Take a look at this image [wordpress.com]. If someone says "the science is settled", then they are clearly NOT being scientific.
True, but what that means is that other folks should always be looking for other theories that might better fit the data. Unfortunately, most of the folks on the other side seem to think that "unsettled" means "I can ignore this because it is inconvenient," which is not the same thing.
At best you may have an idea, but to call it settled - when we're seeing the EXACT SAME THING repeating itself over 60 year cycles, is the antithesis of science.
The problem is that their alternative explanations only fit the data over a very short period of time, geologically speaking. These theories have been debunked repeatedly by trivial comparison with the actual data. At some point, after you've heard dozens of variations of essentially the same thoroughly disproven theory, you have to start assuming that the people repeatedly suggesting them are not actually being skeptical, but rather are just trying to distract from actual science.
Don't get me wrong. I'd love it if all the global warming folks turned out to be wrong. But until there's a model that fits the data back through multiple ice ages and predicts that things will level out, we should still assume that they are right. Why? Because if they're wrong and we assume they are right, then we spend a lot of money making our air cleaner that we didn't have to spend, but we're otherwise no worse off, and if they're right and we assume they are wrong, then we doom our civilization. So if there's even a 50/50 chance that they are right, we have to assume that they are right (and the odds are much higher than that).
That said, there's a lot we don't know. It is possible (nay, almost certain) that we will eventually hit an equilibrium point at which more plants are growing, and the temperature change levels off. The big unanswered questions are how many major cities will be underwater when it does, whether we will have enough arable land to feed the earth's population as temperatures and rain patterns shift, and whether the cost of reducing our greehouse gas emissions exceeds the cost of dealing with the effects of climate change over the long term. And *that* is where there is a lot of room for speculation, debate, etc.
You don't know how climate models work. Almost no one does. Yet you "believe in them". Is it because they produce results that fit your politics?
No, it's because they produce results that fit the data. Show me a model that fits the existing data without predicting that things are going to get a whole lot worse, and I'll start taking the other side of the issue seriously. Until then, I will consider their position to be uninformed, and thus completely irrelevant.
Do you mean 6 Plus, or do you mean that you tried going without a headphone jack and are now so mad at Apple for dropping it that you won't ever buy their products again?
The biggest problem with the USB-C shift on the MacBook Pro and with the headphone jack on the iPhone is that Apple isn't even consistent across their product lines. They did things in entirely the wrong order, and consumers got screwed as a direct result. Apple should have adopted USB-C on the iPhone first, before adopting USB-C on their laptops, and should not have dropped the headphone jack on the iPhone until both the iPhone AND the Mac were on USB-C. That way, users would be able to use the same headphones/dongles with both devices and no one would care that much.
Because Apple continued to use the proprietary Lightning connector after dropping the headphone jack, a user who buys an Apple phone and a Mac has to use a dongle with the phone, and remove that dongle to use the headphones with the Mac (because no laptop ever came with a Lightning jack). So you have to carry the dongle separately, rather than keeping it permanently on the cable. By contrast, you can buy an Android phone and use the same USB-C headphones (or adapter) with your phone AND your Mac. In fact Android phones are arguably a better match for Macs than they are for Windows laptops (where USB-C still isn't prevalent).
This was, IMO, a fairly glaring failure of Apple's product marketing department. Not being change averse is one thing. Rushing haphazardly into a new world without thinking through the consequences is another matter.
And this is why I'm still using an iPhone 6s, and will continue to do so until Schiller pulls his head out of his thoroughly innovated a** [+] and insists that the iPhone hardware folks drop Lightning for USB-C.
[+] Schiller once famously said, "Can't innovate my a**," so I can only assume that by now, someone must have innovated his a** just to prove him wrong. Or was there supposed to be a comma in there?
FYI, if you didn't have equivalents, you could also use xar or cpio (depending on the age of the package) to extract the package's payload to a different base directory.
I suspect Apple will drop that in 10.14, and will recommend VLC as an alternative. Either way, free app, free replacement, no great loss.
Apple's InkServer input method
That one is kind of embarrassing and sad; I suspect it involves 32-bit-only user-space driver code written by tablet vendors, but I'm not certain. Either way, I would not call this an app. If you want to include relatively obscure OS features, you would also need to include support for PICT files, and probably a few others. You should definitely file bugs and complain to Apple about this, though.
Steam
Games are the big exception. Steam itself, however, is an embarrassment, and 64-bit support is probably just the tip of the iceberg. I wonder if they ever got around to fixing the dozens of bugs that prevented running the Mac version on a case-sensitive volume. Either way, I think it's safe to say that this announcement will light a fire under a company that IMO otherwise wouldn't bother fixing anything nonfatal....
McAfee Endpoint Security
Wow. There are serious security implications involved in running 32-bit code. You've really gotta question any security-related app that still hasn't been compiled to support ASLR. That said, again, I wouldn't really call that an app.
Cisco Anyconnect VPN Client for Mac
Hmm. They have a 64-bit iOS client, which means most of their code base should literally be a simple recompile to run on 64-bit. What the heck, Cisco? Either way, again, I don't see them abandoning the Mac platform, so you can probably assume that they'll update it soon enough.
I had the better part of a terabyte of audio recordings alone, on my PowerMac G5, more than a decade ago. I have well over a terabyte of photos, and by that, I mean closer to two. Add to that various musical compositions, Photoshop-generated book cover art, the apps themselves, etc. Of course, most of that stuff is relatively static content (for example, when you edit photos, you're editing metadata, not the RAW files), so they only get backed up once, rather than having dozens of different versions, so at least I don't have tens of terabytes (yet), though I'm probably getting close to a single ten.
Doesn't work. If you read the very top of that page, it says that the page applies up through 10.13.3, and there's a link to info about 10.13.4 that basically says, "It doesn't work in any mode that's actually useful. Don't upgrade."
Really? Which apps? 32-bit Intel apps are really, really rare on OS X. I don't remember the last time I saw one, with the exception of MS Office (because Microsoft screwed around and delayed their 64-bit transition for an entire decade). Most companies were already well on their way to transitioning their code base to 64-bit when the Intel hardware first came out, so the transition to 64-bit Intel was very nearly lost in the noise, effort-wise.
If you follow the link at the top of your linked page, you get to a page that tells you that DisplayLink basically doesn't work at all in 10.13.4 except in a very limited mode where it mirrors the main display. This was discussed on Slashdot a couple of weeks ago.
Hah. Their maximum storage tier is only 2 terabytes. I can't remember the last time I had so little data to back up. Probably somewhere around the time they changed the name from.Mac to MobileMe.
For a perfect/mathematical fractal, the coastline could actually be infinite in length.
Fortunately for us, the dimensions of quarks quantize the possible values somewhat, so it is finite, but large. Still, do you go across one side of each atom, or do you go all the way around each one until the closest point to the next?
No, but if you're on a salary, your employer can call you on a Saturday. Also, some people who get sick on a weekend do fudge their sick days to get a free day on Monday when they aren't sick. It certainly isn't approved behavior, but it happens a lot more than you might expect.
And after all that time carefully editing the last 90% of that post, I missed a typo in the first paragraph. "The correct response to such ideas is always 'Show me the data.'" [redacted swearing]
There's this idea that if prostitution was legal, men would rape less because they'd have an outlet for their sexual urges. This mistaken idea goes against the concepts of feminism and must be resisted every time it pops up.
Some of them might. Some of them might rape more. The correct response so such ideas is always "Show me the data."
Disturbing as it might seem to many, legalized prostitution actually does reduce rape and sexual abuse. A lot. We're not talking about some small variation that could be attributed to chance. We're talking about 30% reduction within just two years. Much of this is likely because prostitutes in those areas feel safe admitting what they do to police, which means they can turn in people who commit crimes against them, thus putting people who harm other people behind bars.
More to the point, the argument in favor of legalizing prostitution is precisely the same as the argument for so-called "sancuary cities" that are hostile towards attempts to deport people solely for being undocumented immigrants. Sanctuary cities have lower crime rates as a direct result of those policies, because the immigrant community isn't afraid to report crimes. What possible reason, then, could anyone have for believing that legalized prostitution would not reduce crime in the same way?
Rape is a core feature of patriarchy.
And of course, preventing women from charging for sex means that any woman who feels that this is her only plausible way out of abject poverty is denied the opportunity to be so empowered legally, and therefore must therefore do so illegally. This means those women are much more at risk of abuse, at risk of getting caught up in networks of people who "protect" them in exchange for skimming part of the profit, because they aren't eligible for protection by law enforcement, and at risk of rape by former customers. And of course, they can't usefully report those rapes, because the first question out of the defense attorney's mouth will be, "How did you know the defendant," and if the witness's answer is, "Your honor, I plead the fifth amendment," the case isn't going to go well for the prosecution.
Anti-prostitution laws actually contribute to the subjugation of women. They don't prevent it. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding him/herself. The numbers speak volumes, and they say you're wrong. Very wrong. Want to convince me otherwise? Show me your numbers, and tell me why your numbers are better.
I agree that this GP was wrong, but having just paid my taxes and met the maximum for Social Security, I can confidently state that federal income tax is the one that matters; the other ones are just a nuisance in comparison.
That's because you're making enough money to meet the maximum for Social Security. Bear in mind that Puerto Rico is extremely poor. Most people make at or near minimum wage. At minimum wage (about $15k per year), after you subtract the $6,350 standard deduction, you're at about $8,650, which puts you in the 10% tax bracket. So you pay $865 in income tax, and that's before the earned income tax credit, child tax credits, etc. Most people in Puerto Rico probably won't pay much, if any income tax even if PR becomes a state.
Medicare and Social Security, however, are a total of 7.65% are on the whole amount, with no deductions, so someone working at minimum wage pays $1,147 in Social Security and Medicare.
In other words, except for the top few percent of people in Puerto Rico, statehood won't make much, if any difference to them financially in the immediate term, but it will eliminate barriers to trade, which over time will greatly benefit everybody there.
This. Similarly, the graduation rate doesn't tell you how good the school is at teaching. It just tells you what percentage of bad students they filtered out before admission. The higher the percentage of weak students, the lower the graduation rate. Each drop of one point in high school GPA corresponds with a 2x reduction in graduation rate.
In other words, this program doesn't give people a chance to attend the best schools, but rather gives people a chance to attend the most expensive, most elite schools. The burden of proof for whether the schools are "best" or not is whether the people brought in by this program end up with better graduation rates than similar students who attend other schools that didn't make the cut.
First fix the flaw in the system that allows any scammer to spoof any number they want, which is the only explanation for why I keep getting robocalls from numbers that match the first 6 digits of my own number.
Oh, I actually kind of like that. Now I know which calls are the really abusive ones. Our area has an overlay of so many different prefixes that I don't know a single person who has both my area code and exact prefix. Even my next-door neighbors all have different prefixes. Most of them use cell phones with different area codes. So when I see a call that matches the first six digits of my phone number, I know with absolute certainty that I should not, under any circumstances, answer it.
It's not a flaw, it's a feature. It permits employees of legitimate businesses to show a different callback number (e.g. customer service) rather than their personal extensions.
That doesn't require the ability to substitute arbitrary numbers — only numbers in a block of numbers owned/rented by the company in question. The flaw is that there is no sanity checking or filtering at the telecom level to determine whether the caller ID data is plausible. If the telephone company detected bogus caller ID messages and immediately terminated the call, we wouldn't have this problem.
Slashdot Mirror
True, but what that means is that other folks should always be looking for other theories that might better fit the data. Unfortunately, most of the folks on the other side seem to think that "unsettled" means "I can ignore this because it is inconvenient," which is not the same thing.
The problem is that their alternative explanations only fit the data over a very short period of time, geologically speaking. These theories have been debunked repeatedly by trivial comparison with the actual data. At some point, after you've heard dozens of variations of essentially the same thoroughly disproven theory, you have to start assuming that the people repeatedly suggesting them are not actually being skeptical, but rather are just trying to distract from actual science.
Don't get me wrong. I'd love it if all the global warming folks turned out to be wrong. But until there's a model that fits the data back through multiple ice ages and predicts that things will level out, we should still assume that they are right. Why? Because if they're wrong and we assume they are right, then we spend a lot of money making our air cleaner that we didn't have to spend, but we're otherwise no worse off, and if they're right and we assume they are wrong, then we doom our civilization. So if there's even a 50/50 chance that they are right, we have to assume that they are right (and the odds are much higher than that).
That said, there's a lot we don't know. It is possible (nay, almost certain) that we will eventually hit an equilibrium point at which more plants are growing, and the temperature change levels off. The big unanswered questions are how many major cities will be underwater when it does, whether we will have enough arable land to feed the earth's population as temperatures and rain patterns shift, and whether the cost of reducing our greehouse gas emissions exceeds the cost of dealing with the effects of climate change over the long term. And *that* is where there is a lot of room for speculation, debate, etc.
No, it's because they produce results that fit the data. Show me a model that fits the existing data without predicting that things are going to get a whole lot worse, and I'll start taking the other side of the issue seriously. Until then, I will consider their position to be uninformed, and thus completely irrelevant.
Do you mean 6 Plus, or do you mean that you tried going without a headphone jack and are now so mad at Apple for dropping it that you won't ever buy their products again?
The biggest problem with the USB-C shift on the MacBook Pro and with the headphone jack on the iPhone is that Apple isn't even consistent across their product lines. They did things in entirely the wrong order, and consumers got screwed as a direct result. Apple should have adopted USB-C on the iPhone first, before adopting USB-C on their laptops, and should not have dropped the headphone jack on the iPhone until both the iPhone AND the Mac were on USB-C. That way, users would be able to use the same headphones/dongles with both devices and no one would care that much.
Because Apple continued to use the proprietary Lightning connector after dropping the headphone jack, a user who buys an Apple phone and a Mac has to use a dongle with the phone, and remove that dongle to use the headphones with the Mac (because no laptop ever came with a Lightning jack). So you have to carry the dongle separately, rather than keeping it permanently on the cable. By contrast, you can buy an Android phone and use the same USB-C headphones (or adapter) with your phone AND your Mac. In fact Android phones are arguably a better match for Macs than they are for Windows laptops (where USB-C still isn't prevalent).
This was, IMO, a fairly glaring failure of Apple's product marketing department. Not being change averse is one thing. Rushing haphazardly into a new world without thinking through the consequences is another matter.
And this is why I'm still using an iPhone 6s, and will continue to do so until Schiller pulls his head out of his thoroughly innovated a** [+] and insists that the iPhone hardware folks drop Lightning for USB-C.
[+] Schiller once famously said, "Can't innovate my a**," so I can only assume that by now, someone must have innovated his a** just to prove him wrong. Or was there supposed to be a comma in there?
FYI, if you didn't have equivalents, you could also use xar or cpio (depending on the age of the package) to extract the package's payload to a different base directory.
Really? Wow. BBEdit's website says it doesn't work. *shrugs*
I suspect Apple will drop that in 10.14, and will recommend VLC as an alternative. Either way, free app, free replacement, no great loss.
That one is kind of embarrassing and sad; I suspect it involves 32-bit-only user-space driver code written by tablet vendors, but I'm not certain. Either way, I would not call this an app. If you want to include relatively obscure OS features, you would also need to include support for PICT files, and probably a few others. You should definitely file bugs and complain to Apple about this, though.
Games are the big exception. Steam itself, however, is an embarrassment, and 64-bit support is probably just the tip of the iceberg. I wonder if they ever got around to fixing the dozens of bugs that prevented running the Mac version on a case-sensitive volume. Either way, I think it's safe to say that this announcement will light a fire under a company that IMO otherwise wouldn't bother fixing anything nonfatal....
Wow. There are serious security implications involved in running 32-bit code. You've really gotta question any security-related app that still hasn't been compiled to support ASLR. That said, again, I wouldn't really call that an app.
Hmm. They have a 64-bit iOS client, which means most of their code base should literally be a simple recompile to run on 64-bit. What the heck, Cisco? Either way, again, I don't see them abandoning the Mac platform, so you can probably assume that they'll update it soon enough.
And TextWrangler won't run in the current version of OS X, much less the next one.
I had the better part of a terabyte of audio recordings alone, on my PowerMac G5, more than a decade ago. I have well over a terabyte of photos, and by that, I mean closer to two. Add to that various musical compositions, Photoshop-generated book cover art, the apps themselves, etc. Of course, most of that stuff is relatively static content (for example, when you edit photos, you're editing metadata, not the RAW files), so they only get backed up once, rather than having dozens of different versions, so at least I don't have tens of terabytes (yet), though I'm probably getting close to a single ten.
Doesn't work. If you read the very top of that page, it says that the page applies up through 10.13.3, and there's a link to info about 10.13.4 that basically says, "It doesn't work in any mode that's actually useful. Don't upgrade."
Really? Which apps? 32-bit Intel apps are really, really rare on OS X. I don't remember the last time I saw one, with the exception of MS Office (because Microsoft screwed around and delayed their 64-bit transition for an entire decade). Most companies were already well on their way to transitioning their code base to 64-bit when the Intel hardware first came out, so the transition to 64-bit Intel was very nearly lost in the noise, effort-wise.
If you follow the link at the top of your linked page, you get to a page that tells you that DisplayLink basically doesn't work at all in 10.13.4 except in a very limited mode where it mirrors the main display. This was discussed on Slashdot a couple of weeks ago.
Hah. Their maximum storage tier is only 2 terabytes. I can't remember the last time I had so little data to back up. Probably somewhere around the time they changed the name from .Mac to MobileMe.
Fortunately for us, the dimensions of quarks quantize the possible values somewhat, so it is finite, but large. Still, do you go across one side of each atom, or do you go all the way around each one until the closest point to the next?
No, but if you're on a salary, your employer can call you on a Saturday. Also, some people who get sick on a weekend do fudge their sick days to get a free day on Monday when they aren't sick. It certainly isn't approved behavior, but it happens a lot more than you might expect.
And after all that time carefully editing the last 90% of that post, I missed a typo in the first paragraph. "The correct response to such ideas is always 'Show me the data.'" [redacted swearing]
FTFM.
Some of them might. Some of them might rape more. The correct response so such ideas is always "Show me the data."
Unfortunately for you, someone did just that, and the numbers strongly suggest that you're wrong. And lest you think the phenomenon is limited to Europe, a present Rhode Island as a counterpoint.
Disturbing as it might seem to many, legalized prostitution actually does reduce rape and sexual abuse. A lot. We're not talking about some small variation that could be attributed to chance. We're talking about 30% reduction within just two years. Much of this is likely because prostitutes in those areas feel safe admitting what they do to police, which means they can turn in people who commit crimes against them, thus putting people who harm other people behind bars.
More to the point, the argument in favor of legalizing prostitution is precisely the same as the argument for so-called "sancuary cities" that are hostile towards attempts to deport people solely for being undocumented immigrants. Sanctuary cities have lower crime rates as a direct result of those policies, because the immigrant community isn't afraid to report crimes. What possible reason, then, could anyone have for believing that legalized prostitution would not reduce crime in the same way?
And of course, preventing women from charging for sex means that any woman who feels that this is her only plausible way out of abject poverty is denied the opportunity to be so empowered legally, and therefore must therefore do so illegally. This means those women are much more at risk of abuse, at risk of getting caught up in networks of people who "protect" them in exchange for skimming part of the profit, because they aren't eligible for protection by law enforcement, and at risk of rape by former customers. And of course, they can't usefully report those rapes, because the first question out of the defense attorney's mouth will be, "How did you know the defendant," and if the witness's answer is, "Your honor, I plead the fifth amendment," the case isn't going to go well for the prosecution.
Anti-prostitution laws actually contribute to the subjugation of women. They don't prevent it. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding him/herself. The numbers speak volumes, and they say you're wrong. Very wrong. Want to convince me otherwise? Show me your numbers, and tell me why your numbers are better.
This could explain the high suicide rate in those countries.
That must be miserable. Nearly everywhere on the planet, you get at least 104 days off per year....
[Pauses to wait for you to get the joke.]
Don't worry. Keep consuming soylent green and one day you'll "satisfy" your wife.
That's because you're making enough money to meet the maximum for Social Security. Bear in mind that Puerto Rico is extremely poor. Most people make at or near minimum wage. At minimum wage (about $15k per year), after you subtract the $6,350 standard deduction, you're at about $8,650, which puts you in the 10% tax bracket. So you pay $865 in income tax, and that's before the earned income tax credit, child tax credits, etc. Most people in Puerto Rico probably won't pay much, if any income tax even if PR becomes a state.
Medicare and Social Security, however, are a total of 7.65% are on the whole amount, with no deductions, so someone working at minimum wage pays $1,147 in Social Security and Medicare.
In other words, except for the top few percent of people in Puerto Rico, statehood won't make much, if any difference to them financially in the immediate term, but it will eliminate barriers to trade, which over time will greatly benefit everybody there.
This. Similarly, the graduation rate doesn't tell you how good the school is at teaching. It just tells you what percentage of bad students they filtered out before admission. The higher the percentage of weak students, the lower the graduation rate. Each drop of one point in high school GPA corresponds with a 2x reduction in graduation rate.
In other words, this program doesn't give people a chance to attend the best schools, but rather gives people a chance to attend the most expensive, most elite schools. The burden of proof for whether the schools are "best" or not is whether the people brought in by this program end up with better graduation rates than similar students who attend other schools that didn't make the cut.
How do you get high on boxing an alligator?
Oh, I actually kind of like that. Now I know which calls are the really abusive ones. Our area has an overlay of so many different prefixes that I don't know a single person who has both my area code and exact prefix. Even my next-door neighbors all have different prefixes. Most of them use cell phones with different area codes. So when I see a call that matches the first six digits of my phone number, I know with absolute certainty that I should not, under any circumstances, answer it.
That doesn't require the ability to substitute arbitrary numbers — only numbers in a block of numbers owned/rented by the company in question. The flaw is that there is no sanity checking or filtering at the telecom level to determine whether the caller ID data is plausible. If the telephone company detected bogus caller ID messages and immediately terminated the call, we wouldn't have this problem.