Another good fix would be to have a “forward” button that returns them to the page they were on with everything intact.
Although to be honest, I’ve always thought that backspace was a stupid hotkey for “back.” It never worked consistently in any browser I’ve ever used, so I never got into the habit of using it.
Why do we keep getting these articles about Europa devoid of any new science? Let me know when someone actually gets some new measurements or, for Christ’s sake, sends a probe to collect samples.
My wife is involved in a number of Facebook communities, and some of the other members can get pretty mean sometimes. They’ll belittle you for remarks they disagree with, or whatever. Sometimes it gets a little upsetting. So what she does is temporarily deactivate her account and stop participating for a while. When she’s over it, she reactivates and continues on.
That link to the article is seriously messed up. I canâ(TM)t scroll down, because whenever I try to, something causes it to jump back to the top of the page.
These days, people don’t know how to he informative and concise. Twitter forces people to think about what they write. However, 140 characters can also be overly restrictive sometimes, which is why people have wanted to increase the character limit. But if they increase it too much, Twitter will just turn into another blogging service. I think that simple exempting images and links is a good compromise.
You may not agree, but some people hold the opinion that Steve Jobs was a visionary and that Apple has been going downhill ever since he died and as Apple uses up the ideas he bulked up before abandoning us to the afterlife. In theory, a sudden and unexpected death of Steve Jobs would have had a measurably impact on Apple’s performance.
But these other people? Bill Gates hardly plays a role at Microsoft anymore, and most major companies have contingency plans to recover from losing their CEO anyhow. So killing major business people would have no measurable effect on the US economy.
But keep in mind that terrorists are not rational people. If your world view clashes with the mainstream, going around killing people isn’t going to make you any new friends or drive people to join your cause. It’s just going to demonstrate that you’re an evil person. Basically, only people brainwashed into liking the Islamic State actually like the Islamic State. Everyone else (including most other people in the middle east) fear and loathe the Islamic State for being yet another group of extremists who make all Muslims look bad.
In my experience, some of the best drivers are the most nervous and cautious. And they didn’t “get out of” some terrible situation. They never got in in the first place, because they drive very defensively. In any case, this is all moot, because if self-driving cars coordinate with each other, then all kinds of bad situations will be avoided.
The biggest problem will be hackers, getting into cars and making them do the wrong thing. Of course, that’ll be some serious criminal behavior, and the auto makers will be liable for the vulnerabilities.
Maybe an AI driving a car won’t be as good as some of the best drivers, but they’ll certainly be better than average. The main advantage is that they can take into account traffic factors that human drivers won’t be aware of, so they can optimize travel. There will be fewer accidents, and traffic will move more smoothly. At safer and more consistent speeds, people will get to their destinations sooner, and they’ll use less energy to do it.
Forgive my ignorance, since I’m not a gamer, but what is it that people hate so much about the Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare trailer? I’m just curious.
They want something that *functions* as a mountain. It doesn’t have to look like a regular mountain, and it doesn’t have to be solid all the way through. As someone else said, a wall might do the trick. And also, the structure could be hollow. Build a steel frame and cover it with inexpensive materials. As long as it has the desired effect, it doesn’t have to look like a mountain. And just imagine the uses that could be put to the interior as well. You could have an entire city in there in the shade. Presumably it would have to be mostly airtight, but if you made it out of translucent materials, then the amount of artificial light inside needn’t be extensive. Imagine a mountain made of plexiglass. Also, for something the size of a mountain, moisture would collect in the inner atmosphere, develop into clouds, and even rain sometimes. If the air inside is cooler than outside, they might want to limit air exchange (i.e. no active ventilation), requring that plants be grown inside to keep the oxygen levels up. Even pollution levels could be kept down if burning is kept to a minimum (no diesel or coal generators inside, but maybe short hydrocarbons like natural gas for cooking, if they even have a supply of it in there).
I’m sure there are a million caveats I’ll never think of, but if they’re going to build something that big, they might as well make it more useful than just a wall and even possibly make it give a return on the investment through taxes. It would require maintenance.
There may or may not be patentable aspects of conlangs, but a language is an idea, and you can’t copyright ideas. You can copyright a BOOK on a language, but not the language itself.
I looked up SJW, and one thing I noticed was the tendency to throw insults at people who disagree with them. You may be falling into that same trap.
Now, while it's certainly denying the KKK a right, keep in mind that this will ultimately resolve itself. It's not like they're going to be denied this right permanently. Also, by doing this, Anonymous is using their usual moral gray area practices to do social justice. The ultimate effect is that it'll draw both Anonymous and KKK practices more into the public eye, and both will be scrutinized.
Is it okay to DDoS *anyone*? Yes. DDoSing terrorists is definitely something we should do. They're killing people. Are the KKK killing people? Are they recruiting people to hurt others? If so, then there's criminal activity, and a DDoS attack would be appropriate. If all they're doing is spouting racist bullshit, then denying them civil rights is not appropriate, but making OTHER websites that shame them is.
Because of the “commies” (a term created out of our fear of the Russians and other communist countries), we have an irrational fear of socialism. Now, while I generally feel that people should earn their income, I also don’t think we should let them starve to death.
The main argument that convinces me in favor of UBI is that it would eliminate the waste of the welfare system. All this administration throws away a ton of money just to evaluate people for their fitness for welfare and keep checking up on them. If instead we just indiscrimately gave everyone the same redistrubtion of tax money, it might actually cost less over-all. Also, the welfare system has a disincentive to leave, because if you make too much income, you lose welfare and may end up making less money for your efforts. UBI would eliminate that problem.
UBI would make SOME people lazy, but a UBI of $30K is barely enough to live in some of the cheapest parts of the US. There’s still an incentive to go out and earn more in order to have some disposable income.
One of the things that keeps people from bettering themselves is the fear of becoming destitute. They work low paying jobs merely to survive, with no time or mental energy left to get more education or look for a better job.
And imagine what UBI would do for the homeless. I’d want open up an efficient apartment complex near one of the four-year SUNY schools in upstate new york with bus service to the school. Send the homeless there.
UBI could actually go part way to making socialized medical system work better. If medical treatment has zero marginal cost, then people will abuse it. If there’s a small amount people have to pay out of pocket, then they’ll think twice. Never mind that that money might have come from UBI.
If government were to suppress KKK websites, that would be unconstitutional. And we uphold the the constitution because giving rights to everyone means that sometimes they will be abused by assholes. For Christians, Pastafarians, and Atheists to be able to talk about their beliefs, we also have to allow Scientologist to flap their evil lips too.
However, in this case, it’s one private group (a loose affiliation of Anonymous and some others) waging a media campaign against another private group. If the KKK’s rights are being infringed, it’s a civil matter, and they can take the matter to court. Of course, it’ll be hard to pin down whom they’re suing, and even the most unblased judges are going to have some trouble sympathizing with the KKK.
In civilized society, we’ve substantially mitigated racism and sexism. We’ve had a “black” president. (Depending on your definition of “black,” he may just be “partly of African ancestry,” but he generally has had some positive impact on racism. Next, we need a female president. (There are male candidates I align with better, but she would do the job adequately, certainly better than GWB.) I was mentioning to a friend that next we need a gay president, but we’re already had a few.:)
I’ve seen arguments that we may be in a simulated universe on the basis of the fact that physics looks like information theory. But it makes more sense that information theory is what it is because it’s a function of the nature of the universe we live in.
That doesn’t prove that the universe ISN’T simulated. It just means that we can’t use the nature of information theory as evidence that it is.
Also, something people keep leaving out is that any simulated universe is going to be necessarily simpler than the one containing the simulator.
What is and is not a religion? Is taking a position on God a religion? In some ways, atheism is “religious” because it makes a definitive statement about the existence of higher beings, while agnosticism is perhaps not because it refuses to take a position. Buddhism is treated like a religion, but it’s really an orthogonal philosophy, and many people are Buddhists and also some other religion at the same time.
Although I will argue with people whose beliefs defy logic, nobody has the right to dictate to you what you should believe. And that goes both ways. Just because there’s a label for your peculiar superstitions doesn’t mean you can force me to respect you.
We have so many real things that are NOT choices that people struggle with. Race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation. Hell, in the UK people put you down if you have red hair. I think this “hate speech” thing is bullshit. If you want to flap your mouth about some ignorant belief you have, go for it; you just don’t have the right to interfere in their lives by hurting them, preventing them from getting jobs, etc.
Whenever I would report bugs with Firefox, devs would take them seriously and even fix them. Sometimes they took years, but even so, they didn’t try to tell me I was an idiot or anything like that.
Whenever I have reported Chrome bugs, I would get a relatively hostile response, with devs telling me that I was wrong, even when I could make a solid usability engineering argument or there were incompatibilities or crashes or whatever.
If Mozilla stops being in control of their browser development, it’s going to seriously suck a lot worse because the Google engineers who work on Chrome that I have dealt with are self-absorbed assholes.
So, basically what we’re hearing is that although there are zero reported cases of this hinge failing, Tesla is recalling them and replacing the weak component.
Sounds like they’re being super proactive and cautious. If I had the money to order a Model 3, I’d plunk it down right now.
Mind you, I haven’t been in an accident in 24 years. The next time it happens is more likely to be someone else’s fault than my own. I’m not the best driver in the world, but I’m pretty cautious. I back away from other vehicles whose movements make me nervous, I’m not aggressive about pulling into traffic, I don’t text while driving. Most of these safety features are there for people who are relatively unskilled at driving. I assume that most of those people who suck at driving are useful contributors to society in some other way. (Not to say that someone’s subjective “usefulness” should be factored into whether or not we should protect them from crushing deaths.)
Some ultra liberal people scoff at the idea that we should stick to certain core values in society. They even go so far as to question some pretty fundamentally held beliefs about murder and paedophilia.
I’m not one to dictate what people do. I think everything should be questioned, even if it’s “fundamentally held.” I don’t think that your values have to be “Christian.” (Christianity at large has some pretty messed up ideas.) And while I favor monogamy, in the general case, I think that stability in relationships is the basic value people would be advised to adhere to. (This is especially important among gay males who have a higher risk of sextually transmitted infection.) There are clear evolutionary and practical advantages.
It’s nice to see that there’s at least a persisting trend in society to stick to one sexual partner, evidenced by the low rate of “mystery father” children.
This is about bringing general safety issues into the spotlight so that they’ll be taken more seriously. If this were rides for men only, then they’d just get slammed. But it’s for women only, ostensibly because of some safety issues that people know have a grain of truth in the backs of their minds. Nobody will argue against the fact that some women have been attacked, and the attacks were perpetrated by men. When this is challenged in court (because it is sexist, intentionally so, to make a point), it will receive a much deeper level of critical analysis.
Women are the primary population segment that still receives discrimination, often in reverse. I’ve seen instances where women (a minority of applicants) were actually preferred for jobs over men, despite some uncertainties, because the employees were mostly men, and the employer felt it was important to strive for gender balance, as long as they could be reasonably sure they weren’t hiring underqualified applicants.
Actually it IS amazing that a person who is BLACK and a WOMAN could get into such an important position back in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Today we recognize it as foolish and stupid to prejudge someone’s abilit to DO MATH (for instance) on the basis of gender or skin color. But back then?
What this tells us is that she’s fucking awesome, more awesome than you and me. She’s so awesome that people at NASA in an era that only valued white men simply were unable to deny the level of her skill. To break through the prejudice required that she have skill way beyond what a white male would have needed to get into the same job.
So yeah. Kudos to this woman for her intelligence, skill, and persistence in an era that would have otherwise begrudged her a job as a toilet cleaner.
If I used Uber to get to and from work, for instance, then when I’m headed there, I haven’t had all my caffeine yet, and when I’m heading home, I’m worn out from work. No way I would get offered a job. On the other hand, if they saw my resume, it would be a different story, what with the 20 year of industry experience, the PhD, etc.
This is just like intelligent design! The AI is like nature, and the human programmers are like God, setting things up and making tweaks to ensure things go right.
That’s very interesting, because as you know, most novels evolve through random mutation and natural selection.
Slashdot Mirror
Another good fix would be to have a “forward” button that returns them to the page they were on with everything intact.
Although to be honest, I’ve always thought that backspace was a stupid hotkey for “back.” It never worked consistently in any browser I’ve ever used, so I never got into the habit of using it.
It can’t JUST be a sticky layer, otherwise it’ll last about 5 minutes before it gets a layer of environmental debris on it.
Why do we keep getting these articles about Europa devoid of any new science? Let me know when someone actually gets some new measurements or, for Christ’s sake, sends a probe to collect samples.
My wife is involved in a number of Facebook communities, and some of the other members can get pretty mean sometimes. They’ll belittle you for remarks they disagree with, or whatever. Sometimes it gets a little upsetting. So what she does is temporarily deactivate her account and stop participating for a while. When she’s over it, she reactivates and continues on.
That link to the article is seriously messed up. I canâ(TM)t scroll down, because whenever I try to, something causes it to jump back to the top of the page.
These days, people don’t know how to he informative and concise. Twitter forces people to think about what they write. However, 140 characters can also be overly restrictive sometimes, which is why people have wanted to increase the character limit. But if they increase it too much, Twitter will just turn into another blogging service. I think that simple exempting images and links is a good compromise.
You may not agree, but some people hold the opinion that Steve Jobs was a visionary and that Apple has been going downhill ever since he died and as Apple uses up the ideas he bulked up before abandoning us to the afterlife. In theory, a sudden and unexpected death of Steve Jobs would have had a measurably impact on Apple’s performance.
But these other people? Bill Gates hardly plays a role at Microsoft anymore, and most major companies have contingency plans to recover from losing their CEO anyhow. So killing major business people would have no measurable effect on the US economy.
But keep in mind that terrorists are not rational people. If your world view clashes with the mainstream, going around killing people isn’t going to make you any new friends or drive people to join your cause. It’s just going to demonstrate that you’re an evil person. Basically, only people brainwashed into liking the Islamic State actually like the Islamic State. Everyone else (including most other people in the middle east) fear and loathe the Islamic State for being yet another group of extremists who make all Muslims look bad.
In my experience, some of the best drivers are the most nervous and cautious. And they didn’t “get out of” some terrible situation. They never got in in the first place, because they drive very defensively. In any case, this is all moot, because if self-driving cars coordinate with each other, then all kinds of bad situations will be avoided.
The biggest problem will be hackers, getting into cars and making them do the wrong thing. Of course, that’ll be some serious criminal behavior, and the auto makers will be liable for the vulnerabilities.
Maybe an AI driving a car won’t be as good as some of the best drivers, but they’ll certainly be better than average. The main advantage is that they can take into account traffic factors that human drivers won’t be aware of, so they can optimize travel. There will be fewer accidents, and traffic will move more smoothly. At safer and more consistent speeds, people will get to their destinations sooner, and they’ll use less energy to do it.
Forgive my ignorance, since I’m not a gamer, but what is it that people hate so much about the Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare trailer? I’m just curious.
They want something that *functions* as a mountain. It doesn’t have to look like a regular mountain, and it doesn’t have to be solid all the way through. As someone else said, a wall might do the trick. And also, the structure could be hollow. Build a steel frame and cover it with inexpensive materials. As long as it has the desired effect, it doesn’t have to look like a mountain. And just imagine the uses that could be put to the interior as well. You could have an entire city in there in the shade. Presumably it would have to be mostly airtight, but if you made it out of translucent materials, then the amount of artificial light inside needn’t be extensive. Imagine a mountain made of plexiglass. Also, for something the size of a mountain, moisture would collect in the inner atmosphere, develop into clouds, and even rain sometimes. If the air inside is cooler than outside, they might want to limit air exchange (i.e. no active ventilation), requring that plants be grown inside to keep the oxygen levels up. Even pollution levels could be kept down if burning is kept to a minimum (no diesel or coal generators inside, but maybe short hydrocarbons like natural gas for cooking, if they even have a supply of it in there).
I’m sure there are a million caveats I’ll never think of, but if they’re going to build something that big, they might as well make it more useful than just a wall and even possibly make it give a return on the investment through taxes. It would require maintenance.
There may or may not be patentable aspects of conlangs, but a language is an idea, and you can’t copyright ideas. You can copyright a BOOK on a language, but not the language itself.
I looked up SJW, and one thing I noticed was the tendency to throw insults at people who disagree with them. You may be falling into that same trap.
Now, while it's certainly denying the KKK a right, keep in mind that this will ultimately resolve itself. It's not like they're going to be denied this right permanently. Also, by doing this, Anonymous is using their usual moral gray area practices to do social justice. The ultimate effect is that it'll draw both Anonymous and KKK practices more into the public eye, and both will be scrutinized.
Is it okay to DDoS *anyone*? Yes. DDoSing terrorists is definitely something we should do. They're killing people. Are the KKK killing people? Are they recruiting people to hurt others? If so, then there's criminal activity, and a DDoS attack would be appropriate. If all they're doing is spouting racist bullshit, then denying them civil rights is not appropriate, but making OTHER websites that shame them is.
That is, unless you're advocating racism.
Because of the “commies” (a term created out of our fear of the Russians and other communist countries), we have an irrational fear of socialism. Now, while I generally feel that people should earn their income, I also don’t think we should let them starve to death.
The main argument that convinces me in favor of UBI is that it would eliminate the waste of the welfare system. All this administration throws away a ton of money just to evaluate people for their fitness for welfare and keep checking up on them. If instead we just indiscrimately gave everyone the same redistrubtion of tax money, it might actually cost less over-all. Also, the welfare system has a disincentive to leave, because if you make too much income, you lose welfare and may end up making less money for your efforts. UBI would eliminate that problem.
UBI would make SOME people lazy, but a UBI of $30K is barely enough to live in some of the cheapest parts of the US. There’s still an incentive to go out and earn more in order to have some disposable income.
One of the things that keeps people from bettering themselves is the fear of becoming destitute. They work low paying jobs merely to survive, with no time or mental energy left to get more education or look for a better job.
And imagine what UBI would do for the homeless. I’d want open up an efficient apartment complex near one of the four-year SUNY schools in upstate new york with bus service to the school. Send the homeless there.
UBI could actually go part way to making socialized medical system work better. If medical treatment has zero marginal cost, then people will abuse it. If there’s a small amount people have to pay out of pocket, then they’ll think twice. Never mind that that money might have come from UBI.
If government were to suppress KKK websites, that would be unconstitutional. And we uphold the the constitution because giving rights to everyone means that sometimes they will be abused by assholes. For Christians, Pastafarians, and Atheists to be able to talk about their beliefs, we also have to allow Scientologist to flap their evil lips too.
However, in this case, it’s one private group (a loose affiliation of Anonymous and some others) waging a media campaign against another private group. If the KKK’s rights are being infringed, it’s a civil matter, and they can take the matter to court. Of course, it’ll be hard to pin down whom they’re suing, and even the most unblased judges are going to have some trouble sympathizing with the KKK.
In civilized society, we’ve substantially mitigated racism and sexism. We’ve had a “black” president. (Depending on your definition of “black,” he may just be “partly of African ancestry,” but he generally has had some positive impact on racism. Next, we need a female president. (There are male candidates I align with better, but she would do the job adequately, certainly better than GWB.) I was mentioning to a friend that next we need a gay president, but we’re already had a few. :)
I’ve seen arguments that we may be in a simulated universe on the basis of the fact that physics looks like information theory. But it makes more sense that information theory is what it is because it’s a function of the nature of the universe we live in.
That doesn’t prove that the universe ISN’T simulated. It just means that we can’t use the nature of information theory as evidence that it is.
Also, something people keep leaving out is that any simulated universe is going to be necessarily simpler than the one containing the simulator.
What is and is not a religion? Is taking a position on God a religion? In some ways, atheism is “religious” because it makes a definitive statement about the existence of higher beings, while agnosticism is perhaps not because it refuses to take a position. Buddhism is treated like a religion, but it’s really an orthogonal philosophy, and many people are Buddhists and also some other religion at the same time.
Although I will argue with people whose beliefs defy logic, nobody has the right to dictate to you what you should believe. And that goes both ways. Just because there’s a label for your peculiar superstitions doesn’t mean you can force me to respect you.
We have so many real things that are NOT choices that people struggle with. Race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation. Hell, in the UK people put you down if you have red hair. I think this “hate speech” thing is bullshit. If you want to flap your mouth about some ignorant belief you have, go for it; you just don’t have the right to interfere in their lives by hurting them, preventing them from getting jobs, etc.
Whenever I would report bugs with Firefox, devs would take them seriously and even fix them. Sometimes they took years, but even so, they didn’t try to tell me I was an idiot or anything like that.
Whenever I have reported Chrome bugs, I would get a relatively hostile response, with devs telling me that I was wrong, even when I could make a solid usability engineering argument or there were incompatibilities or crashes or whatever.
If Mozilla stops being in control of their browser development, it’s going to seriously suck a lot worse because the Google engineers who work on Chrome that I have dealt with are self-absorbed assholes.
So, basically what we’re hearing is that although there are zero reported cases of this hinge failing, Tesla is recalling them and replacing the weak component.
Sounds like they’re being super proactive and cautious. If I had the money to order a Model 3, I’d plunk it down right now.
Mind you, I haven’t been in an accident in 24 years. The next time it happens is more likely to be someone else’s fault than my own. I’m not the best driver in the world, but I’m pretty cautious. I back away from other vehicles whose movements make me nervous, I’m not aggressive about pulling into traffic, I don’t text while driving. Most of these safety features are there for people who are relatively unskilled at driving. I assume that most of those people who suck at driving are useful contributors to society in some other way. (Not to say that someone’s subjective “usefulness” should be factored into whether or not we should protect them from crushing deaths.)
Some ultra liberal people scoff at the idea that we should stick to certain core values in society. They even go so far as to question some pretty fundamentally held beliefs about murder and paedophilia.
I’m not one to dictate what people do. I think everything should be questioned, even if it’s “fundamentally held.” I don’t think that your values have to be “Christian.” (Christianity at large has some pretty messed up ideas.) And while I favor monogamy, in the general case, I think that stability in relationships is the basic value people would be advised to adhere to. (This is especially important among gay males who have a higher risk of sextually transmitted infection.) There are clear evolutionary and practical advantages.
It’s nice to see that there’s at least a persisting trend in society to stick to one sexual partner, evidenced by the low rate of “mystery father” children.
It used to be that we could insult someone by implying that they learned to code at Microsoft. Even if they actually worked there.
These days, you can run bash on Windows, so I guess I’ve run out of ideas.
The founder of Chariot for Women admits to this.
This is about bringing general safety issues into the spotlight so that they’ll be taken more seriously. If this were rides for men only, then they’d just get slammed. But it’s for women only, ostensibly because of some safety issues that people know have a grain of truth in the backs of their minds. Nobody will argue against the fact that some women have been attacked, and the attacks were perpetrated by men. When this is challenged in court (because it is sexist, intentionally so, to make a point), it will receive a much deeper level of critical analysis.
Women are the primary population segment that still receives discrimination, often in reverse. I’ve seen instances where women (a minority of applicants) were actually preferred for jobs over men, despite some uncertainties, because the employees were mostly men, and the employer felt it was important to strive for gender balance, as long as they could be reasonably sure they weren’t hiring underqualified applicants.
Actually it IS amazing that a person who is BLACK and a WOMAN could get into such an important position back in the 1950’s and 1960’s. Today we recognize it as foolish and stupid to prejudge someone’s abilit to DO MATH (for instance) on the basis of gender or skin color. But back then?
What this tells us is that she’s fucking awesome, more awesome than you and me. She’s so awesome that people at NASA in an era that only valued white men simply were unable to deny the level of her skill. To break through the prejudice required that she have skill way beyond what a white male would have needed to get into the same job.
So yeah. Kudos to this woman for her intelligence, skill, and persistence in an era that would have otherwise begrudged her a job as a toilet cleaner.
If I used Uber to get to and from work, for instance, then when I’m headed there, I haven’t had all my caffeine yet, and when I’m heading home, I’m worn out from work. No way I would get offered a job. On the other hand, if they saw my resume, it would be a different story, what with the 20 year of industry experience, the PhD, etc.
This is just like intelligent design! The AI is like nature, and the human programmers are like God, setting things up and making tweaks to ensure things go right.
That’s very interesting, because as you know, most novels evolve through random mutation and natural selection.