants to get back onto the gold standard?
Except that the Intelligent Design "movement" was started, and continues to be pushed, by the Discovery Institute and the Center for Renewal of Science and Culture. Both are Christian groups, and the assumption among believers is that the "intelligent designer" is the Christian God.
What is the name for this fallacy? It seems like a false syllogism. That is, I believe X, people who believe Y believe X, therefore I believe Y seems to be the logical underpinnning you are going for. It is also false.
The most henious examples are to find someone whose beliefs run contrary to yours, and find a villified person in history who shared those beliefs. For instance, "ZOMG, you want trains to run on time and so did Mussilini. Fascist" Cue Godwin's law.
Can Clippy 2.0 also read other people's minds? This question seems very useful:
It looks like your girlfriend is getting disgusted by your porn collection and/or porn currently playing. Would you like me to replace it with good old-fashioned American girl-on-girl action?
A policeman might be part of the big govermental boogeyman, but they're also an individual, with an individual's rights.
The average slashdotter is contending that the policeman be watched, not to punish him, but because he is performing official duties. He is, while on duty, an agent of the government, and during so, he has different rights and privledges. He can speed/run red lights/etc. He has a lower standard for using force. He has arrest powers. He becomes immune to some forms of torts. He also has fewer rights. First and foremost, if he invades your privacy, the evidence cannot be used in court. I actually don't understand it all (IANAL), but many people would contend that his actions need to be recordable to act as a check on abuses.
Since public employees are paid using my tax dollars, then I and every other tax-paying citizen have an absolute right to know what they are up to.
I fail to see why you would couch your argument in an argument about money rather than civil rights vs. the governement. If you visit a different state do you expect to have fewer rights than the citizens of that state?
If a product doesn't stand on its merit, telling me repeatedly how great it is simply turns me off.
Good point. People on/. should stop trying to talk about how great Linux and MacOSX are. I mean, if they were so great they would be dominant already.
New products always need advertising. But what I'm really curious about is how is Silverlight not great? I haven't examined the issue yet (I thought it was still in Beta, so I don't consider their advertising excessibe), but you obviously have carefully weighted all the pros and cons, so I'm interested in your view. Or maybe your logic was "Boo, hiss, MS is the devil."
Print? Print is trying to become like pulp novels or tv news, cheap crap.
But you hit the heart of the problem. TV news is a newscaster talking to the camera. I want to see primary sources mostly, not someone's evidence-free analysis.
There's laws in place to protect people who signed contracts they didn't understand. Can't slip some legalize in a EULA to some videogame requiring someone to give their house up if they click "okay."
True. However, those are mostly judical rulings (IANAL, but from what I understand) about reasonablness in contract law. The law deals with its own abuses. Contract law is at least a full term in law school.
By contrast, lawyers or laypeople making economic decisions is dumb. I know both, and I wouldn't trust either of them to be able to be walked through a companies books. Also, to prove a cost was reasonable, a company/individual would have to open their books to a ridiculous degree. This rule would allow competitors insight into that company's business practices.
I understand the motivation, but I don't believe it is possible. Or even desirable. Limited-edition prints, for example, are based around the idea of scarcity. Now, if you want to convince me that abandonware should be made available, that's fine. But there are other ways (e.g. recurring, progressive fees) to ensure works pass into the public domain.
Mind you, none of us we're potty-mouthed prima donas who needed whoever was paying us to have a contractual obligation to worship the ground on which we walk.
While I don't need that, if you could direct me to someone willing to worship the ground I walked on, that would be an amazing perk. I would settle for a contractual requirement not to micromanage the software architecture. But heck, as long as I get the contractual requirement to pay me, I'm not overly fussy.
They may be the best coders in the world, but their personalities are so bone-chillingly awful
Guys like that are never the best coders in the world, solely because, while they are willing to share their knowledge, they are unwilling to learn. So, while they may be the best coder at any given moment, they don't grow. At least not nearly as quickly as someone who learns from other people's mistakes.
so if you're going to bill an hour, you goddamn well work that hour. Yes, it's not fair that customers think that way, and it's probably not fair that you have to fake it on occasion for 55 of the 60 minutes you're going to invoice, but that's the way of it. It's a pretty clear pointer that he doesn't know his business.
It sounds like he had a fixed price job, and was amazed when he did it in 5 minutes they didn't pay him a $500 fee to fix the problem. While technically he was in the right, it's just dumb to admit it was that easy.
they should hire someone on to manage the mundane things like accounts receivable, the dirty details of contracts and the like.
Best advice to a technically-minded person starting a consulting business. At the very least you need a lawyer to make a boiler-plate contract, and anyone responsible to run accounts recievable.
My favorite part is where he brags about having a business degree, except that prior to that he admitted to being homeless for a big chunk of the year.
Or not knowing that Net-30 is standard. Or the last few paragraphs when he confuses fixed and marginal costs and then claims that companies that charge by billable hours would make more money if they got done with projects sooner.
I don't know why I wasted my time reading that, but I suppose the shudenfradue was too great.
He clearly intends on having a more clear-cut, law-friendly way for it to be put into the books.
It is not a matter of phrasing, it is a problem with the concept. "Available" is an impossible goal, if you are trying to make the pricing "fair". EMI might make random recordings available from their vault, but it costs money to store it, retreive it, there is some profit to be expected, and costs printing it. The fixed costs make it more economical to run occasional reprintings rather than constant availability.
Plus, suppose I write a book, and dislike the way critics pan it. Why should I have to sell it for what you consider fair. Maybe I don't want to sell it at all and want to exercise my rights not to have to share.
Maybe I write a book on shaping model plane wings, extremly technical with a fairly small but wealthy audience. I try to sell it for $75. Who is anyone to tell me that is unreasonable? However, no John Grisham novel is worth that.
Apple messes up dates in the world clock: Hope they fix it soon although it's purely aesthetic.
Microsoft messes up dates in the world clock: Haha, id10ts in Redmond - or - Oh no, the security implications are huge - or - If this was F/OSS someone would have noticed the bad date code and patched it.
Google messes up dates in the world clock: Huh, I thought India was 16 hours behind me, but they must be in some crazy timezone that isn't what I expected.
Software? I use pen and paper to do all the hex calculations and use a morse code key to write to the hard drive. But, I suppose if you are going to trust a machine where anyone can break into your home and change the code on it, then you deserve the lack of security that leads to.
No bank wants an employee that's a convicted fraudster. No school wants teachers who are porn stars. No police force wants an ex-con as an officer.
I understand that a person with large amounts of cash and electronic transfer information shouldn't have a history of stealing cash and via electronic transfers (similar enough to fraudster). I can understand police forces not wanting most ex-cons because they have to uphold the law and not violate it. However, I fail to see why a school should be allowed to rule on the sexual activities of a teacher.
The normally accepted method is that if a site is unable to get/set cookies this indicates that the machine has told them to buzz off (your words).
How would it know that it could not get/set cookies? Just explain how you think it could work in any other way without keeping a way on the server (which I will contend is more intrusive than a cookie) of identifying a computer. All you do is state it shouldn't work like that. Fine, but it's the best way given the constraints of reality.
Last I checked my door required a key only from outside.
You're never gonna get women to put out that way.
Actually, I've had less success since installing double-keyed locks. I think it strikes women as somewhat creepy, but it's really just because the door has glass as part of it.
How, exactly, can there be a voting error in the first place? The voter votes. Done. The voter "made a mistake?" Same answer: "Done. Try better next time, sir."
Voting error usually means that there was some problem, technical or otherwise, that prevented the voter from communicating the vote to the tabulator. This can be as sinister as intentionally losing ballots that vote for an opposing party. It can also be as benign as the voter accidentally checking one box, erasing it, and checking another box, and the OCR machine has trouble reading it. Basically, the ACLU wants the ballots scanned in such a way as a mechanical problem that causes the ballot not to be read to lead to the ballot being destroyed, and the voter given a new one. Or, in other words, scanned on the way out of th polling place.
Lastly, there are many forms of voting that allow people to change their votes as the voting is ongoing. However, these are iterative contests, such as run-offs. The only reason not to allow someone to change their vote at any time over election day is the possibility (110%) of fraud and abuse of the system.
Slashdot Mirror
No its not. To my knowledge, macroevolution, that is, an exclusively breeding new species developing, has never been observed. Microevolution on the other hand has been observed.
Please, this ace inventor is obviously doing his best to jack up the total payment to 10 diamonds. He is entitled to do whatever suits him with his patents, but this makes him seem more like a joker than anything else.
What special criteria doe someone have to meet to be considered an expert witness?
I cannot speak about the economics of wars in an educated fashion, but I can say that the government babying people is cheaper than the alternative. Leave aside the fact that the government will step in later, at the nine stitches mark, instead of earlier, at the stitch in time mark. The government babying people is really a derogertory way to talk about the government assuming risk. Centralizing and sharing risk decreases costs.
But what else can you expect from someone who wants to get back onto the gold standard?
What is the name for this fallacy? It seems like a false syllogism. That is, I believe X, people who believe Y believe X, therefore I believe Y seems to be the logical underpinnning you are going for. It is also false.
The most henious examples are to find someone whose beliefs run contrary to yours, and find a villified person in history who shared those beliefs. For instance, "ZOMG, you want trains to run on time and so did Mussilini. Fascist" Cue Godwin's law.
Can Clippy 2.0 also read other people's minds? This question seems very useful:
It looks like your girlfriend is getting disgusted by your porn collection and/or porn currently playing. Would you like me to replace it with good old-fashioned American girl-on-girl action?
That requires admin access.
The average slashdotter is contending that the policeman be watched, not to punish him, but because he is performing official duties. He is, while on duty, an agent of the government, and during so, he has different rights and privledges. He can speed/run red lights/etc. He has a lower standard for using force. He has arrest powers. He becomes immune to some forms of torts. He also has fewer rights. First and foremost, if he invades your privacy, the evidence cannot be used in court. I actually don't understand it all (IANAL), but many people would contend that his actions need to be recordable to act as a check on abuses.
I fail to see why you would couch your argument in an argument about money rather than civil rights vs. the governement. If you visit a different state do you expect to have fewer rights than the citizens of that state?
Is coherent light necessarily polarized the same?
Good point. People on /. should stop trying to talk about how great Linux and MacOSX are. I mean, if they were so great they would be dominant already.
New products always need advertising. But what I'm really curious about is how is Silverlight not great? I haven't examined the issue yet (I thought it was still in Beta, so I don't consider their advertising excessibe), but you obviously have carefully weighted all the pros and cons, so I'm interested in your view. Or maybe your logic was "Boo, hiss, MS is the devil."
It's not a lack of punishment, it's a reset to zero. So in other words, you burn your bridges, you do just that. You cannot get references, etc.
Print? Print is trying to become like pulp novels or tv news, cheap crap.
But you hit the heart of the problem. TV news is a newscaster talking to the camera. I want to see primary sources mostly, not someone's evidence-free analysis.
True. However, those are mostly judical rulings (IANAL, but from what I understand) about reasonablness in contract law. The law deals with its own abuses. Contract law is at least a full term in law school.
By contrast, lawyers or laypeople making economic decisions is dumb. I know both, and I wouldn't trust either of them to be able to be walked through a companies books. Also, to prove a cost was reasonable, a company/individual would have to open their books to a ridiculous degree. This rule would allow competitors insight into that company's business practices.
I understand the motivation, but I don't believe it is possible. Or even desirable. Limited-edition prints, for example, are based around the idea of scarcity. Now, if you want to convince me that abandonware should be made available, that's fine. But there are other ways (e.g. recurring, progressive fees) to ensure works pass into the public domain.
While I don't need that, if you could direct me to someone willing to worship the ground I walked on, that would be an amazing perk. I would settle for a contractual requirement not to micromanage the software architecture. But heck, as long as I get the contractual requirement to pay me, I'm not overly fussy.
Guys like that are never the best coders in the world, solely because, while they are willing to share their knowledge, they are unwilling to learn. So, while they may be the best coder at any given moment, they don't grow. At least not nearly as quickly as someone who learns from other people's mistakes.
It sounds like he had a fixed price job, and was amazed when he did it in 5 minutes they didn't pay him a $500 fee to fix the problem. While technically he was in the right, it's just dumb to admit it was that easy.
Best advice to a technically-minded person starting a consulting business. At the very least you need a lawyer to make a boiler-plate contract, and anyone responsible to run accounts recievable.
Or not knowing that Net-30 is standard. Or the last few paragraphs when he confuses fixed and marginal costs and then claims that companies that charge by billable hours would make more money if they got done with projects sooner.
I don't know why I wasted my time reading that, but I suppose the shudenfradue was too great.
It is not a matter of phrasing, it is a problem with the concept. "Available" is an impossible goal, if you are trying to make the pricing "fair". EMI might make random recordings available from their vault, but it costs money to store it, retreive it, there is some profit to be expected, and costs printing it. The fixed costs make it more economical to run occasional reprintings rather than constant availability.
Plus, suppose I write a book, and dislike the way critics pan it. Why should I have to sell it for what you consider fair. Maybe I don't want to sell it at all and want to exercise my rights not to have to share.
Maybe I write a book on shaping model plane wings, extremly technical with a fairly small but wealthy audience. I try to sell it for $75. Who is anyone to tell me that is unreasonable? However, no John Grisham novel is worth that.
Slashdot responses...
Apple messes up dates in the world clock: Hope they fix it soon although it's purely aesthetic.
Microsoft messes up dates in the world clock: Haha, id10ts in Redmond - or - Oh no, the security implications are huge - or - If this was F/OSS someone would have noticed the bad date code and patched it.
Google messes up dates in the world clock: Huh, I thought India was 16 hours behind me, but they must be in some crazy timezone that isn't what I expected.
That sounds like the type of law free of ambiguity that will be universally interperted by everyone to be the same.
Software? I use pen and paper to do all the hex calculations and use a morse code key to write to the hard drive. But, I suppose if you are going to trust a machine where anyone can break into your home and change the code on it, then you deserve the lack of security that leads to.
I understand that a person with large amounts of cash and electronic transfer information shouldn't have a history of stealing cash and via electronic transfers (similar enough to fraudster). I can understand police forces not wanting most ex-cons because they have to uphold the law and not violate it. However, I fail to see why a school should be allowed to rule on the sexual activities of a teacher.
I never heard that term before. I had heard the term voter error before. Also, all the news used the term "voter error" in 2000.
How would it know that it could not get/set cookies? Just explain how you think it could work in any other way without keeping a way on the server (which I will contend is more intrusive than a cookie) of identifying a computer. All you do is state it shouldn't work like that. Fine, but it's the best way given the constraints of reality.
Actually, I've had less success since installing double-keyed locks. I think it strikes women as somewhat creepy, but it's really just because the door has glass as part of it.
Voting error usually means that there was some problem, technical or otherwise, that prevented the voter from communicating the vote to the tabulator. This can be as sinister as intentionally losing ballots that vote for an opposing party. It can also be as benign as the voter accidentally checking one box, erasing it, and checking another box, and the OCR machine has trouble reading it. Basically, the ACLU wants the ballots scanned in such a way as a mechanical problem that causes the ballot not to be read to lead to the ballot being destroyed, and the voter given a new one. Or, in other words, scanned on the way out of th polling place.
Lastly, there are many forms of voting that allow people to change their votes as the voting is ongoing. However, these are iterative contests, such as run-offs. The only reason not to allow someone to change their vote at any time over election day is the possibility (110%) of fraud and abuse of the system.