You get service if you have a card, otherwise you are to use the oh-so-helpful forums. Oh wait, you have to have working internet before you can get there! Better hope you have a card!
Maybe, if you have a technical mind, you can write for a living to help STEM people make sense to other humans.
I have no idea which jobs are not suited to you, but being able to write and communicate is valuable. Having a liberal arts degree, since many fail to notice, gives you the ability to cross disciplines easier than the single discipline degrees, since that is the definition. Both are useful.
At 25, you are just starting out. Find something you are passionate about, and go for that.
When you need a car, truck or whatever, you need that mode of transport. If all you need is to move your ass down the street a short way, a bus is helpful. Walking works too. And In so many cases, walking is faster than a bus -- why don't you walk fool?
They are not the same, not even remotely.
what driverless cars can replace is commuter vehicles, especially outside city cores. They will be more convenient than zip cars (in the current state) or the like, after all they come to your door. A bus doesn't, unless your door is where the bus is. Owning a car may seem ridiculous if you order up one, step outside and its there for you - drops you off at your destination and goes off to help another traveller or 2.
By the way, who says it has to fit more than 1 person? or more than 2 peopel?
How often do you travel with more than 1 person? I know my answer. 1% What's your time worth? I know my answer.
To be properly entertaining, we need both kinds of talk. There is no super hero with out a super villian, after all!
To be sure, we have plenty of villians and heros now. Nothing particularly super... except, perhaps, super stupid. But that's neither a villian nor a hero. Is it?
The companies that are effected are legitimate ones who do business in Canada The onus on proving you have permission to send an email is on the company sending it. There has been a flurry of activity wanting permissions recently due to the legislation. It seems that nobody really knows what it means to be identified as a spammer.
Microsoft is probably thinking - to hell with it; the risk is too high. The RSS is good enough.
I got 8 years out of my car before the engine broke (warped block). Out of warranty... and apparently most of the nissan 2.5 litre engines crap out at 120k
I expected 10-15 years out the car and I got 8! Engines are minimum $5k installed on a car that's worth $3-4k max.
I guess I should have expected 5 years and sold it to some other poor sap.
If all you are worried about is cultural bias, don't worry about it. I'm in my mid 40s and I've been in start-ups for much of my career. If you have the skills they are looking for and the product(s) interests you, you will fit in well enough. If all that interests you is your offspring, you won't. (That applies to pubs/golf courses/spas too).
You will have insight into problems that the 20 somethings will never have. You will have strategies that are different and desires that are refined for the products you work on. That is nothing to be shy or ashamed of. You will learn - they will learn. It's called win-win.
IMHO 300 employees is not a start-up in tech. There's bound to be many old-timers hidden from view - probably eating other peoples lunches.
Perhaps the world would be better off without Facebook as it is today, and thus Zuckerberg made a mistake that we all pay for.
Money isn't the only marker for best possible choices. Regular thieves would be identified for their incredible brilliance all the time if that were the case.
nice theory, but I think it doesn't quite hold up. Specifically cheap doesn't mean better for the environment. eg. http://wwf.panda.org/who_we_are/wwf_offices/china/environmental_problems_china/ unfortunately much of what is cheap today is only on loan from future clean-up-costs. That is not factored in the costs now. Not even a bit.
However, cheap is better in other ways. Drink water from a creek. Cool off by sweating. Sit on the ground.
I also suspect that the longevity of an electric car (besides the battery) can outlast a conventional one by a long time given there are so many fewer parts. So quality plays into it. I think it is a simplification that electric cars are more expensive. They probably will not remain that way from a price point either. I think that it is foolish to think that batteries are equivalent to consumable like gasoline. There are similarities, of course, but they are very different.
Even with rough calculations of other technologies, take something recent that has changed quite a bit, like plasma tvs - 10 years ago, they were $10k or more - now, a much better one is available for $1k. If electric cars follow that trend, they will be $5k-$10k in 10 years, and they will be better. The people today buying these are allowing that technology to develop. The people who aren't are possibly Luddites.
I think that it has been revised a few times in the last year and projections are higher than what was hoped - and no decline in the next century (although a slowing is expected). There is a nice chart here: http://www.unfpa.org/pds/trends.htm
It is projected to reach 8.1 billion in 2025, and to further increase to 9.6 billion in 2050 and 10.9 billion by 2100
Just think how dumb they'd be without the internet!
People are a lot 'smarter' than before. There is no doubt. "Just google it" first requires the person to acknowledge they don't know something, and forming a question about that something. Then reading about it. Comprehension may be weak, but there is something more there than before. All of these traits are what we used to call 'smart'.
I'm certain beyond a doubt that computers have given people (those that have them) a HUGE advantage.
I'm remembering people who couldn't read, others who wouldn't admit they don't know something, and people who spouted nonsense. All of those people still exist. But now-a-days only the spouting of nonsense has increased. And the nonsense can be quickly - on the spot - fact checked.
I used to read all sorts of magazines and it was a great way to learn about things that I wouldn't normally find depth in elsewhere. However, the content began to be simplified, and eventually dumbed down so much that reading them became pointless. The internet now carries everything, but to be fair, it usually is poorly written, or for attention spans of 2 minutes or less. And there's the assumption that you will dig around for clarity or depth.
My biggest disappointment is Scientific American. I remember looking forward to it coming to my door - but since the early 90s, it slowly became toilet paper. I remember first learning about fractals from it, for example, and could build my own algorithms from the article alone. Now, if you get anything from it, it would merely be a mention of something interesting and a broken paragraph on what it might be.
All the magazines have fallen victim to this same kind of editing. I'm not really sure who the target audience is either. I suppose people who want to pretend to read words, but not really have any connection between them. It's sad when the 6 o'clock news has more depth in their 'reporting' than is afforded in magazines. I hope there are some that are good out there, but I've lost interest in trying to find them.
The education level across the board seems to be in steady decline here as well (Canada). It was, at one time too, my opinion that the training was the problem, but every so often there has been amazing people come through it as well. Thinking back to when I was in University, there were plenty of 1/2 quality people then too. And to be fair, we had a lot less to work with back then.
Now that I hire people, I'm looking for those 'gems', which tend to be rare. Then there are the 'experienced' people that don't have the current skills required to do the demanded work, and many have the attitude that they do not have things to learn, or are not going to bother. And they still expect top dollar. Then there are the young ones who don't have a clue and think they do. And expect 'roll-your-eyes' top dollar.
This brings me to a different but effectively similar conclusion: 1) The education system has always been mediocre, so when you are looking, it shows 2) Society has shifted toward people feeling more entitled than ever... Maybe it skipped a generation. Yes, that's actually it. 3) My perspective has changed, therefore scrutinizing others' abilities to a degree I've never done before. (This is major)
Since there are more people now (physical numbers, not ratio) that can't/won't do anything worth while, it is both daunting and depressing.
To touch on the idea that classes "lower the level of difficulty" is probably true in a way. I've heard that parents confront university and college professors regularly about their child's performance in classes and demand higher grades from them for their adult children. This is anecdotal evidence, but it would be interesting to find out if this is common-place. I can't imagine my parents becoming involved in my incompetence at that age... but, perhaps that's another story.
I think that it would be a better education system where students are permitted to enter and continue based on merit, not money. It is increasingly the other way around, it seems.
Even though I despise DST or whatever I live in a northern country. Yes, even at 49 degrees north, the daylight is significantly affected over the year.
2 times a year, I see the sun rise at 6 am and set at 6pm... one of them is in 3 days... but since we use DST, it will be 7am to 7pm... (roll eyes). in December, rises 8 AM and sets 4 PM -- dim for about 1 hour on each end like from 8AM to 9AM and 3PM to 4PM in June, rises 5 AM and sets 9 PM -- bright outside these times for 1-2 hours each way, so from 3AM to 5AM and 9PM to 11PM even though the sun is basically set.
For me, it takes me 3 weeks to adjust to a 1 hour change. It has to be the most horrible period in the spring dealing with it. If it were a 2 or 3 hour change, it would take a day or two to adjust.
DST is stupid - I'm not a child who needs to be told when to go work and when to go eat, but I barely follow these conventions for the convenience of others. It is obvious that businesses that live and die by these rules are mostly obsolete. Being at work when others are working is not a DST issue... having a common opening time is beyond moronic, for example, why would a bank only open from 10-3 during the week when everyone is working? That's convenient. Or worse, a clothing store? Who would go?
I love the fact that computers get updated timezone files all the time. It demonstrates how incredibly arbitrary and useless DST really is.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh my god!
Y'all driving me nutzo!
Does that happen still?
Wow!
You get service if you have a card, otherwise you are to use the oh-so-helpful forums.
Oh wait, you have to have working internet before you can get there! Better hope you have a card!
Maybe, if you have a technical mind, you can write for a living to help STEM people make sense to other humans.
I have no idea which jobs are not suited to you, but being able to write and communicate is valuable. Having a liberal arts degree, since many fail to notice, gives you the ability to cross disciplines easier than the single discipline degrees, since that is the definition. Both are useful.
At 25, you are just starting out. Find something you are passionate about, and go for that.
Whomever wrote this is a fool.
When you need a car, truck or whatever, you need that mode of transport. If all you need is to move your ass down the street a short way, a bus is helpful. Walking works too. And In so many cases, walking is faster than a bus -- why don't you walk fool?
They are not the same, not even remotely.
what driverless cars can replace is commuter vehicles, especially outside city cores. They will be more convenient than zip cars (in the current state) or the like, after all they come to your door. A bus doesn't, unless your door is where the bus is. Owning a car may seem ridiculous if you order up one, step outside and its there for you - drops you off at your destination and goes off to help another traveller or 2.
By the way, who says it has to fit more than 1 person? or more than 2 peopel?
How often do you travel with more than 1 person? I know my answer. 1%
What's your time worth? I know my answer.
To be properly entertaining, we need both kinds of talk. There is no super hero with out a super villian, after all!
To be sure, we have plenty of villians and heros now. Nothing particularly super... except, perhaps, super stupid. But that's neither a villian nor a hero. Is it?
interesting - didn't see that
From what I understand, that is not the case. Any email that is unsolicited would be considered spam.
The SPCA, for example, was commenting that they don't have the resources to get permission to satisfy the law.
Canada passed a new law regarding spam in electronic messages (in particular, email) starting July 1
the law is here: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca...
faq is here: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/com5...
the potential fine is $10 million
The companies that are effected are legitimate ones who do business in Canada
The onus on proving you have permission to send an email is on the company sending it.
There has been a flurry of activity wanting permissions recently due to the legislation.
It seems that nobody really knows what it means to be identified as a spammer.
Microsoft is probably thinking - to hell with it; the risk is too high. The RSS is good enough.
Mazda has stated it is not going to spend money on EV so - it is Nissan.
Also, that Mazda could be changing it's mind would be news on its own.
I got 8 years out of my car before the engine broke (warped block).
Out of warranty... and apparently most of the nissan 2.5 litre engines crap out at 120k
I expected 10-15 years out the car and I got 8! Engines are minimum $5k installed on a car that's worth $3-4k max.
I guess I should have expected 5 years and sold it to some other poor sap.
yay gas engines!
W
PS. yes I take care of my cars.
The simulation is uncanny! I noticed that there is only 1 planet with life on it!
If all you are worried about is cultural bias, don't worry about it. I'm in my mid 40s and I've been in start-ups for much of my career. If you have the skills they are looking for and the product(s) interests you, you will fit in well enough. If all that interests you is your offspring, you won't. (That applies to pubs/golf courses/spas too).
You will have insight into problems that the 20 somethings will never have. You will have strategies that are different and desires that are refined for the products you work on. That is nothing to be shy or ashamed of. You will learn - they will learn. It's called win-win.
IMHO 300 employees is not a start-up in tech. There's bound to be many old-timers hidden from view - probably eating other peoples lunches.
Perhaps the world would be better off without Facebook as it is today, and thus Zuckerberg made a mistake that we all pay for.
Money isn't the only marker for best possible choices. Regular thieves would be identified for their incredible brilliance all the time if that were the case.
specifically, "this make a judgement that it is better off not being depressed in this world"
maybe someone can see the whole thing, but not with beta
It is very depressing especially when you invoke religion.
I think it is better for people to be depressed that deluded.
That, my friend, sounds like a challenge!
clearly you don't drive.
nice theory, but I think it doesn't quite hold up. Specifically cheap doesn't mean better for the environment.
eg. http://wwf.panda.org/who_we_are/wwf_offices/china/environmental_problems_china/
unfortunately much of what is cheap today is only on loan from future clean-up-costs. That is not factored in the costs now. Not even a bit.
However, cheap is better in other ways.
Drink water from a creek.
Cool off by sweating.
Sit on the ground.
I also suspect that the longevity of an electric car (besides the battery) can outlast a conventional one by a long time given there are so many fewer parts. So quality plays into it. I think it is a simplification that electric cars are more expensive. They probably will not remain that way from a price point either. I think that it is foolish to think that batteries are equivalent to consumable like gasoline. There are similarities, of course, but they are very different.
Even with rough calculations of other technologies, take something recent that has changed quite a bit, like plasma tvs - 10 years ago, they were $10k or more - now, a much better one is available for $1k. If electric cars follow that trend, they will be $5k-$10k in 10 years, and they will be better. The people today buying these are allowing that technology to develop. The people who aren't are possibly Luddites.
I think that it has been revised a few times in the last year and projections are higher than what was hoped - and no decline in the next century (although a slowing is expected).
There is a nice chart here: http://www.unfpa.org/pds/trends.htm
It is projected to reach 8.1 billion in 2025, and to further increase to 9.6 billion in 2050 and 10.9 billion by 2100
power consumption
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=united+states+power+use+%2F+population+of+united+states
1.39 kilowatt hr / year per person in the USA
If everyone globally uses the same (similar) amount, which is reasonable, it will require about 5x more power that currently used globally. That assumes a lot of things, of course.
Projections are fun!
Just think how dumb they'd be without the internet!
People are a lot 'smarter' than before. There is no doubt. "Just google it" first requires the person to acknowledge they don't know something, and forming a question about that something. Then reading about it. Comprehension may be weak, but there is something more there than before. All of these traits are what we used to call 'smart'.
I'm certain beyond a doubt that computers have given people (those that have them) a HUGE advantage.
I'm remembering people who couldn't read, others who wouldn't admit they don't know something, and people who spouted nonsense. All of those people still exist. But now-a-days only the spouting of nonsense has increased. And the nonsense can be quickly - on the spot - fact checked.
I used to read all sorts of magazines and it was a great way to learn about things that I wouldn't normally find depth in elsewhere. However, the content began to be simplified, and eventually dumbed down so much that reading them became pointless. The internet now carries everything, but to be fair, it usually is poorly written, or for attention spans of 2 minutes or less. And there's the assumption that you will dig around for clarity or depth.
My biggest disappointment is Scientific American. I remember looking forward to it coming to my door - but since the early 90s, it slowly became toilet paper. I remember first learning about fractals from it, for example, and could build my own algorithms from the article alone. Now, if you get anything from it, it would merely be a mention of something interesting and a broken paragraph on what it might be.
All the magazines have fallen victim to this same kind of editing. I'm not really sure who the target audience is either. I suppose people who want to pretend to read words, but not really have any connection between them. It's sad when the 6 o'clock news has more depth in their 'reporting' than is afforded in magazines. I hope there are some that are good out there, but I've lost interest in trying to find them.
The education level across the board seems to be in steady decline here as well (Canada). It was, at one time too, my opinion that the training was the problem, but every so often there has been amazing people come through it as well. Thinking back to when I was in University, there were plenty of 1/2 quality people then too. And to be fair, we had a lot less to work with back then.
Now that I hire people, I'm looking for those 'gems', which tend to be rare. Then there are the 'experienced' people that don't have the current skills required to do the demanded work, and many have the attitude that they do not have things to learn, or are not going to bother. And they still expect top dollar. Then there are the young ones who don't have a clue and think they do. And expect 'roll-your-eyes' top dollar.
This brings me to a different but effectively similar conclusion:
1) The education system has always been mediocre, so when you are looking, it shows
2) Society has shifted toward people feeling more entitled than ever... Maybe it skipped a generation. Yes, that's actually it.
3) My perspective has changed, therefore scrutinizing others' abilities to a degree I've never done before. (This is major)
Since there are more people now (physical numbers, not ratio) that can't/won't do anything worth while, it is both daunting and depressing.
To touch on the idea that classes "lower the level of difficulty" is probably true in a way. I've heard that parents confront university and college professors regularly about their child's performance in classes and demand higher grades from them for their adult children. This is anecdotal evidence, but it would be interesting to find out if this is common-place. I can't imagine my parents becoming involved in my incompetence at that age... but, perhaps that's another story.
I think that it would be a better education system where students are permitted to enter and continue based on merit, not money. It is increasingly the other way around, it seems.
Even though I despise DST or whatever I live in a northern country. Yes, even at 49 degrees north, the daylight is significantly affected over the year.
2 times a year, I see the sun rise at 6 am and set at 6pm... one of them is in 3 days... but since we use DST, it will be 7am to 7pm... (roll eyes).
in December, rises 8 AM and sets 4 PM -- dim for about 1 hour on each end like from 8AM to 9AM and 3PM to 4PM
in June, rises 5 AM and sets 9 PM -- bright outside these times for 1-2 hours each way, so from 3AM to 5AM and 9PM to 11PM even though the sun is basically set.
For me, it takes me 3 weeks to adjust to a 1 hour change. It has to be the most horrible period in the spring dealing with it. If it were a 2 or 3 hour change, it would take a day or two to adjust.
DST is stupid - I'm not a child who needs to be told when to go work and when to go eat, but I barely follow these conventions for the convenience of others. It is obvious that businesses that live and die by these rules are mostly obsolete. Being at work when others are working is not a DST issue... having a common opening time is beyond moronic, for example, why would a bank only open from 10-3 during the week when everyone is working? That's convenient. Or worse, a clothing store? Who would go?
I love the fact that computers get updated timezone files all the time. It demonstrates how incredibly arbitrary and useless DST really is.
I think your math is wrong FTFY:
500e6 bit/sec x 1/8,589,934,592 GB/bit [google.com] x 169 min x 60 sec/min = 590.2 GB
still huge