It is surprising how many people seem to think that biology is this binary as to whether an individual is a man or woman. Usually it is easy enough to tell, but there are certainly plenty of edge cases.
To be perfectly honest there really should be just one bathroom for everyone that has stalls only. However, I'm perfectly happy to grab the popcorn while seeing how this all turns out. What will happen is that one set of victims (the 'T' in LGBT) will face off against another set of victims (Women, who are the most likely to object to this).
Both sides will claim oppression, you can bet on it.
And you don't think a judge can't tell the difference between a genuine transexual and a pervert?
Irrelevant. The judge will rule based on what the law says; if the guy says "I identify as female", the judge is not allowed to go "Oh no you don't", the prosecution has to provide proof that the person did not, at the time of the offence, identify as female. This is clearly impossible.
If people would adopt open standards like SIP we wouldn't be in this mess.
If SIP wasn't crap, people would have adopted it. There is no good way to make SIP work short of ensuring that every ISP maintains a STUN/ICE/Turnserver. Sip was never designed to work via NATs, much less the multi-level NATs most cell-service providers put their handsets through. Even with STUN or a full TURN server installed, you aren't going to get very far.
It's not about feeling smarter, it's about not feeling like you're surrounded by idiots. It's not nice. Slip of the fingers are okay, fundamental grammatical mistakes just make me take people less seriously, especially here on the internet where the only thing I have to go by is the words people type.
Seconded. Let me add that if I believe the writer isn't a native English speaker, I tend to be much more tolerant of mistakes. When I am talking in other languages people are tolerant of me.
According to the summary, the study did not find that jerks who pointed out mistakes, they found that people who were given errors acted like jerks.
In other words, if the summary is correct, they got their conclusions the wrong way about - after reading error-riddled text, people were more likely to act like jerks. They should have done the personality test prior to the paragraph reading.
These "researchers" are too stupid to be scientists.
apparently they were just trolls who were trolling Linus by withdrawing their free labour or something.
Not wanting to be sworn at and belittled makes one an SJW. We know SJWs are bad because and useless they represent everything evil in all its forms. Therefore not wanting to be sworn at makes them evil and useless. Since they're useless there's no point having them on the kernel team.
Moderation on Slashdot is broken.
Anything counter to running round like a headless chicken squawking "SJW SJW SJW" all over the place seems to get modbombed down pretty fast. You're back to +3 now though, so sanity is starting to prevail again. The modbombing crowd are pretty quick off the mark too, so posts tend to spike low before getting modded back up.
The two of you should get a room, because, really.... publicly ego-massaging and congratulating each other that you both think the "correct" thoughts? You both just responded to a post that was bombed down to -1 in no time, and try to say that *that* post is representative of slashdot?
BTW: Sanity *is* starting to prevail, which is why the ideological nonsense from both sides almost always goes down and stays down - right now AmiMoJo's comment is still modded down, not at +3. On the rare occasion either of you post something egalitarian, your post goes up and stays up. Hard as it may be for you to believe, to the middle majority of the bell curve, both sides look the same, whether the issue is Trump/Guns/Politics/Religion.
You'd be right if PTSD wasn't considered a disability. As it is considered a disability by medical professionals and organisations the world over, you are massively incorrect, and you've just shown that you're quite happy being incorrect if you can grind a suitable axe in the process.
Sure, its considered a medical disability, but what I started on about is still not measurable. Doesn't matter how you want to put it, it's not measurable. You cannot compare two cases of PTSD the way you can with most other things, because you cannot measure it. It all comes down to who says they feel $X more.
You've got to draw the line in the sand *somewhere*; you choose to draw the line at unmeasurable feels. I choose to draw it at what can be measured and quantified. Because, you see, if the world has to care about *your* unmeasurable feels, then they have to care about *my* unmeasurable feels, at which point it just degrades into who better expresses their unmeasurable feels, which they may or may not even be feeling.
Thus, the world doesn't particularly care about your feels. We don't care if you "feel" triggered, were you actually? Doctors the world over require substantial evidence before diagnosing PTSD. Social mountaineers, OTOH, get by with just "You said $FOO, you triggered me".
As far as the axe-grinding goes, I've never espoused any ideology, and continue to refuse espousing any particular ideology; however I've noticed the various *wing nutcases always try to console themselves that because they are true to their ideology, they *must* be the good guys, hence everyone on the other side must be bad, hence anyone who expresses skepticism of their extraordinary claims must be on the "other side".
The world is not so black and white - if the bar for PTSD was "You've triggered me" you can be sure it would abused. And, to be honest, as someone with a close family member who actually suffered from PTSD, there is a world of difference between actual diagnosed PTSD and someone on the internet who got offended that someone else used the word "cunt". You trivialise real victims in pursuit of your ideology, just like those professional whiners do when they complain about "stare-rape".
I can just about guarantee you that no PTSD sufferer is going to get triggered by someone on the internet. Real suffering and real loss puts a whole of things into perspective, and one of those things is that the offensive words on the internet remain there.
You're confusing something that is both measurable and objective with something that is neither measurable nor objective.
DSM defines PTSD as an actual thing, and that very much has the concept of triggers.
No offence, but I'll take the medical professional's opinion on this over yours.
An actual thing it may be, but measurable and objectively empirical it is not, hence it is not even in the same realm as someone who is disabled. In terms of science, micro-aggression triggers have more in common with homeopathy and acupuncture than it does with science.
It was a dumb comment for sure, but turning this into a matter of class warfare or social justice is orders of magnitude dumber.
What's dumb is ignoring class warfare as the elite drop bombs on your head, and decrying social justice when you're having injustice inflicted upon you every day.
But maybe you're more comfortable in the role of useful idiot. You wouldn't be the first.
You are the tool for the upper classes. You freely pursue their interests to the detriment of your own - note that you no longer even pretend to be egalitarian. Support some special group (chosen by you or chosen for you? Did you ever stop to think about who did the choosing? Yeah, I thought so).
The 1%, or the ruling class... whatever you want to call them, the worst thing for them is a society in which all individuals are equal. Why would they want an equal society? That would just drag them down. Hence the recent war on egalitarians...
Just look at who is behind the vocal movement for Social Justice; not grassroots support, never grassroots support, only all the really big, and really wealthy ruling class interests. The message is consistent - "Fight these people over here - they are oppressing you!", "Oh, fight those people over there - they are oppressing you too!". In a somewhat twisted caricature of unrecognised irony, you are congratulated for "fighting the good fight", for "bullying the bullies."
You're their tool, chasing their paper tigers. Of course, you claim that the ruling class supports your cause, not realising that you are instead supporting theirs. Their interests do not lie in an egalitarian society; quite the opposite in fact. Ever wonder why, when all the large and powerful institutions are egging you on, could they not do anything about the alleged threats going to Anita Seekasian? After all, I can guarantee that these powerful media groups could make a single phone-call to ensure that a cop took her statement, and an investigation actually commenced, if nothing else. You ever wonder why they did not use their power and influence to help her? She complained that no cop even wanted to help her - and yet you never wondered why the powerful groups you were fighting for also did not help her.
They didn't, not because much of what she said later turned out to be untrue, but because she was useful to them by providing people like you with a reason to fight for their cause.
Ever stop to think why you have such an adverse knee-jerk reaction to any egalitarian outlook? You come out foaming at the mouth, blasting insults and internet-big-man threats to anyone who dare question the status quo. It's because you're a good little tool. You can be counted on to bully, to threaten and to fight with nobodies purely to advance a non-egalitarian society. Any time someone objects, a tool like you rushes out the shaming language - shame 'em into submission... "What a crybaby!", "Awwww? Is Poor Widdle You Missing His Privilege?", nevermind the fact that you think you are addressing the least powerful social grouping. When you think you're talking to people who have been picked on their entire lives, you pick on them some more?
At the end of it all, you see, an egalitarian society is no threat to me, nor to you. It is a threat to those who we laughingly refer to as the ruling class, but in reality are more like the slave-owner class. It's better, for them anyway, that your energies and outrage be directed away from them. You even miss the irony that your outrage is directed at the group of people who are at the lowest point of the social totem pole - the introverted nerds. You appear to miss the fact that you're stepping on the bottom of the social class in your eagerness to display solidarity with the ruling classes.
Keep in mind that while EVs in 2 years are likely to destroy new ICE vehicle sales,
No. They haven't even gotten the infrastructure in place yet, so... no. There are too many things still to fix to make that a reality; I'll just point out one.
At peak periods a single fuel station on a popular holiday route (to the coast) where I am sees roughly 2500 fill-ups per hour; this is in the middle of a 600km drive. If you take 60 mins to charge the car up (best-case scenario) you need parking bays for at least 2500 cars. Doable, but at many times the cost to the charging station owner who won't be making as much off electricity as he will off fuel. Even if the owner is willing to run at a smaller profit or at a loss, because, well... reasons... it's going to cost to supply the current required to quick-charge 2500 cars at one go. Standard electricity supply isn't going to cut it and an industrial (factory) municipal supply will be needed.
The nice thing about the dead-dino fuel is that it takes less than 5 mins to fill up, and then you can make way for the next car who needs to fill up. And, the typical driver would only spend that 5 mins maybe twice a month - say 10 mins a month, total, to make the car go. Spending a only minute a day to plug the electric car in takes more time than that; typically it takes more time than a minute a day to even find a charging spot.
So, no... electric cars aren't going to be more than a statistical blip in sales for at least 4 or 5 years until *after* the infrastructure has started building out. Saying "2 years" is asking for ponies and rainbows - it isn't going to happen.
Under normal circumstances it could go either way. Except we already know he is miserable owing to his predictions of doom and despair arising from the end of the age of coal and his misery arising from the apparent ascendancy of the communist scientists. So a better interpretation of: can't these people just kill themselves already instead of trying to make us all miserable? Is
1. He is miserable
I dunno, hey. He said "Stop trying to make me miserable" when he just as easily could have said "Stop making me miserable". The meaning is pretty clear and unambiguous to me.
When people say "Stop trying to annoy me" they generally do not mean "Stop annoying me".
the best way to contribute to the pool of human knowledge
Taking the piss out of trigger warnings is functionally equivalent to taking the piss out of people who mention "this contains bright flashing lights and may be unsuitable for epileptics" or people who provide wheelchair ramps when not compelled to do so by law.
You're confusing something that is both measurable and objective with something that is neither measurable nor objective. "Triggers" fall into the same basic category of astrology, homeopathy, chiropracty(sp?) and similar. It is, I find, usually safe to ignore people who ask you to take their non-empirical voodoo seriously.
You don't even need to get that deep. I used to have a car that was sadly very easy to steal, you could use a screwdriver to start it. So after it got stolen once, when I got it back I got into the habit of pulling the coil wire out and taking it with me for the night when I got home. 2 times I came downstairs to find the ignition in the 'on' position, but the car was not moved. Car thieves aren't generally going to stick around to try and diagnose the car they're trying to steal if it doesn't start in 10 seconds of cranking, so popping a coil wire off in 5 seconds is a quick and easy way to safeguard your car against 99.9999% of the thieves out there.
Until recently I'd just pull the distributor rotor off, it's small enough to fit in my pocket with my keys so I can do it when going out as well as overnight at home.
Honestly? Islam needs to schism the way the Church did so that the crazies that are left are easily identified, and the moderates who don't think of violence in any practical way have their own IslamV2.0
Exactly. There are several stores close by where I live that use Apple Pay and I'm usually out of the door and half way to the car before the guy in the next line has waited for his chip card to be read and authorized.
Hyperbole much? I pay daily with chip+pin; less than a second to read, 2 seconds to punch in the code, 3 seconds to print the slip. I've never had a transaction go above ten seconds; that's the upper bound that NFC is competing with - ten seconds including printing, 7 seconds without printing.
Well, you either pay for the first $50 or pay higher fees.
Then you don't have use of the credit card for a couple of days.
Then once you have the new one, any automated payments on it need to be redone. If you can remember them.
Your definition of safe is rather small in scope.
Firstly, those *are* tiny problems. Secondly, if merchants/banks were to lazy to implement something better and easier like chip+pin, what makes you think that they would go for something an order of magnitude more complex and troublesome like Apple Pay?
It uses exactly the same EMV protocol as the chip on my credit card.
Except here in the US they couldn't be bothered to implement chip+pin so the chip is effectively pointless.
They couldn't be bothered to implement something as easy as chip+pin, something so easy that African nations have implemented, that people who are barely literate can use.... and yet you expect them to implement something that only rich people can use, that has difficulties in implementation, scarce deployments, and whole slew of other problems.
"I've never found a woman coworker to be even half as passionate about technology and computers as I am."
+5 for this misogynist crap?
Pray tell, how is this in any way misogynist?
Looking at the OP's score and your score (currently -1: troll), I'm inclined to remind you once again that you look just as foaming-at-the-mouth-insane as the far right groups like the WBC. Your ideology is just as devoid of common-sense as theirs.
... allowing myself to be exploited by employers who took advantage of my "passion......To make a long story short, all of your "passion" will amount to nothing in the end...
I don't know why you got modded up - you spent you "passion" on your employer, the OP is spending his on his own stuff. If you can't see the difference then there's something wrong with you.
I still can't figure out how some people think the word "single" is an insult. I'm over 30, male, single, never married.
It's the shame game. Society gets a great deal of work out of men using women as the motivator. It's no secret - it's been this way in almost every society ever documented, from the primitive matrilineal mosuo to the most advanced western societies today. As a man, you get shamed if you don't support yourself and at least one other person.
Slashdot Mirror
It is surprising how many people seem to think that biology is this binary as to whether an individual is a man or woman. Usually it is easy enough to tell, but there are certainly plenty of edge cases.
To be perfectly honest there really should be just one bathroom for everyone that has stalls only. However, I'm perfectly happy to grab the popcorn while seeing how this all turns out. What will happen is that one set of victims (the 'T' in LGBT) will face off against another set of victims (Women, who are the most likely to object to this).
Both sides will claim oppression, you can bet on it.
And you don't think a judge can't tell the difference between a genuine transexual and a pervert?
Irrelevant. The judge will rule based on what the law says; if the guy says "I identify as female", the judge is not allowed to go "Oh no you don't", the prosecution has to provide proof that the person did not, at the time of the offence, identify as female. This is clearly impossible.
If people would adopt open standards like SIP we wouldn't be in this mess.
If SIP wasn't crap, people would have adopted it. There is no good way to make SIP work short of ensuring that every ISP maintains a STUN/ICE/Turnserver. Sip was never designed to work via NATs, much less the multi-level NATs most cell-service providers put their handsets through. Even with STUN or a full TURN server installed, you aren't going to get very far.
Re:I have a suspicion... (Score:10)
Is anyone else seeing this? April 1st, scores are in binary?
I point out typos to help educate
A lot of people consider unsolicited education to be disrespectful.
Many of those people consider any education to be disrespectful.
It's not about feeling smarter, it's about not feeling like you're surrounded by idiots. It's not nice. Slip of the fingers are okay, fundamental grammatical mistakes just make me take people less seriously, especially here on the internet where the only thing I have to go by is the words people type.
Seconded. Let me add that if I believe the writer isn't a native English speaker, I tend to be much more tolerant of mistakes. When I am talking in other languages people are tolerant of me.
According to the summary, the study did not find that jerks who pointed out mistakes, they found that people who were given errors acted like jerks.
In other words, if the summary is correct, they got their conclusions the wrong way about - after reading error-riddled text, people were more likely to act like jerks. They should have done the personality test prior to the paragraph reading.
These "researchers" are too stupid to be scientists.
apparently they were just trolls who were trolling Linus by withdrawing their free labour or something.
Not wanting to be sworn at and belittled makes one an SJW. We know SJWs are bad because and useless they represent everything evil in all its forms. Therefore not wanting to be sworn at makes them evil and useless. Since they're useless there's no point having them on the kernel team.
Moderation on Slashdot is broken.
Anything counter to running round like a headless chicken squawking "SJW SJW SJW" all over the place seems to get modbombed down pretty fast. You're back to +3 now though, so sanity is starting to prevail again. The modbombing crowd are pretty quick off the mark too, so posts tend to spike low before getting modded back up.
The two of you should get a room, because, really.... publicly ego-massaging and congratulating each other that you both think the "correct" thoughts? You both just responded to a post that was bombed down to -1 in no time, and try to say that *that* post is representative of slashdot?
BTW: Sanity *is* starting to prevail, which is why the ideological nonsense from both sides almost always goes down and stays down - right now AmiMoJo's comment is still modded down, not at +3. On the rare occasion either of you post something egalitarian, your post goes up and stays up. Hard as it may be for you to believe, to the middle majority of the bell curve, both sides look the same, whether the issue is Trump/Guns/Politics/Religion.
You'd be right if PTSD wasn't considered a disability. As it is considered a disability by medical professionals and organisations the world over, you are massively incorrect, and you've just shown that you're quite happy being incorrect if you can grind a suitable axe in the process.
Sure, its considered a medical disability, but what I started on about is still not measurable. Doesn't matter how you want to put it, it's not measurable. You cannot compare two cases of PTSD the way you can with most other things, because you cannot measure it. It all comes down to who says they feel $X more.
You've got to draw the line in the sand *somewhere*; you choose to draw the line at unmeasurable feels. I choose to draw it at what can be measured and quantified. Because, you see, if the world has to care about *your* unmeasurable feels, then they have to care about *my* unmeasurable feels, at which point it just degrades into who better expresses their unmeasurable feels, which they may or may not even be feeling.
Thus, the world doesn't particularly care about your feels. We don't care if you "feel" triggered, were you actually? Doctors the world over require substantial evidence before diagnosing PTSD. Social mountaineers, OTOH, get by with just "You said $FOO, you triggered me".
As far as the axe-grinding goes, I've never espoused any ideology, and continue to refuse espousing any particular ideology; however I've noticed the various *wing nutcases always try to console themselves that because they are true to their ideology, they *must* be the good guys, hence everyone on the other side must be bad, hence anyone who expresses skepticism of their extraordinary claims must be on the "other side".
The world is not so black and white - if the bar for PTSD was "You've triggered me" you can be sure it would abused. And, to be honest, as someone with a close family member who actually suffered from PTSD, there is a world of difference between actual diagnosed PTSD and someone on the internet who got offended that someone else used the word "cunt". You trivialise real victims in pursuit of your ideology, just like those professional whiners do when they complain about "stare-rape".
I can just about guarantee you that no PTSD sufferer is going to get triggered by someone on the internet. Real suffering and real loss puts a whole of things into perspective, and one of those things is that the offensive words on the internet remain there.
You're confusing something that is both measurable and objective with something that is neither measurable nor objective.
DSM defines PTSD as an actual thing, and that very much has the concept of triggers.
No offence, but I'll take the medical professional's opinion on this over yours.
An actual thing it may be, but measurable and objectively empirical it is not, hence it is not even in the same realm as someone who is disabled. In terms of science, micro-aggression triggers have more in common with homeopathy and acupuncture than it does with science.
What's dumb is ignoring class warfare as the elite drop bombs on your head, and decrying social justice when you're having injustice inflicted upon you every day.
But maybe you're more comfortable in the role of useful idiot. You wouldn't be the first.
You are the tool for the upper classes. You freely pursue their interests to the detriment of your own - note that you no longer even pretend to be egalitarian. Support some special group (chosen by you or chosen for you? Did you ever stop to think about who did the choosing? Yeah, I thought so).
The 1%, or the ruling class... whatever you want to call them, the worst thing for them is a society in which all individuals are equal. Why would they want an equal society? That would just drag them down. Hence the recent war on egalitarians...
Just look at who is behind the vocal movement for Social Justice; not grassroots support, never grassroots support, only all the really big, and really wealthy ruling class interests. The message is consistent - "Fight these people over here - they are oppressing you!", "Oh, fight those people over there - they are oppressing you too!". In a somewhat twisted caricature of unrecognised irony, you are congratulated for "fighting the good fight", for "bullying the bullies."
You're their tool, chasing their paper tigers. Of course, you claim that the ruling class supports your cause, not realising that you are instead supporting theirs. Their interests do not lie in an egalitarian society; quite the opposite in fact. Ever wonder why, when all the large and powerful institutions are egging you on, could they not do anything about the alleged threats going to Anita Seekasian? After all, I can guarantee that these powerful media groups could make a single phone-call to ensure that a cop took her statement, and an investigation actually commenced, if nothing else. You ever wonder why they did not use their power and influence to help her? She complained that no cop even wanted to help her - and yet you never wondered why the powerful groups you were fighting for also did not help her.
They didn't, not because much of what she said later turned out to be untrue, but because she was useful to them by providing people like you with a reason to fight for their cause.
Ever stop to think why you have such an adverse knee-jerk reaction to any egalitarian outlook? You come out foaming at the mouth, blasting insults and internet-big-man threats to anyone who dare question the status quo. It's because you're a good little tool. You can be counted on to bully, to threaten and to fight with nobodies purely to advance a non-egalitarian society. Any time someone objects, a tool like you rushes out the shaming language - shame 'em into submission... "What a crybaby!", "Awwww? Is Poor Widdle You Missing His Privilege?", nevermind the fact that you think you are addressing the least powerful social grouping. When you think you're talking to people who have been picked on their entire lives, you pick on them some more?
At the end of it all, you see, an egalitarian society is no threat to me, nor to you. It is a threat to those who we laughingly refer to as the ruling class, but in reality are more like the slave-owner class. It's better, for them anyway, that your energies and outrage be directed away from them. You even miss the irony that your outrage is directed at the group of people who are at the lowest point of the social totem pole - the introverted nerds. You appear to miss the fact that you're stepping on the bottom of the social class in your eagerness to display solidarity with the ruling classes.
And yet, you blither on mindlessly a
Keep in mind that while EVs in 2 years are likely to destroy new ICE vehicle sales,
No. They haven't even gotten the infrastructure in place yet, so... no. There are too many things still to fix to make that a reality; I'll just point out one.
At peak periods a single fuel station on a popular holiday route (to the coast) where I am sees roughly 2500 fill-ups per hour; this is in the middle of a 600km drive. If you take 60 mins to charge the car up (best-case scenario) you need parking bays for at least 2500 cars. Doable, but at many times the cost to the charging station owner who won't be making as much off electricity as he will off fuel. Even if the owner is willing to run at a smaller profit or at a loss, because, well... reasons... it's going to cost to supply the current required to quick-charge 2500 cars at one go. Standard electricity supply isn't going to cut it and an industrial (factory) municipal supply will be needed.
The nice thing about the dead-dino fuel is that it takes less than 5 mins to fill up, and then you can make way for the next car who needs to fill up. And, the typical driver would only spend that 5 mins maybe twice a month - say 10 mins a month, total, to make the car go. Spending a only minute a day to plug the electric car in takes more time than that; typically it takes more time than a minute a day to even find a charging spot.
So, no... electric cars aren't going to be more than a statistical blip in sales for at least 4 or 5 years until *after* the infrastructure has started building out. Saying "2 years" is asking for ponies and rainbows - it isn't going to happen.
Under normal circumstances it could go either way. Except we already know he is miserable owing to his predictions of doom and despair arising from the end of the age of coal and his misery arising from the apparent ascendancy of the communist scientists. So a better interpretation of: can't these people just kill themselves already instead of trying to make us all miserable? Is
1. He is miserable
I dunno, hey. He said "Stop trying to make me miserable" when he just as easily could have said "Stop making me miserable". The meaning is pretty clear and unambiguous to me.
When people say "Stop trying to annoy me" they generally do not mean "Stop annoying me".
I mean, can't these people just kill themselves already instead of trying to make us all miserable?
You said:
He said he was miserable.
I said:
He didn't say he was miserable.
You replied:
Seems like they made themselves miserable
Once again, he didn't say he was miserable! What's wrong? Too early in the morning? Not enough coffee? :-)
the best way to contribute to the pool of human knowledge Taking the piss out of trigger warnings is functionally equivalent to taking the piss out of people who mention "this contains bright flashing lights and may be unsuitable for epileptics" or people who provide wheelchair ramps when not compelled to do so by law.
You're confusing something that is both measurable and objective with something that is neither measurable nor objective. "Triggers" fall into the same basic category of astrology, homeopathy, chiropracty(sp?) and similar. It is, I find, usually safe to ignore people who ask you to take their non-empirical voodoo seriously.
He said he was miserable.
He didn't say he was miserable. He said "instead of trying to make us all miserable". He said nothing about the success of the attempt.
You don't even need to get that deep. I used to have a car that was sadly very easy to steal, you could use a screwdriver to start it. So after it got stolen once, when I got it back I got into the habit of pulling the coil wire out and taking it with me for the night when I got home. 2 times I came downstairs to find the ignition in the 'on' position, but the car was not moved. Car thieves aren't generally going to stick around to try and diagnose the car they're trying to steal if it doesn't start in 10 seconds of cranking, so popping a coil wire off in 5 seconds is a quick and easy way to safeguard your car against 99.9999% of the thieves out there.
Until recently I'd just pull the distributor rotor off, it's small enough to fit in my pocket with my keys so I can do it when going out as well as overnight at home.
Making God Proud Since ... well, forever.
Honestly? Islam needs to schism the way the Church did so that the crazies that are left are easily identified, and the moderates who don't think of violence in any practical way have their own IslamV2.0
Exactly. There are several stores close by where I live that use Apple Pay and I'm usually out of the door and half way to the car before the guy in the next line has waited for his chip card to be read and authorized.
Hyperbole much? I pay daily with chip+pin; less than a second to read, 2 seconds to punch in the code, 3 seconds to print the slip. I've never had a transaction go above ten seconds; that's the upper bound that NFC is competing with - ten seconds including printing, 7 seconds without printing.
Well, you either pay for the first $50 or pay higher fees.
Then you don't have use of the credit card for a couple of days. Then once you have the new one, any automated payments on it need to be redone. If you can remember them.
Your definition of safe is rather small in scope.
Firstly, those *are* tiny problems. Secondly, if merchants/banks were to lazy to implement something better and easier like chip+pin, what makes you think that they would go for something an order of magnitude more complex and troublesome like Apple Pay?
It uses exactly the same EMV protocol as the chip on my credit card.
Except here in the US they couldn't be bothered to implement chip+pin so the chip is effectively pointless.
They couldn't be bothered to implement something as easy as chip+pin, something so easy that African nations have implemented, that people who are barely literate can use.... and yet you expect them to implement something that only rich people can use, that has difficulties in implementation, scarce deployments, and whole slew of other problems.
You cannot really be serious.
I know women who are extremely passionate about CS. The statement was a best idiotic,
The statement was "I never found a woman that...", and not "woman aren't..." Your reading comprehension is extremely poor.
"I've never found a woman coworker to be even half as passionate about technology and computers as I am."
+5 for this misogynist crap?
Pray tell, how is this in any way misogynist?
Looking at the OP's score and your score (currently -1: troll), I'm inclined to remind you once again that you look just as foaming-at-the-mouth-insane as the far right groups like the WBC. Your ideology is just as devoid of common-sense as theirs.
... allowing myself to be exploited by employers who took advantage of my "passion... ...To make a long story short, all of your "passion" will amount to nothing in the end...
I don't know why you got modded up - you spent you "passion" on your employer, the OP is spending his on his own stuff. If you can't see the difference then there's something wrong with you.
I still can't figure out how some people think the word "single" is an insult. I'm over 30, male, single, never married.
It's the shame game. Society gets a great deal of work out of men using women as the motivator. It's no secret - it's been this way in almost every society ever documented, from the primitive matrilineal mosuo to the most advanced western societies today. As a man, you get shamed if you don't support yourself and at least one other person.