Don't constitutional rights only apply to American citizens though? It's not a bill of universal human rights. As a result, you should ensure those only those voting are citizens. That's the only ways to guarantee the integrity of an election.
How did the UK end up with a better system? Because in Canada, which follows the parliamentary system, the Prime Minister has more power in Canada than the President does in the US. If you don't know that's true, you have no experience outside the US.
I totally agree with you. This leftist nonsense that everyone around the world is nice and nobody is a bad guy is far removed from the reality of the world.
Nobody wants to be stuck with the cost of replacing the batteries when they stop effectively holding a charge, or they hold much less of a charge than when you first bought the vehicle.
Having read the article, it's clear that he was offering concrete solutions to addressing the problem of diversity and to fixing what he sees as growing issues in Google's culture. The reprints of this article apparently did not include the scientific eivdence to back up his arguments but he's on very solid footing, scientifically with his arguments. Unfortunately publishing a memo like this is like sacrificing someone's sacred cow; you're going to get an irrational knee-jerk response on par with the response of any religious extremist (because it's an ideological issue.)
The link below contain responses from scientific experts in the field who essentially back this engineers arguments. http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...
And once you open that up you have more calls of discrimination. How do you legally say you can go it but if you've had your genital removed or are on hormone therapy you cannot be in the military? That just creates more problems that it's worth. Best thing to do is an outright ban.
I think most of the people will just spend the time playing games. If someone paid me enough money to cover my living expenses I'd only work as much as necessary to have the entertainment I want and no more. This is a pipe dream that's just a recycled flavour of communism. We all know how well that worked out in *every* instance in which it was tried.
Exactly. This says it uses lithium-metal. Isn't lithium a rare earth mineral that is really expensive and relatively hard to find? If so, wouldn't it follow that if it's using a lot more lithium it's going to be a crap ton more expensive than a lithium ion battery?
Were early 3D TV sets too highly priced? - Yes! But the content was also ridiculously expensive. Any 3D version of a show is at least $10 more expensive. Manufacturers and content producers thought that they could milk people for 3D and it failed.
Were there too few 3D films and 3D TV stations available to watch (aka "The Content Problem")? - No, but there were too few who did 3D well. Mostly producers used 3D as a gimmick. Avatar did well because they did 3D correctly.
Did people hate wearing active/passive plastic 3D glasses in the living room? - I blame Active 3D technology here for being just plain shitty. Most people didn't even know that there was such as thing as Passive 3D. When I tested Active 3D out it gave me a splitting headache within about 30 minutes. It was unwatchable for long periods of time and the glasses were ridiculously expensive. However, when I tried a passive 3D TV/glasses they worked great and I was hooked. I love passive 3D. Any of my friends that came over and watched something in passive 3D also liked it and most of them went and bought an LG TV set. The downside being loss of horizontal resolution. Now I'm waiting for 4K 3D where that will fix the resolution issue.
Was the price of Blu-ray 3D films and Blu-ray 3D players set too high? - Players no, films absolutely, and they still are.
Was there something wrong with the stereo 3D effect the industry tried to popularize? - Only to the degree that it generally was not done well. Film makers need to learn what makes a good 3D film and sadly in many cases it is an add on gimmick and the director doesn't spend any time learning how to use it effectively.
Did too many people suffer 3D viewing related "headaches," "dizzyness," "eyesight problems," and similar? - Yes, because of Active 3D technology, which sucks horribly IMO.
Was the then -- still quite new -- 1080p HD 2D television simply "good enough" for the average TV viewer? - Yes, but only because they've made 3D so hard for the average person to adopt. Expensive sets, content, glasses and poor Active 3D technology.
Another related question: If things went so wrong with 3D TVs, what guarantee is there that the new 3D VR/AR trend won't collapse along similar lines as well? - I fully expect this to happen. People complained loudly about 3D glasses and now you expect them to wear a HMD? Really?
Romney: "Russia is America’s number one geopolitical foe” Obama: “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back becausethe Cold War’s been over for 20 years.” Hillary: "“It’s somewhat dated to be looking backwards”
If you'd all have voted for Romney you wouldn't be in this position and wouldn't have to choose between twiddle dee and twiddle dumb.
Totally agree. All this shows is that another segment of the market that reads sci-fi has finally taken an interest in the awards ceremony process.
It's analogous to the same rise in reported crime that happens when you put more cops on the street. Does that mean that there is really more crime or do you just have more people to report what is there? I view this the same way, you're just seeing 'conservatives' who read sci-fi actually come out to vote. I'm a conservative and I've been reading sci-fi/fantasy all my life; the same goes for most of my family and extended family.
Well it's certainly better than shutting down their twitter accounts..
My point was more that the CIA/FBI could potentially take over the accounts and impersonate them. If they can't then yes, they should just monitor (which is probably more practical.)
Now, Anonymous should be finding these 5-6 guys, discovering their true identities and sending that information to the CIA while knocking them off the internet and locking them out of their account (while turning over their account credentials to the CIA as well.)
Slashdot Mirror
Don't constitutional rights only apply to American citizens though? It's not a bill of universal human rights. As a result, you should ensure those only those voting are citizens. That's the only ways to guarantee the integrity of an election.
Again.... repeat after me.... The US is not a Democracy, it's a Republic. Don't confuse the two.
How did the UK end up with a better system? Because in Canada, which follows the parliamentary system, the Prime Minister has more power in Canada than the President does in the US. If you don't know that's true, you have no experience outside the US.
Repeat after me... The US is not a Democracy, it's a Republic.
Well said
I totally agree with you. This leftist nonsense that everyone around the world is nice and nobody is a bad guy is far removed from the reality of the world.
When facts meet politics, politics win. All it shows is that Google is more concerned about optics than making decisions based on facts.
Nobody wants to be stuck with the cost of replacing the batteries when they stop effectively holding a charge, or they hold much less of a charge than when you first bought the vehicle.
According to these scientists (actual experts in the field) he's right.
http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...
Having read the article, it's clear that he was offering concrete solutions to addressing the problem of diversity and to fixing what he sees as growing issues in Google's culture. The reprints of this article apparently did not include the scientific eivdence to back up his arguments but he's on very solid footing, scientifically with his arguments. Unfortunately publishing a memo like this is like sacrificing someone's sacred cow; you're going to get an irrational knee-jerk response on par with the response of any religious extremist (because it's an ideological issue.)
The link below contain responses from scientific experts in the field who essentially back this engineers arguments. http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...
But apparently he's right...
http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...
At least according to some experts... (but I know *everyone* here on /. is an expert)
http://quillette.com/2017/08/0...
And once you open that up you have more calls of discrimination. How do you legally say you can go it but if you've had your genital removed or are on hormone therapy you cannot be in the military? That just creates more problems that it's worth. Best thing to do is an outright ban.
The only people it seems that are against this ruling are the arm chair quarterbacks not in the military
https://www.youngcons.com/woun...
I think most of the people will just spend the time playing games. If someone paid me enough money to cover my living expenses I'd only work as much as necessary to have the entertainment I want and no more. This is a pipe dream that's just a recycled flavour of communism. We all know how well that worked out in *every* instance in which it was tried.
Exactly. This says it uses lithium-metal. Isn't lithium a rare earth mineral that is really expensive and relatively hard to find? If so, wouldn't it follow that if it's using a lot more lithium it's going to be a crap ton more expensive than a lithium ion battery?
My point exactly, Active 3D tech killed it for most people.
Were early 3D TV sets too highly priced?
- Yes! But the content was also ridiculously expensive. Any 3D version of a show is at least $10 more expensive. Manufacturers and content producers thought that they could milk people for 3D and it failed.
Were there too few 3D films and 3D TV stations available to watch (aka "The Content Problem")?
- No, but there were too few who did 3D well. Mostly producers used 3D as a gimmick. Avatar did well because they did 3D correctly.
Did people hate wearing active/passive plastic 3D glasses in the living room?
- I blame Active 3D technology here for being just plain shitty. Most people didn't even know that there was such as thing as Passive 3D. When I tested Active 3D out it gave me a splitting headache within about 30 minutes. It was unwatchable for long periods of time and the glasses were ridiculously expensive. However, when I tried a passive 3D TV/glasses they worked great and I was hooked. I love passive 3D. Any of my friends that came over and watched something in passive 3D also liked it and most of them went and bought an LG TV set. The downside being loss of horizontal resolution. Now I'm waiting for 4K 3D where that will fix the resolution issue.
Was the price of Blu-ray 3D films and Blu-ray 3D players set too high?
- Players no, films absolutely, and they still are.
Was there something wrong with the stereo 3D effect the industry tried to popularize?
- Only to the degree that it generally was not done well. Film makers need to learn what makes a good 3D film and sadly in many cases it is an add on gimmick and the director doesn't spend any time learning how to use it effectively.
Did too many people suffer 3D viewing related "headaches," "dizzyness," "eyesight problems," and similar?
- Yes, because of Active 3D technology, which sucks horribly IMO.
Was the then -- still quite new -- 1080p HD 2D television simply "good enough" for the average TV viewer?
- Yes, but only because they've made 3D so hard for the average person to adopt. Expensive sets, content, glasses and poor Active 3D technology.
Another related question: If things went so wrong with 3D TVs, what guarantee is there that the new 3D VR/AR trend won't collapse along similar lines as well?
- I fully expect this to happen. People complained loudly about 3D glasses and now you expect them to wear a HMD? Really?
Looks like we're heading into another cold war folks.....
My 2 cents....
Romney: "Russia is America’s number one geopolitical foe”
Obama: “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back becausethe Cold War’s been over for 20 years.”
Hillary: "“It’s somewhat dated to be looking backwards”
If you'd all have voted for Romney you wouldn't be in this position and wouldn't have to choose between twiddle dee and twiddle dumb.
Totally agree. All this shows is that another segment of the market that reads sci-fi has finally taken an interest in the awards ceremony process.
It's analogous to the same rise in reported crime that happens when you put more cops on the street. Does that mean that there is really more crime or do you just have more people to report what is there? I view this the same way, you're just seeing 'conservatives' who read sci-fi actually come out to vote. I'm a conservative and I've been reading sci-fi/fantasy all my life; the same goes for most of my family and extended family.
Do they also drive BMW's?
And you can get a bash shell.....
SSH into windows to get a powershell? No thanks.
Well it's certainly better than shutting down their twitter accounts..
My point was more that the CIA/FBI could potentially take over the accounts and impersonate them. If they can't then yes, they should just monitor (which is probably more practical.)
Now, Anonymous should be finding these 5-6 guys, discovering their true identities and sending that information to the CIA while knocking them off the internet and locking them out of their account (while turning over their account credentials to the CIA as well.)