Well, in comparison to a game at Yankee Stadium, soccer is different in particular in that the soccer game involves less use of performance enhancing drugs.
No, if it was like soccer, it would have taken at least 45 minutes to happen, five yellow cards would have been given out, and three fights would have broken out in the stands for no apparent reason.
Would be good if the phone companies didn't charge you to send AND receive them. So I have it disabled.
And that is my biggest complaint about text messaging. It is disgustingly profitable for the phone companies and they treat it like it is some great burden to them. I generally did not use it on my phone - and I would generally call people back if they sent me a text just to emphasize how much I despise text messaging - but recently my mobile phone provider released a new plan that gives me unlimited text and unlimited minutes for the same price I was paying before for just airtime. Now I have text and use it when I need to communicate with people who insist on text.
I almost never use text messaging, but it is extremely useful when cell networks are overloaded as it uses almost no bandwidth and hence messages almost always get through. Unfortunately not many people think of it that way and tend to keep trying to make a voice call when the network is rejecting their attempts.
President Lawnchair just gave his news conference and used the usual weasel words that were signature of every administration of recent memory. He will do whatever his corporate overlords tell him to do.
I can't see squat up there from where I live. My cell phone service at home ordinarily oscillates between terrible and inexistent, so I can't observe an effect from it on that either.
Back when I had a Wii, in order to get these network services, you essentially had to set the device to never turn off. And that was something I deemed as pointless and a waste of power.
I own two different White Wii consoles and neither has needed to be left on continually to use these services. You can power it down completely and you'll get the weather and news in 1-2 minutes at most after powering it back up.
That said, the Wii is the most power efficient console on the market by a long shot. The Wii uses much less power when fully running than the XBox360 or PS3 use when idle. In fact IIRC the PS3 uses more power while sleeping than the Wii does while running. If you want to call the power usage pointless (as you did), you have a point, but it is hardly worth turning off if you are looking to save money on your power bill; I've had individual hard drives use more wattage than the Wii.
I miss the days of having consoles that didn't have retroactive feature loss.
I can't think of an internet-connected console that didn't have that fault. And of course you can still use the Wii just fine without these features, they have no impact on game play whatsoever.
I wrongly thought that the parent was talking about the costs for getting a paper published for the scientist (which are zero, as I mention in my post)
Actually, I disagree with the notion that the costs for the scientist are zero. My last paper cost around $1,500 to be published in PLoS ONE. While some disciplines do now have peer reviewed journals that will actually publish at no cost to the author, that is generally the exception and not the rule. In the case of yet some other journals - PLoS being an example - there are cases where you can publish in their journals for free but someone pays for that somewhere along the way.
Believe it or not, we live in a world in which interesting stories often take more than twenty-four hours to play out, and are still worth discussing some time after the CNN blurb appears.
Believe it or not, but slashdot used to be a site that got tech news before it broke in the mainstream outlets. A story being featured on slashdot used to be an accomplishment for a story, showing it was important to geek culture. Now, slashdot just fishes old headlines from drudgereport, breitbart, fox news, and occasionally CNN.
I was reading this same CNN article yesterday. I considered submitting it here but figured people had already read it... guess not. Glad I can still come here to find yesterday's news, though.
Last time I checked, the costs of publication for the scientist were exactly zero (if you leave out the cost of actually doing the work, of course).
I would love to know how you reached that number. While I do feel that the journals are generally overcharging, the cost is not zero. Publications need to be reviewed, and even if you don't pay the reviewer you still have the cost of publicizing the release of the publication. You also have costs associated with editing and formatting the manuscript so that it meets reasonable academic standards for publication and then you also have ongoing costs for hosting the document.
I'm not saying there are any false positives on the list, but rather that having any could be a really, really, bad thing. Scientists all over the world are fed up with the rising costs of publication, and several journals have tried to pop up to address it. This is one thing that many of the fakes are trying to exploit, but if a real journal comes up that can get work reviewed and published for less than the rest, it should not be suppressed.
Hence if a valid new journal comes up that wants to do business for less, care must be taken to ensure it doesn't end up on the dreaded "fake journal" lists.
Of course, there are plenty of dangerous pathogens that are researched actively in the US and other countries. However, Anthrax for the most part is not one of them. As my undergrad microbiology professor said, Anthrax is a "weapon of mass distraction", as it is of little value in terms of actually causing fatalities. It is incredibly difficult for someone who has caught Anthrax to actually transmit it to another individual. Even when you have spores (such as those that were mailed) it is not easy to actually infect someone with it as the required number of spores to infect someone is highly variable. And on top of that, if it is quickly diagnosed the outcome is usually quite good.
In other words, you could do almost as much by mailing letters with powdered sugar instead.
This is on the front page because Fisker is linked to Democrats, and the failure of this company makes them look bad.
Pretty much all economic failures between 2008 and 2016 are "linked to the Democrats", because they are currently in power. Are you suggesting we just suspend reporting altogether until a Republican president gets elected again?
Not at all. My point is that slashdot has taken a very conservative turn in the past 5-10 or so years.
That, and when the republicans had all the power (it could be argued that hasn't ended), we blamed all the economic problems on the democrats. While the GOP claims to be about "personal responsibility" they do a great job of avoiding ever taking responsibility.
This story isn't on the front page because of the technology, because of the environmental promises of electric cars, or even because it is a business story. This is on the front page because Fisker is linked to Democrats, and the failure of this company makes them look bad. This story should be filed under politics, not technology or business.
How was Windows outselling Apple before Windows existed?
MS-DOS
I suspect the OP was after the point that MS-DOS, while being a key part of Windows for a long time, is not Windows itself. There were Apple computers around for several years before Microsoft released its first commercial version of Windows, and that first version did not likely outsell Apple computers in its first year.
Hence the article title here of "Apple Devices To Outsell Windows For First Time Ever" is likely not accurate. Perhaps if you disregard all versions of Windows prior to 3.0, it might be accurate, but as written it is almost certainly an oversimplification.
There are people in all branches of academia who have finished PhDs and are not finding meaningful employment. While a while back there was a study that declared that those who hold a PhD are seeing a much lower unemployment rate than the rest of the country (something like 2% vs the usual 9.999%) the problem is a lot of people who have that terminal degree are not getting the job they trained for. Many people are completing multiple post-doc positions and then ending up in dead end positions in academia (or industry) with no chance for professional advancement.
In other words, if the "unemployment" number for those with a PhD included those who are "underemployed" (in comparison to the job they actually aspire to hold), the number would be much, much, higher.
I've long since learned that at an airport, it's best to just play it cool, and be seen to be non-threatening or angry with them
Solid advice. That works well with US customs as well in most cases. When I deal with either I always try to present myself as the least interesting person they've seen all day. (granted a lot of people find me boring so that isn't too much of a stretch for me) Have all the papers ready and approach them as if they had their sense of humor surgically removed but are otherwise just like any other person you've ever met.
Some people seem to think it's a good time to make a political statement or otherwise act like an ass
There is a time and place for such things, but I would generally say the airport is not one.
Well, there's little room to interpret buying you a drink as anything threatening.
While such a line is not inherently threatening, it is within the political bit that is incorporated into the grudge many hold against the TSA. Why belittle someone on the job when they have the ability to select you for "additional screening"?
I was going through security one time and had to be patted down. The guy behind me in line decided to be a joker and made a comment along the lines of "they could at least give you a drink for this!". I was really expecting them to unleash the dogs on him for that, but they let him through with just the usual scan. I'm not sure if he would have been so lucky had we been at a larger airport.
So I would say the TSA agents do have some latitude on what they do - but I wouldn't recommend testing it if you want to make it on time to your flight.
I am used to flying steerage / cargo class on airlines, getting service that is generally no better than that given to packages that I ship. I generally pay UPS by the pound, why shouldn't I pay airlines the same way?
This should have run its course by now, shouldn't it? It seems that the zombie craze is lasting even longer than the vampire craze we had a few years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, in comparison to a game at Yankee Stadium, soccer is different in particular in that the soccer game involves less use of performance enhancing drugs.
Since when could they score twice in 45 minutes in soccer?
It's exactly like soccer.
No, if it was like soccer, it would have taken at least 45 minutes to happen, five yellow cards would have been given out, and three fights would have broken out in the stands for no apparent reason.
Being as the intellistations and some intelliservers were already done by lenovo, the deal won't be noticed by many.
Would be good if the phone companies didn't charge you to send AND receive them. So I have it disabled.
And that is my biggest complaint about text messaging. It is disgustingly profitable for the phone companies and they treat it like it is some great burden to them. I generally did not use it on my phone - and I would generally call people back if they sent me a text just to emphasize how much I despise text messaging - but recently my mobile phone provider released a new plan that gives me unlimited text and unlimited minutes for the same price I was paying before for just airtime. Now I have text and use it when I need to communicate with people who insist on text.
I almost never use text messaging, but it is extremely useful when cell networks are overloaded as it uses almost no bandwidth and hence messages almost always get through. Unfortunately not many people think of it that way and tend to keep trying to make a voice call when the network is rejecting their attempts.
President Lawnchair just gave his news conference and used the usual weasel words that were signature of every administration of recent memory. He will do whatever his corporate overlords tell him to do.
I can't see squat up there from where I live. My cell phone service at home ordinarily oscillates between terrible and inexistent, so I can't observe an effect from it on that either.
Back when I had a Wii, in order to get these network services, you essentially had to set the device to never turn off. And that was something I deemed as pointless and a waste of power.
I own two different White Wii consoles and neither has needed to be left on continually to use these services. You can power it down completely and you'll get the weather and news in 1-2 minutes at most after powering it back up.
That said, the Wii is the most power efficient console on the market by a long shot. The Wii uses much less power when fully running than the XBox360 or PS3 use when idle. In fact IIRC the PS3 uses more power while sleeping than the Wii does while running. If you want to call the power usage pointless (as you did), you have a point, but it is hardly worth turning off if you are looking to save money on your power bill; I've had individual hard drives use more wattage than the Wii.
I miss the days of having consoles that didn't have retroactive feature loss.
I can't think of an internet-connected console that didn't have that fault. And of course you can still use the Wii just fine without these features, they have no impact on game play whatsoever.
I guess I was doing it wrong.
I wrongly thought that the parent was talking about the costs for getting a paper published for the scientist (which are zero, as I mention in my post)
Actually, I disagree with the notion that the costs for the scientist are zero. My last paper cost around $1,500 to be published in PLoS ONE. While some disciplines do now have peer reviewed journals that will actually publish at no cost to the author, that is generally the exception and not the rule. In the case of yet some other journals - PLoS being an example - there are cases where you can publish in their journals for free but someone pays for that somewhere along the way.
Believe it or not, we live in a world in which interesting stories often take more than twenty-four hours to play out, and are still worth discussing some time after the CNN blurb appears.
Believe it or not, but slashdot used to be a site that got tech news before it broke in the mainstream outlets. A story being featured on slashdot used to be an accomplishment for a story, showing it was important to geek culture. Now, slashdot just fishes old headlines from drudgereport, breitbart, fox news, and occasionally CNN.
I was reading this same CNN article yesterday. I considered submitting it here but figured people had already read it... guess not. Glad I can still come here to find yesterday's news, though.
Last time I checked, the costs of publication for the scientist were exactly zero (if you leave out the cost of actually doing the work, of course).
I would love to know how you reached that number. While I do feel that the journals are generally overcharging, the cost is not zero. Publications need to be reviewed, and even if you don't pay the reviewer you still have the cost of publicizing the release of the publication. You also have costs associated with editing and formatting the manuscript so that it meets reasonable academic standards for publication and then you also have ongoing costs for hosting the document.
I'm not saying there are any false positives on the list, but rather that having any could be a really, really, bad thing. Scientists all over the world are fed up with the rising costs of publication, and several journals have tried to pop up to address it. This is one thing that many of the fakes are trying to exploit, but if a real journal comes up that can get work reviewed and published for less than the rest, it should not be suppressed.
Hence if a valid new journal comes up that wants to do business for less, care must be taken to ensure it doesn't end up on the dreaded "fake journal" lists.
Of course, there are plenty of dangerous pathogens that are researched actively in the US and other countries. However, Anthrax for the most part is not one of them. As my undergrad microbiology professor said, Anthrax is a "weapon of mass distraction", as it is of little value in terms of actually causing fatalities. It is incredibly difficult for someone who has caught Anthrax to actually transmit it to another individual. Even when you have spores (such as those that were mailed) it is not easy to actually infect someone with it as the required number of spores to infect someone is highly variable. And on top of that, if it is quickly diagnosed the outcome is usually quite good.
In other words, you could do almost as much by mailing letters with powdered sugar instead.
This is on the front page because Fisker is linked to Democrats, and the failure of this company makes them look bad.
Pretty much all economic failures between 2008 and 2016 are "linked to the Democrats", because they are currently in power. Are you suggesting we just suspend reporting altogether until a Republican president gets elected again?
Not at all. My point is that slashdot has taken a very conservative turn in the past 5-10 or so years.
That, and when the republicans had all the power (it could be argued that hasn't ended), we blamed all the economic problems on the democrats. While the GOP claims to be about "personal responsibility" they do a great job of avoiding ever taking responsibility.
This story isn't on the front page because of the technology, because of the environmental promises of electric cars, or even because it is a business story. This is on the front page because Fisker is linked to Democrats, and the failure of this company makes them look bad. This story should be filed under politics, not technology or business.
Welcome back to drudgedot.
How was Windows outselling Apple before Windows existed?
MS-DOS
I suspect the OP was after the point that MS-DOS, while being a key part of Windows for a long time, is not Windows itself. There were Apple computers around for several years before Microsoft released its first commercial version of Windows, and that first version did not likely outsell Apple computers in its first year.
Hence the article title here of "Apple Devices To Outsell Windows For First Time Ever" is likely not accurate. Perhaps if you disregard all versions of Windows prior to 3.0, it might be accurate, but as written it is almost certainly an oversimplification.
There are people in all branches of academia who have finished PhDs and are not finding meaningful employment. While a while back there was a study that declared that those who hold a PhD are seeing a much lower unemployment rate than the rest of the country (something like 2% vs the usual 9.999%) the problem is a lot of people who have that terminal degree are not getting the job they trained for. Many people are completing multiple post-doc positions and then ending up in dead end positions in academia (or industry) with no chance for professional advancement.
In other words, if the "unemployment" number for those with a PhD included those who are "underemployed" (in comparison to the job they actually aspire to hold), the number would be much, much, higher.
I've long since learned that at an airport, it's best to just play it cool, and be seen to be non-threatening or angry with them
Solid advice. That works well with US customs as well in most cases. When I deal with either I always try to present myself as the least interesting person they've seen all day. (granted a lot of people find me boring so that isn't too much of a stretch for me) Have all the papers ready and approach them as if they had their sense of humor surgically removed but are otherwise just like any other person you've ever met.
Some people seem to think it's a good time to make a political statement or otherwise act like an ass
There is a time and place for such things, but I would generally say the airport is not one.
Well, there's little room to interpret buying you a drink as anything threatening.
While such a line is not inherently threatening, it is within the political bit that is incorporated into the grudge many hold against the TSA. Why belittle someone on the job when they have the ability to select you for "additional screening"?
I was going through security one time and had to be patted down. The guy behind me in line decided to be a joker and made a comment along the lines of "they could at least give you a drink for this!". I was really expecting them to unleash the dogs on him for that, but they let him through with just the usual scan. I'm not sure if he would have been so lucky had we been at a larger airport.
So I would say the TSA agents do have some latitude on what they do - but I wouldn't recommend testing it if you want to make it on time to your flight.
I am used to flying steerage / cargo class on airlines, getting service that is generally no better than that given to packages that I ship. I generally pay UPS by the pound, why shouldn't I pay airlines the same way?
This should have run its course by now, shouldn't it? It seems that the zombie craze is lasting even longer than the vampire craze we had a few years ago.
I'm betting on space aliens for the next one.