We should increase revenue. But people need to realize that the bush tax cuts are only 1/8th of our deficit. We can and should raise taxes, but it needs to be done in addition to reform and management of the defense and entitlement programs.
You're a moron. It means that developers need to grow up. The only reason to use names like this is for the shock value due to their offensiveness. I think it should go without saying that we need to stop demeaning women for lulz.
Not quite. We're talking about life starting in an environment like that, not life evolving into that environment from a more comfortable one.
We have exactly one planet with one example of life starting. We have no idea what circumstances can lead to life starting. We do know, however, that life will fill pretty much any niche there is. With the lack of knowledge we have, it would be foolish to believe that we can rule out any environment as a possibility for life.
Just like the intense heat of the yellowstone mudpots or the ocean volcanic vents would prevent life from being there? Or the extreme cold of the arctic? Or any of the other places that we thought life couldn't exist until we found it there?
Sorry to be nit picky, but ultimately mean in the end or eventually (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ultimately), so all you did was add redundancy to his statement.
Yeah, she made almost every mistake she could (including offering a groupon worth 8x what a normal customer paid), and then they make it sound like groupon is terrible. Yes, offering a large discount and sharing 50% of the revenue on top of that has huge potential to lose you money. If you mishandle it, perhaps you should look at yourself first.
They'll trade the bitcoin for actual currency. The extra step here is that there's an organization that buys and sells bitcoin that can give them anonymity. It's essentially like using baseball cards instead of cash: the baseball cards' value fluctuates, but it's stable enough to get you close to what you want and there's a third party willing to buy and sell the cards when they're not being used in a drug transaction.
I see it more as smart phones have been small tablets for a while. In many ways that iPhone was the first widely successful tablet, it also happened to do phone calls. It just makes sense to extend the same things that have worked on smart phones to tablets.
Agreed. If this gains too much traction it creates the wrong incentives for people who don't care about the environment. The easiest way to avoid that is to place all creatures as being equally important, since political factors could cause any metric to be skewed. Just look at the climate debate to see how quickly and easily the process can be politicized.
I would love this. My first child was born a year ago, and bottle feeding turned out to be the only way my wife could regain sanity (I'd bottle feed while she caught 3 uninterrupted hours of sleep). This would have helped a lot.
This is anecdotal, but it seems to me that what happened is that the iPhone kicked the door open for non-Blackberry devices by getting the devices into enough people high enough into the company that they had to start supporting them. Then, once you're supporting iPhones, the jump to supporting androids is much smaller.
After cars become self-driving, they will become smaller, as they will really almost always carry one person and be used within city limits.
I'm not following your logic there. How does the car driving itself change the number of people that are in a car at once? I don't see why the self-driving part of it should have any bearing there. Most driving currently occurs with only one person in the car, but people keep buying 5 passenger cars for the times when they don't.
Having to present opposing opinions doesn't mean you are silenced, unless your position is so weak that merely hearing an opposing viewpoint will obliterate it in your audience's mind
I believe the concern here is that, instead of just putting more liberal voices on talk radio, they'll cut some of the conservative voices. The same thing happened with Title IX: instead of just creating more female athletic programs, a lot of male athletic programs were cancelled. This sometimes included the best athletic programs that weren't receiving recognition. One of our community colleges had a wrestling program that was ranked nationally, but it was cut because of title IX and it's relative lack of popularity. The same thing happened with another college's gymnastics program. I would imagine in the talk radio world, this would mean that the smarter but less fear-mongering radio hosts would get cut.
I actually agree with that, but claiming that the governor is only doing this when he was very clear about it while it was in the legislature is dumb. I think he should have vetoed it anyway, but claiming he's changing his mind after the fact is just wrong.
Once it was passed, the outcry was enough to have the Governor and some others think that it was worth a repeal.
Bullshit. The governor didn't veto it because the legislature had enough votes to overcome the veto, so he's trying to get it overturned in other ways. He was against the bill even when it was passed.
This is a standard CSRF attack that leaks less data than most. The potential for abuse is far smaller than the potential for abuse with any of the attacks that leak your browser history.
That's exactly what he's done. I'm surprised more people aren't yawning over this. I remember when this was demonstrated only showing your gmail contacts instead of just whether you're logged in or not.
The only novel thing he appears to have done is trying to load a static resource that requires you to be logged in. I haven't seen it done this way before, but it's a small refinement on an existing attack, not a novel attack.
Slashdot Mirror
We should increase revenue. But people need to realize that the bush tax cuts are only 1/8th of our deficit. We can and should raise taxes, but it needs to be done in addition to reform and management of the defense and entitlement programs.
SHIT! It's already making retro-active changes!
You're a moron. It means that developers need to grow up. The only reason to use names like this is for the shock value due to their offensiveness. I think it should go without saying that we need to stop demeaning women for lulz.
Not quite. We're talking about life starting in an environment like that, not life evolving into that environment from a more comfortable one.
We have exactly one planet with one example of life starting. We have no idea what circumstances can lead to life starting. We do know, however, that life will fill pretty much any niche there is. With the lack of knowledge we have, it would be foolish to believe that we can rule out any environment as a possibility for life.
Just like the intense heat of the yellowstone mudpots or the ocean volcanic vents would prevent life from being there? Or the extreme cold of the arctic? Or any of the other places that we thought life couldn't exist until we found it there?
Sorry to be nit picky, but ultimately mean in the end or eventually (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ultimately), so all you did was add redundancy to his statement.
Yeah, she made almost every mistake she could (including offering a groupon worth 8x what a normal customer paid), and then they make it sound like groupon is terrible. Yes, offering a large discount and sharing 50% of the revenue on top of that has huge potential to lose you money. If you mishandle it, perhaps you should look at yourself first.
They'll trade the bitcoin for actual currency. The extra step here is that there's an organization that buys and sells bitcoin that can give them anonymity. It's essentially like using baseball cards instead of cash: the baseball cards' value fluctuates, but it's stable enough to get you close to what you want and there's a third party willing to buy and sell the cards when they're not being used in a drug transaction.
You're correct when you say that it's an annoyance, as long as you call thousands of dollars in lawyer fees and a ruined reputation an "annoyance".
I see it more as smart phones have been small tablets for a while. In many ways that iPhone was the first widely successful tablet, it also happened to do phone calls. It just makes sense to extend the same things that have worked on smart phones to tablets.
Predicted future news:
Google and Google News aren't turning up anything like that
I think I know why.
Agreed. If this gains too much traction it creates the wrong incentives for people who don't care about the environment. The easiest way to avoid that is to place all creatures as being equally important, since political factors could cause any metric to be skewed. Just look at the climate debate to see how quickly and easily the process can be politicized.
I would love this. My first child was born a year ago, and bottle feeding turned out to be the only way my wife could regain sanity (I'd bottle feed while she caught 3 uninterrupted hours of sleep). This would have helped a lot.
This is anecdotal, but it seems to me that what happened is that the iPhone kicked the door open for non-Blackberry devices by getting the devices into enough people high enough into the company that they had to start supporting them. Then, once you're supporting iPhones, the jump to supporting androids is much smaller.
After cars become self-driving, they will become smaller, as they will really almost always carry one person and be used within city limits.
I'm not following your logic there. How does the car driving itself change the number of people that are in a car at once? I don't see why the self-driving part of it should have any bearing there. Most driving currently occurs with only one person in the car, but people keep buying 5 passenger cars for the times when they don't.
The competitor will have an option for "GT mode", "Super Sport", "Cruise launch", "Eco-boost" and "Rally" that no one understands.
It'll also let you plot your own course, which apple wouldn't let you do.
It's too bad that slashdot editors were too busy posting everything that passed for a joke yesterday instead of even pretending to be a news site.
Having to present opposing opinions doesn't mean you are silenced, unless your position is so weak that merely hearing an opposing viewpoint will obliterate it in your audience's mind
I believe the concern here is that, instead of just putting more liberal voices on talk radio, they'll cut some of the conservative voices. The same thing happened with Title IX: instead of just creating more female athletic programs, a lot of male athletic programs were cancelled. This sometimes included the best athletic programs that weren't receiving recognition. One of our community colleges had a wrestling program that was ranked nationally, but it was cut because of title IX and it's relative lack of popularity. The same thing happened with another college's gymnastics program. I would imagine in the talk radio world, this would mean that the smarter but less fear-mongering radio hosts would get cut.
I actually agree with that, but claiming that the governor is only doing this when he was very clear about it while it was in the legislature is dumb. I think he should have vetoed it anyway, but claiming he's changing his mind after the fact is just wrong.
Once it was passed, the outcry was enough to have the Governor and some others think that it was worth a repeal.
Bullshit. The governor didn't veto it because the legislature had enough votes to overcome the veto, so he's trying to get it overturned in other ways. He was against the bill even when it was passed.
we are a nation of immigrants. we always have been, unless you are native american.
I hate that statement. Their ancestors immigrated here just the same as ours, they just came earlier.
At least until self-driving car technology is deployed
There's an app for that.
The legislature had enough votes to overcome the veto. The legislature leadership truly is to blame in this instance.
This is a standard CSRF attack that leaks less data than most. The potential for abuse is far smaller than the potential for abuse with any of the attacks that leak your browser history.
That's exactly what he's done. I'm surprised more people aren't yawning over this. I remember when this was demonstrated only showing your gmail contacts instead of just whether you're logged in or not.
The only novel thing he appears to have done is trying to load a static resource that requires you to be logged in. I haven't seen it done this way before, but it's a small refinement on an existing attack, not a novel attack.