They started with a vehicle that is often mocked for changing only the very least allowed by the law (the Jeep Wrangler) and then they added all these electronics to it? Yeah, we all knew they were in trouble but this seems like an odd course for them to follow to try to right their own ship.
And to quite a lot of the British audience he's an insufferably smug, unfunny git whose most recent claim to fame is being publicly shamed for tax avoidance.
I was not aware of that. You probably know that if he were in the US, he would instead be publicly celebrated for tax avoidance. Perhaps he's been corrupted by too much western contact?
assuming of course that you meant reproducible and not reproductible
Sorry, that was a typo.:)
I figured as much, but thought I'd check in case you are involved in (or want to recruit others to partake in) some sort of cutting-edge HVAC research.
I agree with you 100% on that (assuming of course that you meant reproducible and not reproductible). Honestly though there are few fields of modern science that are not having at least some reproducibility issues. Some suffer it more than others, of course, but it is a rather pervasive problem. As much as neurology is a well established medical speciality, there is a lot we still don't know about how the brain works. fMRI and other tools were supposed to help but without a solid foundation we're still shooting in the dark at times; and there is a long list of exceptions to what we think we know.
The research is on fMRI - the F stands for Functional. As it mentions later in the summary this is used to try to associate regions of the brain with specific functions. This is not the same as the structure of the brain itself. What we see in terms of actual brain structures - folds, regions, etc, is still very much valid. We're just not so sure about the functional assignments that we've held on to for a while now.
I was actually quite surprised they didn't recruit him for it. He's been on both the top and bottom of the leaderboard for star in a reasonably priced car. He has the humor that would keep the show going even in the post-Clarkson era. To a global audience he's as British as the queen. And of course, his name is Carr.
I don't know what he's doing for work right now, but it certainly doesn't get as much TV time on this side of the pond as Top Gear.
As usual, if there is something positive coming from Washington and it involves a Democrat, slashdot cannot identify that person as one. I'm surprised this story even made the front page.
Anyone who still prefers taking notes on a notebook with a pen?
Yes, it is the best way for taking the widest variety of notes. OCR with a stylus still isn't that great, especially if you need to incorporate a formula of some sort into your notes while you're going. Typing works if you are taking notes at a history lecture but not for much else. Paper notebooks also never run out of battery and run an OS that never crashes. You might find yourself periodically doodling in your notebook but you'll never find yourself wasting hours on facebook with it.
I keep getting OMNI and IMAX flipped. A home OMNI theatre would be unbelievably awesome. A home IMAX threatre would be nifty but I'm not sure it would really get the neighbors that excited.
I have a hard time seeing how it is worth the effort to sell an old drive. They are worth so little on the used market that it generally seems to make more sense to either toss them in the closet to rot in peace, or seek out a place that can properly dispose of them.
Oh, wait. I can't do that. I have never had a facebook account yet the facebook app is installed on my android phone and so intertwined with non-facebook functions that I do use that I am not allowed to uninstall facebook.
Why would I want to do that? I can use the third mouse button to do that,
Mouse != Trackpoint
We can call them trackpoint buttons if you want, or anything else you like. They work like mouse buttons for the trackpoint. Trackpoints have had three buttons longer than touchpads have supported two-finger scrolling, and the third button has pretty much always been available for scrolling with those trackpoints.
If you want to be ignorant of superior pointing devices, you can make that choice. Don't call other people dumb just because you prefer an inferior and less productive way to move your cursor.
Me on my trackpad can run circles around anyone on their trackpoint.
I didn't know I had entered in cursor olympics. Maybe when I'm done doing actual work with my trackpoint you can show me the clever games you love to play with your touchpad.
You can't even do the most basic operation (two-finger scrolling) using a trackpoint.
Why would I want to do that? I can use the third mouse button to do that, and have been able to do that for a very long time. Scroll vertical, scroll horizontal, etc. All without taking my fingers off the home row.
Enjoy the dumbness, though, if that's your preference.
If you want to be ignorant of superior pointing devices, you can make that choice. Don't call other people dumb just because you prefer an inferior and less productive way to move your cursor.
Give me a trackpoint and I will buy it. Touchpads suck, period. I don't care who makes them I have never seen a touchpad that was anywhere near as good as the trackpoints I have had on my laptops over the years.
Never owned a MacBook Pro then, have you?
My wife owns one, I use it only when I have no better option. She uses a mouse when she has real work to do as the touchpad on there sucks for her work. For me the only pointing device that is a bigger impediment to work than a touchpad is a touchscreen.
Give me a trackpoint and I will buy it. Touchpads suck, period. I don't care who makes them I have never seen a touchpad that was anywhere near as good as the trackpoints I have had on my laptops over the years.
They are all rights guaranteed by the constitution.
The constitution does not guarantee you the right to buy a gun, only to have one. The second amendment explicitly mentions a militia and armed citizens. If you take those two to be tied together - they are in the same sentence after all - you could say that the guns are only guaranteed to be made available by the militia. Note that the militia is not defined in any way, it could be any number (even one, perhaps) of people who just like to shoot guns.
What difference does it make after all?
It makes a huge difference. If they already own guns, those guns are not magically made illegal. Similarly they can go buy as much ammo as they want. Nothing is taken away, there is just a new impediment to purchasing more.
By contrast, there is no purchasing element to worshipping as you see fit or speaking as you like. Yeah, you may have a preacher who tells you that you can buy your way to heaven, and you can buy more attention in the press (although Drumpf has showed us time and again this year that the best press attention comes for free), but there is nothing stopping you from exercising those all you want right now. Similarly no bills proposed to date would place new impediments on someone from using guns they already own.
I thought the US government was concerned about Chinese made technology potentially giving up important information to the Chinese government. How is Trend Micro allowed in the State Department?
That doesn't imply that these people have been found guilty in a court of law through due process and can have their rights taken away from them.
No rights are taken away by the no fly list. People are still free to travel by other methods. Even if the No Fly became No Fly / No Buy, that does not impede rights either; guns that were already purchased legally are still legally owned and can be born and used legally.
The second amendment does not say that people must be allowed to purchase an arbitrary number of weapons on a whim.
One party in the house is attempting to bring attention to the fact that the other party refuses to hold a discussion or a vote on a matter. The second, larger party could easily sink the matter just by voting on it, as they can certainly defeat all the proposals with their majority.
Yet the slashdot voice tells us that the minority is somehow attempting to destroy democracy, with their horrid request for a vote.
As other people (not here, of course) have pointed out, the question that not nearly enough people are asking is what is Paul Ryan afraid of? He knows he has enough votes to quickly vote down all four of the senate proposals. There is no fillibuster mechanism in the house (this is the closest the house can get to it, and it really isn't very close to it), so they can make debate as short as they want. The house can up/down vote each one of these and get all four of them done before lunch if they want to. Instead Ryan and his friends are running away from this, and almost nobody has the balls to challenge him on that and ask why.
ave their 2nd Amendment Rights abrogated by using a list which has no Due Process to be either listed or removed?
Two really big obvious problems with that statement.
First, no bill proposed in the past several decades has proposed taking away legally owned guns. If you already own guns and are on the No Fly List you can go buy all the ammo you want and go do all the legal shooting you want with the guns you already own. The list would simply prevent you from buying additional weapons. ,br>
Second, there are processes to be removed from the list. People have been able to get their names removed. It is not easy or transparent but it is not impossible either.
No, not the webcam thing. I'm apparently more careful with my webcam and my software than he is.
it appears, Zuckerberg uses Mozilla's Thunderbird as his primary email client.
I've been using Thunderbird for a long time now. Before that I used Netscape Communicator (which looked a lot like the usual setup for Thunderbird). If he's smart enough to use Thunderbird then maybe he's not completely awful.
So then were in the constitution does it state that the federal government can regulate which mode of transportation
That's a flimsy argument at best. That statement fits in with the same league as those who say the second amendment means you should be allowed to have your own personal nuclear arsenal if you can afford it. The no fly list only restricts you from using one form of transportation. The federal government says you cannot ride a horse or bicycle on the interstate highway, why are you not angry about that?
Also you don't know you are on their stupid list until you are turned away at the airport so at that point they really are preventing you from traveling.
The airlines have access to this information. They could check ticket sales against the list before selling tickets and tell buyers they are on the list, but that would impact their profits ever-so-slightly.
I can use?
I don't know. Can you? I'm not sure what this thing might be that you are asking me if you can use.
As far as the list goes there have been some big fuck-ups
It's not perfect. If you read my previous comment you would see I already admitted that. You don't seem to want to acknowledge a possibility of us agreeing on something here but indeed I said it is not perfect.
as the vast majority of people on it are not terrorists
That is one huge generalization, there. Do you even have the slightest idea how many people are on the list? It is essentially impossible for you to support your statement if you don't know how large the list is.
I say that because if even a sizeable amount of the people on the list were terrorists the US would look a lot more like Fallujah.
No, there are several things wrong with that statement.
One, the list includes people who are known to not be in the US. Osama bin Laden was on the list after 9/11 even though the chance of him ever flying within the US after then were essentially zero.
Two, the purpose of the list is to prevent terrorism in the US. Hence it was a curated list of both people who had committed acts of terror - here or abroad - as well as people with connections to terror. There were, of course, problems with the list but it is the best list we've had so far.
I still haven't seen you offer up a better list. If the FBI and others are watching for potential future terrorists, how do you propose for them to share that information amongst themselves? Or do you want them to just get out of the business entirely and let the chips fall where they may?
Slashdot Mirror
They started with a vehicle that is often mocked for changing only the very least allowed by the law (the Jeep Wrangler) and then they added all these electronics to it? Yeah, we all knew they were in trouble but this seems like an odd course for them to follow to try to right their own ship.
And to quite a lot of the British audience he's an insufferably smug, unfunny git whose most recent claim to fame is being publicly shamed for tax avoidance.
I was not aware of that. You probably know that if he were in the US, he would instead be publicly celebrated for tax avoidance. Perhaps he's been corrupted by too much western contact?
assuming of course that you meant reproducible and not reproductible
Sorry, that was a typo. :)
I figured as much, but thought I'd check in case you are involved in (or want to recruit others to partake in) some sort of cutting-edge HVAC research.
Regardless, reproductible research is desirable.
I agree with you 100% on that (assuming of course that you meant reproducible and not reproductible). Honestly though there are few fields of modern science that are not having at least some reproducibility issues. Some suffer it more than others, of course, but it is a rather pervasive problem. As much as neurology is a well established medical speciality, there is a lot we still don't know about how the brain works. fMRI and other tools were supposed to help but without a solid foundation we're still shooting in the dark at times; and there is a long list of exceptions to what we think we know.
The research is on fMRI - the F stands for Functional. As it mentions later in the summary this is used to try to associate regions of the brain with specific functions. This is not the same as the structure of the brain itself. What we see in terms of actual brain structures - folds, regions, etc, is still very much valid. We're just not so sure about the functional assignments that we've held on to for a while now.
they really need someone dry and British.
Jimmy Carr it is then.
I was actually quite surprised they didn't recruit him for it. He's been on both the top and bottom of the leaderboard for star in a reasonably priced car. He has the humor that would keep the show going even in the post-Clarkson era. To a global audience he's as British as the queen. And of course, his name is Carr.
I don't know what he's doing for work right now, but it certainly doesn't get as much TV time on this side of the pond as Top Gear.
As usual, if there is something positive coming from Washington and it involves a Democrat, slashdot cannot identify that person as one. I'm surprised this story even made the front page.
Anyone who still prefers taking notes on a notebook with a pen?
Yes, it is the best way for taking the widest variety of notes. OCR with a stylus still isn't that great, especially if you need to incorporate a formula of some sort into your notes while you're going. Typing works if you are taking notes at a history lecture but not for much else. Paper notebooks also never run out of battery and run an OS that never crashes. You might find yourself periodically doodling in your notebook but you'll never find yourself wasting hours on facebook with it.
I keep getting OMNI and IMAX flipped. A home OMNI theatre would be unbelievably awesome. A home IMAX threatre would be nifty but I'm not sure it would really get the neighbors that excited.
I have a hard time seeing how it is worth the effort to sell an old drive. They are worth so little on the used market that it generally seems to make more sense to either toss them in the closet to rot in peace, or seek out a place that can properly dispose of them.
Oh, wait. I can't do that. I have never had a facebook account yet the facebook app is installed on my android phone and so intertwined with non-facebook functions that I do use that I am not allowed to uninstall facebook.
Why would I want to do that? I can use the third mouse button to do that,
Mouse != Trackpoint
We can call them trackpoint buttons if you want, or anything else you like. They work like mouse buttons for the trackpoint. Trackpoints have had three buttons longer than touchpads have supported two-finger scrolling, and the third button has pretty much always been available for scrolling with those trackpoints.
If you want to be ignorant of superior pointing devices, you can make that choice. Don't call other people dumb just because you prefer an inferior and less productive way to move your cursor.
Me on my trackpad can run circles around anyone on their trackpoint.
I didn't know I had entered in cursor olympics. Maybe when I'm done doing actual work with my trackpoint you can show me the clever games you love to play with your touchpad.
You can't even do the most basic operation (two-finger scrolling) using a trackpoint.
Why would I want to do that? I can use the third mouse button to do that, and have been able to do that for a very long time. Scroll vertical, scroll horizontal, etc. All without taking my fingers off the home row.
Enjoy the dumbness, though, if that's your preference.
If you want to be ignorant of superior pointing devices, you can make that choice. Don't call other people dumb just because you prefer an inferior and less productive way to move your cursor.
Give me a trackpoint and I will buy it. Touchpads suck, period.
Oh, Sweet Jesus Christ. I'd rather slice my throat wide open and bleed to death than use a trackpoint. The touchpads on Mac laptops are awesome.
Then please don't ever come into my server room, I don't want to have to clean up the blood.
Give me a trackpoint and I will buy it. Touchpads suck, period. I don't care who makes them I have never seen a touchpad that was anywhere near as good as the trackpoints I have had on my laptops over the years.
Never owned a MacBook Pro then, have you?
My wife owns one, I use it only when I have no better option. She uses a mouse when she has real work to do as the touchpad on there sucks for her work. For me the only pointing device that is a bigger impediment to work than a touchpad is a touchscreen.
Give me a trackpoint and I will buy it. Touchpads suck, period. I don't care who makes them I have never seen a touchpad that was anywhere near as good as the trackpoints I have had on my laptops over the years.
They are all rights guaranteed by the constitution.
The constitution does not guarantee you the right to buy a gun, only to have one. The second amendment explicitly mentions a militia and armed citizens. If you take those two to be tied together - they are in the same sentence after all - you could say that the guns are only guaranteed to be made available by the militia. Note that the militia is not defined in any way, it could be any number (even one, perhaps) of people who just like to shoot guns.
What difference does it make after all?
It makes a huge difference. If they already own guns, those guns are not magically made illegal. Similarly they can go buy as much ammo as they want. Nothing is taken away, there is just a new impediment to purchasing more.
By contrast, there is no purchasing element to worshipping as you see fit or speaking as you like. Yeah, you may have a preacher who tells you that you can buy your way to heaven, and you can buy more attention in the press (although Drumpf has showed us time and again this year that the best press attention comes for free), but there is nothing stopping you from exercising those all you want right now. Similarly no bills proposed to date would place new impediments on someone from using guns they already own.
I thought the US government was concerned about Chinese made technology potentially giving up important information to the Chinese government. How is Trend Micro allowed in the State Department?
That is not even close to remotely similar.
That doesn't imply that these people have been found guilty in a court of law through due process and can have their rights taken away from them.
No rights are taken away by the no fly list. People are still free to travel by other methods. Even if the No Fly became No Fly / No Buy, that does not impede rights either; guns that were already purchased legally are still legally owned and can be born and used legally.
The second amendment does not say that people must be allowed to purchase an arbitrary number of weapons on a whim.
One party in the house is attempting to bring attention to the fact that the other party refuses to hold a discussion or a vote on a matter. The second, larger party could easily sink the matter just by voting on it, as they can certainly defeat all the proposals with their majority.
Yet the slashdot voice tells us that the minority is somehow attempting to destroy democracy, with their horrid request for a vote.
As other people (not here, of course) have pointed out, the question that not nearly enough people are asking is what is Paul Ryan afraid of? He knows he has enough votes to quickly vote down all four of the senate proposals. There is no fillibuster mechanism in the house (this is the closest the house can get to it, and it really isn't very close to it), so they can make debate as short as they want. The house can up/down vote each one of these and get all four of them done before lunch if they want to. Instead Ryan and his friends are running away from this, and almost nobody has the balls to challenge him on that and ask why.
ave their 2nd Amendment Rights abrogated by using a list which has no Due Process to be either listed or removed?
Two really big obvious problems with that statement.
First, no bill proposed in the past several decades has proposed taking away legally owned guns. If you already own guns and are on the No Fly List you can go buy all the ammo you want and go do all the legal shooting you want with the guns you already own. The list would simply prevent you from buying additional weapons.
,br> Second, there are processes to be removed from the list. People have been able to get their names removed. It is not easy or transparent but it is not impossible either.
I still think of Plextor when I see the term Plex. I used to pine for a Plextor drive, settled for a Yamaha instead (back in the day).
it appears, Zuckerberg uses Mozilla's Thunderbird as his primary email client.
I've been using Thunderbird for a long time now. Before that I used Netscape Communicator (which looked a lot like the usual setup for Thunderbird). If he's smart enough to use Thunderbird then maybe he's not completely awful.
So then were in the constitution does it state that the federal government can regulate which mode of transportation
That's a flimsy argument at best. That statement fits in with the same league as those who say the second amendment means you should be allowed to have your own personal nuclear arsenal if you can afford it. The no fly list only restricts you from using one form of transportation. The federal government says you cannot ride a horse or bicycle on the interstate highway, why are you not angry about that?
Also you don't know you are on their stupid list until you are turned away at the airport so at that point they really are preventing you from traveling.
The airlines have access to this information. They could check ticket sales against the list before selling tickets and tell buyers they are on the list, but that would impact their profits ever-so-slightly.
I can use?
I don't know. Can you? I'm not sure what this thing might be that you are asking me if you can use.
As far as the list goes there have been some big fuck-ups
It's not perfect. If you read my previous comment you would see I already admitted that. You don't seem to want to acknowledge a possibility of us agreeing on something here but indeed I said it is not perfect.
as the vast majority of people on it are not terrorists
That is one huge generalization, there. Do you even have the slightest idea how many people are on the list? It is essentially impossible for you to support your statement if you don't know how large the list is.
I say that because if even a sizeable amount of the people on the list were terrorists the US would look a lot more like Fallujah.
No, there are several things wrong with that statement.
One, the list includes people who are known to not be in the US. Osama bin Laden was on the list after 9/11 even though the chance of him ever flying within the US after then were essentially zero.
Two, the purpose of the list is to prevent terrorism in the US. Hence it was a curated list of both people who had committed acts of terror - here or abroad - as well as people with connections to terror. There were, of course, problems with the list but it is the best list we've had so far.
I still haven't seen you offer up a better list. If the FBI and others are watching for potential future terrorists, how do you propose for them to share that information amongst themselves? Or do you want them to just get out of the business entirely and let the chips fall where they may?