The reason the current icons are good is that they are now unambiguous in their meaning, being up to date with current culture/tech has no bearing on this. The dated-ness of them actually helps, since they come from an age of unitaskers. They are good simply because each icon can only have one possible, reasonable interpretation.* If you were to try and make them modern, in our age of multitaskers, you'd get generic meaningless icons.
*ok, clipboard for paste, but not copy is a little ambiguous, but always appears near the less ambiguous paper doppelganger for "copy."
I facepalmed at that too. Typical head-in-the-sand behavior. Of course election officials aren't going to want to go looking too too hard for evidence that they wasted millions of taxpayer dollars awarding the contract to someone who already had a track record of over-voting bugs. Nothing to see here, just a small hiccup, inconsequential, could never happen on a big scale, move along.
How much you want to bet that the "replaced machine" gets shoved in a dank basement, or recycled for scrap, rather than stripped down to every wire/line of code looking for the fault or design flaw? (Preferably by the engineer who designed it, who is being flogged the whole time.)
I also like how they emphasize that this wasn't a close district. That just made it easier to detect. It's not like the machines somehow "know" when they are in a 95% leaning district and then allow themselves to malfunction only then.
Because the companies building them put their engineering A-team on the ATMs. The B-team gets stuck with the product for governments. Because waaaay more money is on the line if they screw up an ATM. The banks that bought them will hold their feet to the fire. Unlike state elections officials.
Do you think NY state officials are going to ask for a refund to replace all the machines? Blacklist ES&S? At least demand a full code audit and proof that any replacement get properly tested to JDEC/IEEE/ISO/whatever environmental standard applies? Demand a quick and proper fix? Demand testing above and beyond mere consumer grade electronics? Demand the head of the responsible manager from the company that cut corners, either on cost or rushing to meet the hanging-chad hysteria, by failing to test the damn thing above room temp?
Or just quietly accept whatever pitiful "patch" is offered to them by the manufacturer that is as much fig leaf as actual fix? The head of elections in the state is probably the one responsible for choosing the product and the millions of taxpayer dollars to spend on the units; admitting fault would mean loosing face. And they can't be fired or thrown on their sword like a bank VP could be. So there is a huge incentive for the state to help the company spin this as only a minor incident not worthy of voter concerns.
Of course I'm also sure that none of this has anything to do with the fact that YouTube gets a cut of those ad proceeds. And that a small user posting original content would probably opt not to insert ads, such that YouTube would be then getting a cut of zero.
I'm also willing to venture that after going through the figleaf of a process of he-said, she-said, he-said, that there is little recourse. My guess is that any future attempt by a little guy to appeal/refute/re-dispute a big copyright holders' refutation of the original dispute will fall down some big black rabbit hole of non-responsiveness from YouTube corporate bureaucracy, complete with lack of any personal points of contact for trying to actually resolve this.
I've found some that still will let you do multiples of $10 and give you one $10 if it's an odd multiple. I'll often dither my amount by +/-10 just to get one when my wallet is empty on smaller bills.
Technically, CGI is "Visual Effects." "Special Effects" are things like gasoline bomb 'explosions', squibs, etc.--effects/illusions that happen in front of the camera and are captured on film.
But radiators are probably pretty robust to kinetic damage. Just like in your car. I could see ships that are intentionally large, but 99% radiator acting as ablative shield too. Hide the critical 1% throughout the ship randomly so the opponent doesn't know which 1% to aim at.
Surprised the CC companies don't offer bounties/rewards for people who find this and report it to the CC company so they can slap the merchant or shut of card processing to them. It is the CC company taking the hit.
How about abuse of eminent domain to take people's homes and giving them at rock-bottom prices to developers? Also, it doesn't take legitimate copyright claims for corporate led (but legislatively enabled) SLAPP suits. Such as suing for trademark infringement {my company}sucks.com, even though it is a legit complaint site that doesn't pretend to be affiliated or sell anything. Often the free speech zones are for economic summits where often the gripe about government policy is that it lets companies abuse workers here and abroad to make a buck. Lots of people are pissed at companies that get away with breaches of privacy and fighting privacy protections that the government couldn't think of doing, and trying to get congress to codify this permissive atmosphere in law, or at least not actively restrict the companies.
Exactly right and incredibly wrong at the same time: the merchant raises everyone's price. And typically the card companies contractually don't allow the merchant to differentiate price based on payment method. If that across-the-board raise (say, 0.25%) is less than the cash-back bonus (say 1%), then congratulations, the card holder is making all the other suckers who paid in cash pay for his bonus. (Though he is only getting some fraction of the advertized %.) So in the end the rewards transfer wealth from other customers who's reward is zero (or even just below the average) to those with better rewards programs.
Uh, ST-IV they used a captured Bird of Prey, not a Star Fleet vessel. So at least the Klingons could do it...if their scientists were thoughtful enough.
Because they are used to prove that the schooling system prior was meeting "the whole point." A student isn't expected be making new academic discoveries at the time of the test; that was supposed to already have happened and the test is the confirmation that it happened properly.
(Though a smart kid may be able to infer some new academic principles during the test in lieu of rote preparation, if they're good/cocky enough.)
We are at war with Eurasia. We've always been at war with Eurasia.
Nice revisionism there. Plenty of skeptics (actually dentists, there is a difference, and Muller is the former not the later) have been claiming flat temperatures, or that any documented rise was part of normal fluctuations that would average out.
Last ditch, hair-brained schemes and desperate measures where the cure is almost as bad as the problem. Then human misery as it all crumbles apart Mad Max style.
Actually, Discovery channel had a great program on this that was a "100 year history" from the point of view of 2100. Very creative way to present a scary but realistic projection of today's business-as-usual. Made me cry at the end.
Wasn't the whole selling point of Mt. Dew, when it first came out, that it has 100% (50%?) more caffeine than other sodas? I remember if you needed a bigger kick your only choice was Jolt.
The reason climatologists are opposed to it is that they understand the differing timescales of the problem and the solution. CO2 has a atmospheric residency on the order of hundreds of years. The sulfur particulates must constantly be replenished (and in ever increasing quantities, if CO2 is not checked.)
SRM is grabbing the wolf by the ears. Once you commit to it you can't stop, or all the solar forcing you'd been masking comes back with a vengeance....it's like you hadn't even tried to begin with.
That, and the short-attention-span public, seeing temporary fix and not realizing how tenuous it was, would think "Problem Solved!" and be even more reluctant to solve the root of the problem.
Now something like a solar shade MIGHT be maintainable.....except that it's not close to feasible with today's tech. And it still lets the public/politicians kick the can down the road with CO2 until the problem comes back.
Carbon scrubbing may be necessary, and attacks the root. But unless you force the bad actors to pay up or shut up, the good Samaritans end up footing the bill. And if it works the bad actors will just want to dump that much more CO2 into the air. Good luck getting carbon credits (which do a great job in leveraging free market forces to solve the problem) into law any time soon.
My credit union must outsource their fraud department. I get cold calls occasionally, but before they will ask about fraud they try to require me to confirm MY identity with sensitive info. That I would demand their own 1800 number to call them back, while comparing against the service # on the back of the card, shocked them. That the numbers were DIFFERENT shocked me. Regular customer service # did confirm the other number as legit, eventually, after they understood why I was asking.
Tried to point out to them that they were 'training' customers to give sensitive info out in an insecure manner, but it seemed lost on them. I'm guessing 95% of the time folks just give out SSN digits, MMN, etc. to callers claiming to be the fraud department.
(P.S. WTF is so horrible with/.'s scripting that typing one sentence requires a minute of 100% CPU spike with zero responsiveness from the browser?)
Slashdot Mirror
What if you just REALLY hate these cans? I mean, _someone_ really hates them.
The reason the current icons are good is that they are now unambiguous in their meaning, being up to date with current culture/tech has no bearing on this. The dated-ness of them actually helps, since they come from an age of unitaskers. They are good simply because each icon can only have one possible, reasonable interpretation.* If you were to try and make them modern, in our age of multitaskers, you'd get generic meaningless icons.
*ok, clipboard for paste, but not copy is a little ambiguous, but always appears near the less ambiguous paper doppelganger for "copy."
I facepalmed at that too. Typical head-in-the-sand behavior. Of course election officials aren't going to want to go looking too too hard for evidence that they wasted millions of taxpayer dollars awarding the contract to someone who already had a track record of over-voting bugs. Nothing to see here, just a small hiccup, inconsequential, could never happen on a big scale, move along.
How much you want to bet that the "replaced machine" gets shoved in a dank basement, or recycled for scrap, rather than stripped down to every wire/line of code looking for the fault or design flaw? (Preferably by the engineer who designed it, who is being flogged the whole time.)
I also like how they emphasize that this wasn't a close district. That just made it easier to detect. It's not like the machines somehow "know" when they are in a 95% leaning district and then allow themselves to malfunction only then.
Because the companies building them put their engineering A-team on the ATMs. The B-team gets stuck with the product for governments. Because waaaay more money is on the line if they screw up an ATM. The banks that bought them will hold their feet to the fire. Unlike state elections officials.
Do you think NY state officials are going to ask for a refund to replace all the machines? Blacklist ES&S? At least demand a full code audit and proof that any replacement get properly tested to JDEC/IEEE/ISO/whatever environmental standard applies? Demand a quick and proper fix? Demand testing above and beyond mere consumer grade electronics? Demand the head of the responsible manager from the company that cut corners, either on cost or rushing to meet the hanging-chad hysteria, by failing to test the damn thing above room temp?
Or just quietly accept whatever pitiful "patch" is offered to them by the manufacturer that is as much fig leaf as actual fix? The head of elections in the state is probably the one responsible for choosing the product and the millions of taxpayer dollars to spend on the units; admitting fault would mean loosing face. And they can't be fired or thrown on their sword like a bank VP could be. So there is a huge incentive for the state to help the company spin this as only a minor incident not worthy of voter concerns.
I'm guessing that the review committee is someone [important] 's brother.
OK, you're going with that one? I'd have gone with Earth Girls are Easy.
Of course I'm also sure that none of this has anything to do with the fact that YouTube gets a cut of those ad proceeds. And that a small user posting original content would probably opt not to insert ads, such that YouTube would be then getting a cut of zero.
I'm also willing to venture that after going through the figleaf of a process of he-said, she-said, he-said, that there is little recourse. My guess is that any future attempt by a little guy to appeal/refute/re-dispute a big copyright holders' refutation of the original dispute will fall down some big black rabbit hole of non-responsiveness from YouTube corporate bureaucracy, complete with lack of any personal points of contact for trying to actually resolve this.
I've found some that still will let you do multiples of $10 and give you one $10 if it's an odd multiple. I'll often dither my amount by +/-10 just to get one when my wallet is empty on smaller bills.
Technically, CGI is "Visual Effects." "Special Effects" are things like gasoline bomb 'explosions', squibs, etc.--effects/illusions that happen in front of the camera and are captured on film.
But radiators are probably pretty robust to kinetic damage. Just like in your car. I could see ships that are intentionally large, but 99% radiator acting as ablative shield too. Hide the critical 1% throughout the ship randomly so the opponent doesn't know which 1% to aim at.
Mostly harmless.
From OKC, Why you should never pay for online dating. Of course "mysteriously" deleted from cupid's site by the CEO shortly after match.com bought them out.
Surprised the CC companies don't offer bounties/rewards for people who find this and report it to the CC company so they can slap the merchant or shut of card processing to them. It is the CC company taking the hit.
Forward is up. Up is backwards. Backwards is down. Down is forward.
How about abuse of eminent domain to take people's homes and giving them at rock-bottom prices to developers? Also, it doesn't take legitimate copyright claims for corporate led (but legislatively enabled) SLAPP suits. Such as suing for trademark infringement {my company}sucks.com, even though it is a legit complaint site that doesn't pretend to be affiliated or sell anything. Often the free speech zones are for economic summits where often the gripe about government policy is that it lets companies abuse workers here and abroad to make a buck. Lots of people are pissed at companies that get away with breaches of privacy and fighting privacy protections that the government couldn't think of doing, and trying to get congress to codify this permissive atmosphere in law, or at least not actively restrict the companies.
Exactly right and incredibly wrong at the same time: the merchant raises everyone's price. And typically the card companies contractually don't allow the merchant to differentiate price based on payment method. If that across-the-board raise (say, 0.25%) is less than the cash-back bonus (say 1%), then congratulations, the card holder is making all the other suckers who paid in cash pay for his bonus. (Though he is only getting some fraction of the advertized %.) So in the end the rewards transfer wealth from other customers who's reward is zero (or even just below the average) to those with better rewards programs.
Uh, ST-IV they used a captured Bird of Prey, not a Star Fleet vessel. So at least the Klingons could do it...if their scientists were thoughtful enough.
Because they are used to prove that the schooling system prior was meeting "the whole point." A student isn't expected be making new academic discoveries at the time of the test; that was supposed to already have happened and the test is the confirmation that it happened properly. (Though a smart kid may be able to infer some new academic principles during the test in lieu of rote preparation, if they're good/cocky enough.)
We are at war with Eurasia. We've always been at war with Eurasia.
Nice revisionism there. Plenty of skeptics (actually dentists, there is a difference, and Muller is the former not the later) have been claiming flat temperatures, or that any documented rise was part of normal fluctuations that would average out.
Last ditch, hair-brained schemes and desperate measures where the cure is almost as bad as the problem. Then human misery as it all crumbles apart Mad Max style.
Actually, Discovery channel had a great program on this that was a "100 year history" from the point of view of 2100. Very creative way to present a scary but realistic projection of today's business-as-usual. Made me cry at the end.
Wasn't the whole selling point of Mt. Dew, when it first came out, that it has 100% (50%?) more caffeine than other sodas? I remember if you needed a bigger kick your only choice was Jolt.
Just and old Winchester that may or may not work. Oh, and also, dogs can't look up.
The reason climatologists are opposed to it is that they understand the differing timescales of the problem and the solution. CO2 has a atmospheric residency on the order of hundreds of years. The sulfur particulates must constantly be replenished (and in ever increasing quantities, if CO2 is not checked.)
SRM is grabbing the wolf by the ears. Once you commit to it you can't stop, or all the solar forcing you'd been masking comes back with a vengeance....it's like you hadn't even tried to begin with.
That, and the short-attention-span public, seeing temporary fix and not realizing how tenuous it was, would think "Problem Solved!" and be even more reluctant to solve the root of the problem.
Now something like a solar shade MIGHT be maintainable.....except that it's not close to feasible with today's tech. And it still lets the public/politicians kick the can down the road with CO2 until the problem comes back.
Carbon scrubbing may be necessary, and attacks the root. But unless you force the bad actors to pay up or shut up, the good Samaritans end up footing the bill. And if it works the bad actors will just want to dump that much more CO2 into the air. Good luck getting carbon credits (which do a great job in leveraging free market forces to solve the problem) into law any time soon.
Which makes you wonder why they didn't just make Cryptonomicon (of which this is a few chapters) into a movie.
My credit union must outsource their fraud department. I get cold calls occasionally, but before they will ask about fraud they try to require me to confirm MY identity with sensitive info. That I would demand their own 1800 number to call them back, while comparing against the service # on the back of the card, shocked them. That the numbers were DIFFERENT shocked me. Regular customer service # did confirm the other number as legit, eventually, after they understood why I was asking.
Tried to point out to them that they were 'training' customers to give sensitive info out in an insecure manner, but it seemed lost on them. I'm guessing 95% of the time folks just give out SSN digits, MMN, etc. to callers claiming to be the fraud department.
(P.S. WTF is so horrible with /.'s scripting that typing one sentence requires a minute of 100% CPU spike with zero responsiveness from the browser?)