Doesn't make sense when the NRA is pushing hard on the idea that the second amendment is all about overthrowing the government when necessary. And the armed peace officers in the courtroom count as part of the government to overthrow. (and if they were going to overthrow the government would they really be slowed down by the metal detector at the courthouse entrance?)
Yes, but every politician is a corrupt, serially lying manipulator. And as far as political family business, the Clinton's are noobs in that area. They only wish they had the nepotism that the Bush's and Kennedy's had.
I think there's a problem with so called sports drinks, which are just sugar water with some other ingredients. Power-Ade for instance. Parents probably thinking it's ok for the kids.
Zero views a day if the back room tech fails, or their security software fails, or the backhaul fiber stops working, or all the phones go blank, or Taylor Swift decides Snapchat isn't cool anymore.
I really like my Aquamacs though. Also having multiple open windows is nice. Using it only from a terminal would feel clumsy, even though that's what I used to do.
Welcome to the brave new world of short term memory. Last time it was about how evil content owners were trying to keep down the small upstart Netflix. Today it's about how the mega corporation of Netflix is dropping your shows and capping your bandwidth in order to make even more money. Tomorrow it will be about how forgetful we all seem to be lately.
Netflix is not shrinking the catalog by choice, the catalog is being taken away from them by the content owners. They don't have have a limit on how many shows they have, they don't have to drop an American show in order to get a title from an international catalog.
There are so few reasonable shows compared to the past. People aren't cutting the cord because quality is good. So there are two or three decent shows, that's far too few to pay $70-$100 for a subscription.
Competition from others is tough. The consumer isn't going to want to subscribe to multiple services after so recently having learned to cut the cord. All those services have 95% of the content in common anyway, it's only the last 5% that they're fighting over. I am not going to pay $10/mo for just one tv series no matter how good it is.
But they want a slice of that money pie and if they can't have their slice then they don't want anyone else to have a slice either. They'd rather have crappy streaming that everyone hates rather than someone else make the money.
Early on it was easier to license stuff for streaming. Then the content owners started seeing a shift away from traditional cable towards streaming and were annoyed/surprised/jealous. When the content came up for relicensing again the content owners negotiated much more strongly.
For example, some stations didn't want to give any streaming rights for anything they had because they had a plan to do their own streaming in the future (like CBS with it's mindblowingly stupid streaming; 5 episodes for free or if you subscribe and pay money you can see *7* episodes!). Others said "wow, I didn't realize my back catalog was actually worth money!" (Starz).
Netflix would prefer having streaming rights for the majority of the shows that they dropped, they're not dropping those shows because of a lack of interest or because their digital warehouse is out of space. They get no money or enjoyment from having to listen to the customer complaints when they drop stuff.
Just wait, soon those whiny students will be your coworkers.
I found it interesting when one guest on a radio show was pointing out how the helicopter parenting was expanding into college, where parents were following and making sure their kids too the right classes, go and complain to the dean on the child's behalf, etc. So right there we have a generation of college graduates who will show up with no concept about how to work independently in the real world.
Those graduates will find out that they can't get their way when they're not on college. They won't worry about micro aggressions any more because they'll have macro aggressions when they walk down the wrong street. Their performance review at work won't focus on their feelings. They're not going to be able to have an abritration about the hostile environment when the Hells Angels member moves in next door. No A-for-effort when they screw up their tax forms. People really should be able to deal with the real world that has no imaginary protection bubble before they turn 30.
So student activists from the 60s when seeing something they don't like went out on a voter registration drive; students today just want the college administration to acknowledge their pain. Something has seriously gone wrong.
Nothing new. The CS For All has never been about computer science. It's about creating malleable employees that can get started right away on trivial tasks without needing to go to college or a trade school first. I mean how can we compete with third world countries paying $4/day to their workers (or $2/day if they're children) if our workers have college loans to pay off?
People outside of CS have absolutely no clue what CS is, some probably think it's equivalent to programming, and a depressingly large number probably associate it with creating web sites. Why do you see this only in CS? I don't hear people bitch that more EE grads need to know how to solder, that learning Laplace transforms as a freshman is a waste of time because Matlab can do that for you, and so forth. But in CS there's a race to the bottom.
My phone has a fitness tracker. I turned it on for a bit then stopped. Then without the app running it would still bug me that I had only walked 100 steps that day, which was because the phone was immobile on my desk being charged (always being charged) while I was outside walking in the fresh air.
Slashdot Mirror
Doesn't make sense when the NRA is pushing hard on the idea that the second amendment is all about overthrowing the government when necessary. And the armed peace officers in the courtroom count as part of the government to overthrow. (and if they were going to overthrow the government would they really be slowed down by the metal detector at the courthouse entrance?)
I don't think politicians can even be capable of suffering from cognition.
Yes, but every politician is a corrupt, serially lying manipulator. And as far as political family business, the Clinton's are noobs in that area. They only wish they had the nepotism that the Bush's and Kennedy's had.
Crowds are catalysts for crazy. Anything can happen in a crowd. Nerds will start dancing even. And someone looking for a fight will find one.
The vast majority of people who don't own guns haven't hurt anyone either.
He said his gun was yuge! Slightly smaller than large anyway.
I think there's a problem with so called sports drinks, which are just sugar water with some other ingredients. Power-Ade for instance. Parents probably thinking it's ok for the kids.
Zero views a day if the back room tech fails, or their security software fails, or the backhaul fiber stops working, or all the phones go blank, or Taylor Swift decides Snapchat isn't cool anymore.
I really like my Aquamacs though. Also having multiple open windows is nice. Using it only from a terminal would feel clumsy, even though that's what I used to do.
Welcome to the brave new world of short term memory. Last time it was about how evil content owners were trying to keep down the small upstart Netflix. Today it's about how the mega corporation of Netflix is dropping your shows and capping your bandwidth in order to make even more money. Tomorrow it will be about how forgetful we all seem to be lately.
Netflix is not shrinking the catalog by choice, the catalog is being taken away from them by the content owners. They don't have have a limit on how many shows they have, they don't have to drop an American show in order to get a title from an international catalog.
There are so few reasonable shows compared to the past. People aren't cutting the cord because quality is good. So there are two or three decent shows, that's far too few to pay $70-$100 for a subscription.
Competition from others is tough. The consumer isn't going to want to subscribe to multiple services after so recently having learned to cut the cord. All those services have 95% of the content in common anyway, it's only the last 5% that they're fighting over. I am not going to pay $10/mo for just one tv series no matter how good it is.
But they want a slice of that money pie and if they can't have their slice then they don't want anyone else to have a slice either. They'd rather have crappy streaming that everyone hates rather than someone else make the money.
Early on it was easier to license stuff for streaming. Then the content owners started seeing a shift away from traditional cable towards streaming and were annoyed/surprised/jealous. When the content came up for relicensing again the content owners negotiated much more strongly.
For example, some stations didn't want to give any streaming rights for anything they had because they had a plan to do their own streaming in the future (like CBS with it's mindblowingly stupid streaming; 5 episodes for free or if you subscribe and pay money you can see *7* episodes!). Others said "wow, I didn't realize my back catalog was actually worth money!" (Starz).
Netflix would prefer having streaming rights for the majority of the shows that they dropped, they're not dropping those shows because of a lack of interest or because their digital warehouse is out of space. They get no money or enjoyment from having to listen to the customer complaints when they drop stuff.
That instills so much trust into Google's hiring practices.
Just wait, soon those whiny students will be your coworkers.
I found it interesting when one guest on a radio show was pointing out how the helicopter parenting was expanding into college, where parents were following and making sure their kids too the right classes, go and complain to the dean on the child's behalf, etc. So right there we have a generation of college graduates who will show up with no concept about how to work independently in the real world.
Those graduates will find out that they can't get their way when they're not on college. They won't worry about micro aggressions any more because they'll have macro aggressions when they walk down the wrong street. Their performance review at work won't focus on their feelings. They're not going to be able to have an abritration about the hostile environment when the Hells Angels member moves in next door. No A-for-effort when they screw up their tax forms. People really should be able to deal with the real world that has no imaginary protection bubble before they turn 30.
So student activists from the 60s when seeing something they don't like went out on a voter registration drive; students today just want the college administration to acknowledge their pain. Something has seriously gone wrong.
Nothing new. The CS For All has never been about computer science. It's about creating malleable employees that can get started right away on trivial tasks without needing to go to college or a trade school first. I mean how can we compete with third world countries paying $4/day to their workers (or $2/day if they're children) if our workers have college loans to pay off?
People outside of CS have absolutely no clue what CS is, some probably think it's equivalent to programming, and a depressingly large number probably associate it with creating web sites. Why do you see this only in CS? I don't hear people bitch that more EE grads need to know how to solder, that learning Laplace transforms as a freshman is a waste of time because Matlab can do that for you, and so forth. But in CS there's a race to the bottom.
Emacs is GUI based, it's only ncurses based if you're using it from a terminal. For GUI is it not tied to one particular type of GUI either.
Lisp is a real language with lots of history and theory, JavaScript is a hack, it's not a draw it's a clear advantage to Emacs there.
So Microsoft tools are so difficult to use across different tool versions that it becomes a news story when someone manages to upgrade?
I only have netflix so can't compare, but I thought there was an option on roku to change to quality?
Why do you need to track it? Are you turning it in to someone later?
My phone has a fitness tracker. I turned it on for a bit then stopped. Then without the app running it would still bug me that I had only walked 100 steps that day, which was because the phone was immobile on my desk being charged (always being charged) while I was outside walking in the fresh air.
Well, at one point there were up to 90 wearers of smart watches world wide, I would call that a bubble...
It's either that or getting back to work.