I get the feeling that Tesla and Leonardo Da Vinci were asexual. Leo once wrote something about how he thought the "means of reproduction" were so disgusting that he was amazed people hadn't gone extinct.
Now Newton was not merely disinterested in sex like Tesla and Da Vinci, but was religiously opposed to sexual activity, so yeah there's a good chance he was sucking dudes off in the bathroom at every opportunity.
Am I supposed to believe that cell phones played any meaningful role in the miniaturization and affordable production of electronics in general, and the development of lithium batteries? You may be right in terms of the development of cellular networks but that's only half of it. If you could teleport a relatively modern and functional cellular network back to the 40s, 60s, even the 80s, it wouldn't have made cell phones much more affordable or practical to the average Joe.
I don't see how the existence of a niche item could accelerate the development of all the technologies required for cell phones to be affordable. Cell phones benefited from other, mainstream industries, it wasn't driving them any more than RC planes or HAM radio were.
This. Cell phones wouldn't be much further along today if they'd been introduced in the '40s. They simply would've existed for 50~60 years as rich people toys rather than 20~30.
Hey now this thing will need many more capabilities before it's ready for such duties. It will have to learn how to leverage bigotry, do nonsense math (a very unnatural ability for a computer), perform basic bald-faced corruption, and it will need to be fitted with a robot arm so that it can grab women by the pussy without consent.
I find it disturbing that there's this meme of "the violence and hatred of leftism" going around on the web, grasping at straws to justify its existence. You don't see everyday leftists talking about the right being generally violent and hateful after the Portland stabbings, Charleston shootings, etc...they understand that there are violently insane people out there who are in no way representative of their claimed ideology. But the right is hell-bent on painting leftists in general as violent and hateful at the slightest opportunity. What is the right's agenda with this?
I think it's an attempt to distract from and normalize their own issues with hatefulness through false equivalence. They've gotten in bed with the alt-right (or what remains of them), which is in bed with overt white supremacists including actual nazis. Bigotry has made a comeback into the mainstream with Trump, especially dog-whistle racism and Islamophobia. They don't like this to be pointed out. So when you do, they call it hateful and intolerant. We should tolerate intolerance and be respectful to hate, they say in effect. And failure to do so is at least as terrible as being a nazi, therefore the left is at least as hateful as the right.
Worst of all, massive amounts of hypocrisy and selctive memory are required to paint the left as more violent since violence and violent imagery is clearly more common on the right. One bloody Trump head and all Obama effigies are instantly forgotten. One leftist attack allows 2~3 attacks by the right to be swept under history's rug, by my estimation. Any angry word toward Trump erases years and years of the ubiquitous, often racist vitriol toward Obama. Poof. Now the left is hateful toward the innocent angels on the right!
Myself, I'll continue to use Uber primarily because I have it set up, and I feel like I am helping the drivers more than the company (I always tip Uber drivers now, did not at first).
Good, you're not helping them if you're not tipping them. An Uber driver would be lucky to break even without tips, if they account for the cost of owning and maintaining their vehicle.
That's what all the smokers looking to use e-cigs as a rebranding opportunity (to themselves and others) desperately want to believe. They think there's David-and-Goliath battle between the plucky e-cig industry and the nasty old tobacco industry that wants to shut them down because their "safer option" is a threat. In reality there are no good guys to root for in any fight between the vendors of death sticks and the vendors of death juice.
Now cigs and e-cigs are probably not exactly as deadly as each other (which is worse, I'm not sure) and they likely kill their users in different ways, but I don't think that's worth splitting hairs over.
This. I think the only surefire way to take care of these dots is to either reduce resolution to the point that they're unreadable, or to seek-and-destroy them by pasting over the entire pattern area with nearby colors wherever it occurs.
I'm not sure that would anonymize the document, for example what if the dot pattern were printed over a black background? B/W conversion would leave the dot pattern in place, just in white instead of yellow.
This has nothing to do with the vulnerabilities of voting machines. This was an unsuccessful phishing attack against a company, which in terms of computer security newsworthiness ranks about the same as a port scan.
True, but here she made a stupid decision to leak information of little to no value. Russians running an unsuccessful phishing attack against a voting machine company isn't news, that's just Tuesday. If it were successful and being covered up, that would be different.
Hey, people would've laughed at the idea of Trump being President a year ago...but yeah, Canada will have to get in line behind Russia, China, Germany, France...
That's not remotely true. At the extremes you've got hard Brexit and increased integration with Europe. There's a vast swathe of middle ground, including a soft Brexit and the position taken by most Remain campaigners (remaining in, but fighting tightening integration and securing opt-outs).
Not really. Soft Brexit doesn't really exist. It's a term for the mistaken belief that the UK can have its cake and eat it too with the EU. It's paradoxical to the EU's rules. So the only option meaningfully different from "hard Brexit" involves remaining in the EU.
I'm not an AMD fanboy either, so you can take your strawman elsewhere. I didn't give AMD credit for anything other than the release of competitive chips (after many years of not being so competitive).
Looks like Intel is specifically worried about ARMs eating desktop market share:
This. You can go without DirecTV and AT&T cable (which might mean no subscription TV in some parts of the US) but it's becoming practically impossible to run from forced arbitration clauses, because they're fucking everywhere these days.
"The market for new CPUs hasn't been so hot in the last few years, ARM processors are becoming more and more popular, and AMD is starting to bring stiff competition again, so we're going to become patent trolls now to make up for all that lost income. So beware!"
and they forget that the other half of the population is NOT in the business ownership 'club' and does not benefit from the 'give the ruling class everything they ask for, and more shit.
Oh they didn't forget, they either believe in magical trickle-down nonsense, or they just don't care.
Was just going to say this. How did this 1800s-ish idea manage to be born into and survive in the modern world? We know that company stores and debtors' prisons are bad ideas, yet many countries are OK with forced arbitration.
These two companies form a duopoly in overpriced home hardware boutiques for yuppies in the US, and the Republican/Democrat parties are a duopoly in government.
Slashdot Mirror
I get the feeling that Tesla and Leonardo Da Vinci were asexual. Leo once wrote something about how he thought the "means of reproduction" were so disgusting that he was amazed people hadn't gone extinct.
Now Newton was not merely disinterested in sex like Tesla and Da Vinci, but was religiously opposed to sexual activity, so yeah there's a good chance he was sucking dudes off in the bathroom at every opportunity.
Not only will they track you and spy on you. but now they'll also censor your browsing.
At least they're not just silently modifying the traffic to mislead you...yet...
Now what's that theory about all participants in capitalism requiring perfect information about the market?
#MA^C^C NO CARRIER
Am I supposed to believe that cell phones played any meaningful role in the miniaturization and affordable production of electronics in general, and the development of lithium batteries? You may be right in terms of the development of cellular networks but that's only half of it. If you could teleport a relatively modern and functional cellular network back to the 40s, 60s, even the 80s, it wouldn't have made cell phones much more affordable or practical to the average Joe.
I don't see how the existence of a niche item could accelerate the development of all the technologies required for cell phones to be affordable. Cell phones benefited from other, mainstream industries, it wasn't driving them any more than RC planes or HAM radio were.
This. Cell phones wouldn't be much further along today if they'd been introduced in the '40s. They simply would've existed for 50~60 years as rich people toys rather than 20~30.
Hey now this thing will need many more capabilities before it's ready for such duties. It will have to learn how to leverage bigotry, do nonsense math (a very unnatural ability for a computer), perform basic bald-faced corruption, and it will need to be fitted with a robot arm so that it can grab women by the pussy without consent.
This is something I could use every day...when pointed to reverse encFS mounts, that is ;-)
I find it disturbing that there's this meme of "the violence and hatred of leftism" going around on the web, grasping at straws to justify its existence. You don't see everyday leftists talking about the right being generally violent and hateful after the Portland stabbings, Charleston shootings, etc...they understand that there are violently insane people out there who are in no way representative of their claimed ideology. But the right is hell-bent on painting leftists in general as violent and hateful at the slightest opportunity. What is the right's agenda with this?
I think it's an attempt to distract from and normalize their own issues with hatefulness through false equivalence. They've gotten in bed with the alt-right (or what remains of them), which is in bed with overt white supremacists including actual nazis. Bigotry has made a comeback into the mainstream with Trump, especially dog-whistle racism and Islamophobia. They don't like this to be pointed out. So when you do, they call it hateful and intolerant. We should tolerate intolerance and be respectful to hate, they say in effect. And failure to do so is at least as terrible as being a nazi, therefore the left is at least as hateful as the right.
Worst of all, massive amounts of hypocrisy and selctive memory are required to paint the left as more violent since violence and violent imagery is clearly more common on the right. One bloody Trump head and all Obama effigies are instantly forgotten. One leftist attack allows 2~3 attacks by the right to be swept under history's rug, by my estimation. Any angry word toward Trump erases years and years of the ubiquitous, often racist vitriol toward Obama. Poof. Now the left is hateful toward the innocent angels on the right!
Myself, I'll continue to use Uber primarily because I have it set up, and I feel like I am helping the drivers more than the company (I always tip Uber drivers now, did not at first).
Good, you're not helping them if you're not tipping them. An Uber driver would be lucky to break even without tips, if they account for the cost of owning and maintaining their vehicle.
That's what all the smokers looking to use e-cigs as a rebranding opportunity (to themselves and others) desperately want to believe. They think there's David-and-Goliath battle between the plucky e-cig industry and the nasty old tobacco industry that wants to shut them down because their "safer option" is a threat. In reality there are no good guys to root for in any fight between the vendors of death sticks and the vendors of death juice.
Now cigs and e-cigs are probably not exactly as deadly as each other (which is worse, I'm not sure) and they likely kill their users in different ways, but I don't think that's worth splitting hairs over.
This. I think the only surefire way to take care of these dots is to either reduce resolution to the point that they're unreadable, or to seek-and-destroy them by pasting over the entire pattern area with nearby colors wherever it occurs.
I'm not sure that would anonymize the document, for example what if the dot pattern were printed over a black background? B/W conversion would leave the dot pattern in place, just in white instead of yellow.
This has nothing to do with the vulnerabilities of voting machines. This was an unsuccessful phishing attack against a company, which in terms of computer security newsworthiness ranks about the same as a port scan.
True, but here she made a stupid decision to leak information of little to no value. Russians running an unsuccessful phishing attack against a voting machine company isn't news, that's just Tuesday. If it were successful and being covered up, that would be different.
Hey, people would've laughed at the idea of Trump being President a year ago...but yeah, Canada will have to get in line behind Russia, China, Germany, France...
That's not remotely true. At the extremes you've got hard Brexit and increased integration with Europe. There's a vast swathe of middle ground, including a soft Brexit and the position taken by most Remain campaigners (remaining in, but fighting tightening integration and securing opt-outs).
Not really. Soft Brexit doesn't really exist. It's a term for the mistaken belief that the UK can have its cake and eat it too with the EU. It's paradoxical to the EU's rules. So the only option meaningfully different from "hard Brexit" involves remaining in the EU.
I'm not an AMD fanboy either, so you can take your strawman elsewhere. I didn't give AMD credit for anything other than the release of competitive chips (after many years of not being so competitive).
Looks like Intel is specifically worried about ARMs eating desktop market share:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/...
This. You can go without DirecTV and AT&T cable (which might mean no subscription TV in some parts of the US) but it's becoming practically impossible to run from forced arbitration clauses, because they're fucking everywhere these days.
"The market for new CPUs hasn't been so hot in the last few years, ARM processors are becoming more and more popular, and AMD is starting to bring stiff competition again, so we're going to become patent trolls now to make up for all that lost income. So beware!"
As opposed to demand-side economics.
and they forget that the other half of the population is NOT in the business ownership 'club' and does not benefit from the 'give the ruling class everything they ask for, and more shit.
Oh they didn't forget, they either believe in magical trickle-down nonsense, or they just don't care.
Was just going to say this. How did this 1800s-ish idea manage to be born into and survive in the modern world? We know that company stores and debtors' prisons are bad ideas, yet many countries are OK with forced arbitration.
These two companies form a duopoly in overpriced home hardware boutiques for yuppies in the US, and the Republican/Democrat parties are a duopoly in government.
FTFY
Other than just saying it was worse. How is was america worse during the Obama Administration?
A long-lasting and historic low in conservative good feels.