Starship Troopers was always controversial for its martial philosophy, and All You Zombies is wacky. Why not pick one of his more straightforward books?
FYI: There are no zombies in this movie. (Or, at least, there were none in the original story, and it doesn't look like they randomly added any to the movie.)
It's just straight-up scifi time travel.
this was before night of the living dead, so the current style of zombie didn't exist.
i'm weirded out by the extinction of manuals, instructions, even readmes. especially all those phone apps, half of them arent as obvious as the person seems to believe.
in an economy which depends on huge multinationals making and selling you new disposable junk all the time, and a recession based on a reduction in demand for all this junk, to repair your old stuff is unpatriotic, antisocial, and subversive. go out and spend.
those maker movement type magazines periodically have instructions for putting a better thermostat into an old toaster oven so you can use it to solder boards full of surface mount parts.
it's amazing how heat proof solid state has become. when i started in this biz, with germanium transistors, I built a little light flasher, and decided to pot it in epoxy. the heat of the epoxy setting was enough to fry the transistors. the icing on the cake was that I couldn't salvage any of the other components, as they had been potted in epoxy.
I did this once with an intermittent Ford ignition module; they had a reputation for going intermittent when they got warm, and Ford was stiffing everybody under warranty. The well known fix was to put the module into the ignition at like 500 degrees for an hour or so, and when you took it out you could get a warranty replacement from Ford without them telling you "it looks OK to us".
How exactly are paper records any more secure? I've gone into a number of clinics and doctor's offices were the only "security" of their medical records is an easily broken into cabinet.
Perhaps they're not more secure in the literal sense, but they're less of an enticing target. It requires physical presence, and probably some form of breaking and entering. It requires physical transport (which likely means multiple trips), and either a LOT of work on a photocopier, or banking on the fact that no one will miss them. Once you have them, you need to go through them by hand and glean any useful information through manual file sifting.
Digital records are stolen through the Ethernet port. They won't be "gone", so they won't be "missed". They can be sifted, sorted, filtered, and pivoted until they produce useful information. If the records don't produce useful data, it'd be much more difficult to convict the thief of a crime, whereas physical record theft still leaves a laundry list of crimes with which to convict that are easier to prove.
Should the cabinets be locked? Yes...but the only place on a computer you need a crowbar to get what you want is in a game of Half-Life.
Ah you make good points. who's got mod points left over?
How exactly are paper records any more secure? I've gone into a number of clinics and doctor's offices were the only "security" of their medical records is an easily broken into cabinet.
Yep. As I've posted before, when EMRs were just getting off the ground, in the 90s, I saw a presentation by some honcho in some company at a conference, and he said whenever he got asked about security of computerized records, he would excuse himself, head for the nearest nurses' station, grab a fistful of charts, walk back to whatever room, and toss them on the table. All the hospital execs in the room kind of chuckled and grinned ruefully. I've thought about that every time I visit somebody in the hospital to this date, and pass by the nurses' station which still has random stacks of charts sitting here and there, not too carefully watched.
So you might be a 'suspect'. In the real word (as opposed the paranoid crazy version here) someone would politely sit down with you and discuss a few things. Then someone else might come over and discuss some more things.
If you're a 'suspect', and they want to talk to you, then at a minimum, you're forced to pay to retain counsel (unless you're stupid, and talk to them without one). So you're screwed no matter what at that point.
You make that sound like a bad thing. Plead guilty, get free room and board and medical care and education, plus learn useful skills like locksmithing and self-defense. By the time you get out, the economy will be back to full employment, what with the Republicans in the senate and house and all. If you're lucky, you ight even have a religious conversion.
Did you seriously just ask if I read people literally saying "Boys are penalized unless they behave like girls" as measuring a gender based prejudice?
The data show, for the first time, that gender disparities in teacher grades start early and uniformly favor girls. In every subject area, boys are represented in grade distributions below where their test scores would predict.
No, unless your understanding of literally is "not literally".
And the entire rest of the article goes on to explain how that's a gender based prejudice.
You read this:
"The authors attribute this misalignment to what they called non-cognitive skills, or "how well each child was engaged in the classroom, how often the child externalized or internalized problems, how often the child lost control and how well the child developed interpersonal skills." They even report evidence of a grade bonus for boys with test scores and behavior like their girl counterparts."
and you understand it as "gender based prejudice"?
No, it's definitely teachers actively screwing boys. They're literally being graded worse just for being boys.
?? "just for being boys"? Did you miss the part that said: "it's because of their classroom behavior, which may lead teachers to assign girls higher grades than their male counterparts."? It was in the second sentence fer crissake.
I only have my own personal anecdote, but I was the top boy in my highschool class by far. That didn't even get me into the top 10% of my class, though, since the top 10% were all girls. I think the only other boy in the honor society was a boy from the next year's class but I can't remember. (I know who the next highest boy in the school's ranking was but I don't remember whether or not he hit the cutoff for honor society.)
This was during the 90s in a public high school, so it wasn't like the population was simply unbalanced. This is hardly a new problem. Our education system simply doesn't engage with boys and hasn't for years at this point.
If you want links, though, it isn't hard to find them:
Indeed. Our educational system simply doesn't engage with kids in general, it's just that girls don't act out the general frustration in as obvious a fashion as boys do. By the time you get to higher education, you've selected out the kids who really can't deal with it at all.
No other modern industry has the failure rate that we accept as normal in our educational system.
Teachers also have a much higher education level than the average worker. Teachers make below average wages compared to workers with the same level of education.
Which is largely because.... they're mostly women.
Thanks for pointing this out. Teachers in almost all communities make an above average wage. In most districts, they have benefits that are far above average. The 2012 Chicago teacher's strike was a great example. Teachers asked for a 30% raise over 4 years, and ended up getting about 17.6%. Nationwide, the average wage increase for 2012-2014 was just about 1%. The median salary is $76,000, and the school district covers 88% of the cost of health benefits, nearly 10% better than the state average for all employers. They also contribute to a defined benefit pension plan and a contribution based retirement plan similar to a 401k. They work 39 weeks a year, and have paid sick time and paid vacation on top of that. In Chicago, the median income for a household - not a person but for a household - was $38,625. Men had a median income of $35,154.
This means that men are being systematically taken advantage of. There are 32,000 teachers in Chicago, and with so many of the being women, the difference is that men are being deprived of jobs that are substantially above average in pay and benefits, to the tunes of tens of million of dollars a year.
Where is the outrage over this?
Public school teachers in Chicago? The extra salary is combat pay.
These figures just demonstrate the effect of the diminished role of unions in modern employment. Private school teachers, who are not unionized don't make near these sums or benefits, nor do they have protections like tenure. Teaching is skilled labor, with a high degree of responsibility, requiring lots of post-secondary education; the points usually brought up to defend the high incomes of medical doctors. As anybody with a PhD can tell you, that's not what determines income; it's supply and demand.
When the 99.99% complain about the.01%, that's attacked as classism; they're supposed to reserve their antagonism for the working class folks next door who make more than they do. Cutting the salaries of teachers or any other unionized workers won't raise your income any; quite the opposite, as they will then be motivated to compete with you in the job market, allowing your employer to bid lower. The cure is not to get teachers or other unions to join into the race to the bottom which has characterized salaries and wages and benefits for the past 30 years.
3rd Wave feminism is about materialism (jobs are a resource, we are fighting men for them), sexual liberation (we have sex with who we want, and if or when the kids come along, society (all men, or the guy I was seeing at the time, or the last guy I saw) pay for it), paternal monopoly (men have no right to their children, society and women have more rights than they do), and public shaming of men because they are men (many, many examples). It is a dogma of domination only a very small minority of real fools agree with.
The net effect of this dogma is that upwards of 10% of men over 45 in the US are unmarried and have no children; in Japan that statistic is up to 25%. The trend is increasing 1% year over year, which means within the current 18 to 25 crowd in the US, about 30-40% of those boys in that group will never get married, and never have kids, out of choice; for Japan that statistic is going to be 45%-55% higher. Now if you look at the increasingly violent trends in fetishism in Japan and now the US, and the increase in "lad culture", the net result is eventually going to be something very, very horrific and bloody. Those roosters are starting to come home to roost; about once a month now, fetishist porn stars are ending up behind bars for maiming or killing people with drugs or various cutting tools.
If you treat men like animals, they will act like animals. And really, ever since Carrie Nation in the 1800's, that's what feminism has really been about, is about getting men not to act like a bunch of petulant children and to have some discipline and self respect.
How about we end this social equality bullshit before it does some real and permanent damage?
Soo... women having sex with lots of people leads to lots of men having no sex, which leads to them cutting people up? Who were these men having sex with before, they need to continue.
Slashdot Mirror
Starship Troopers was always controversial for its martial philosophy, and All You Zombies is wacky. Why not pick one of his more straightforward books?
puppet masters http://www.imdb.com/title/tt01...
2015, anyway.
FYI: There are no zombies in this movie. (Or, at least, there were none in the original story, and it doesn't look like they randomly added any to the movie.) It's just straight-up scifi time travel.
this was before night of the living dead, so the current style of zombie didn't exist.
i'm weirded out by the extinction of manuals, instructions, even readmes. especially all those phone apps, half of them arent as obvious as the person seems to believe.
in an economy which depends on huge multinationals making and selling you new disposable junk all the time, and a recession based on a reduction in demand for all this junk, to repair your old stuff is unpatriotic, antisocial, and subversive. go out and spend.
like those epitaphs which read "I told you I was sick"
or apply large voltages across the brains of people with depression.
those maker movement type magazines periodically have instructions for putting a better thermostat into an old toaster oven so you can use it to solder boards full of surface mount parts.
it's amazing how heat proof solid state has become. when i started in this biz, with germanium transistors, I built a little light flasher, and decided to pot it in epoxy. the heat of the epoxy setting was enough to fry the transistors. the icing on the cake was that I couldn't salvage any of the other components, as they had been potted in epoxy.
accordion to whom?
I did this once with an intermittent Ford ignition module; they had a reputation for going intermittent when they got warm, and Ford was stiffing everybody under warranty. The well known fix was to put the module into the ignition at like 500 degrees for an hour or so, and when you took it out you could get a warranty replacement from Ford without them telling you "it looks OK to us".
How exactly are paper records any more secure? I've gone into a number of clinics and doctor's offices were the only "security" of their medical records is an easily broken into cabinet.
Perhaps they're not more secure in the literal sense, but they're less of an enticing target. It requires physical presence, and probably some form of breaking and entering. It requires physical transport (which likely means multiple trips), and either a LOT of work on a photocopier, or banking on the fact that no one will miss them. Once you have them, you need to go through them by hand and glean any useful information through manual file sifting.
Digital records are stolen through the Ethernet port. They won't be "gone", so they won't be "missed". They can be sifted, sorted, filtered, and pivoted until they produce useful information. If the records don't produce useful data, it'd be much more difficult to convict the thief of a crime, whereas physical record theft still leaves a laundry list of crimes with which to convict that are easier to prove.
Should the cabinets be locked? Yes...but the only place on a computer you need a crowbar to get what you want is in a game of Half-Life.
Ah you make good points. who's got mod points left over?
How exactly are paper records any more secure? I've gone into a number of clinics and doctor's offices were the only "security" of their medical records is an easily broken into cabinet.
Yep. As I've posted before, when EMRs were just getting off the ground, in the 90s, I saw a presentation by some honcho in some company at a conference, and he said whenever he got asked about security of computerized records, he would excuse himself, head for the nearest nurses' station, grab a fistful of charts, walk back to whatever room, and toss them on the table. All the hospital execs in the room kind of chuckled and grinned ruefully. I've thought about that every time I visit somebody in the hospital to this date, and pass by the nurses' station which still has random stacks of charts sitting here and there, not too carefully watched.
North Korea, or disgruntled former employees?
So you might be a 'suspect'. In the real word (as opposed the paranoid crazy version here) someone would politely sit down with you and discuss a few things. Then someone else might come over and discuss some more things.
If you're a 'suspect', and they want to talk to you, then at a minimum, you're forced to pay to retain counsel (unless you're stupid, and talk to them without one). So you're screwed no matter what at that point.
You make that sound like a bad thing. Plead guilty, get free room and board and medical care and education, plus learn useful skills like locksmithing and self-defense. By the time you get out, the economy will be back to full employment, what with the Republicans in the senate and house and all. If you're lucky, you ight even have a religious conversion.
Or if you are of the Melanic persuasion.
"Your honor, I was plenty gruntled!"
Neighbor, whispering "I dunno, he always only looked semigruntled to me"
North Carolina should not act in such regard!
Neal Caffery?
That can mean only one thing.... we need to invade Iraq.
Did you seriously just ask if I read people literally saying "Boys are penalized unless they behave like girls" as measuring a gender based prejudice?
The data show, for the first time, that gender disparities in teacher grades start early and uniformly favor girls. In every subject area, boys are represented in grade distributions below where their test scores would predict.
No, unless your understanding of literally is "not literally".
And the entire rest of the article goes on to explain how that's a gender based prejudice.
You read this: "The authors attribute this misalignment to what they called non-cognitive skills, or "how well each child was engaged in the classroom, how often the child externalized or internalized problems, how often the child lost control and how well the child developed interpersonal skills." They even report evidence of a grade bonus for boys with test scores and behavior like their girl counterparts." and you understand it as "gender based prejudice"?
No, it's definitely teachers actively screwing boys. They're literally being graded worse just for being boys.
?? "just for being boys"? Did you miss the part that said: "it's because of their classroom behavior, which may lead teachers to assign girls higher grades than their male counterparts."? It was in the second sentence fer crissake.
I only have my own personal anecdote, but I was the top boy in my highschool class by far. That didn't even get me into the top 10% of my class, though, since the top 10% were all girls. I think the only other boy in the honor society was a boy from the next year's class but I can't remember. (I know who the next highest boy in the school's ranking was but I don't remember whether or not he hit the cutoff for honor society.)
This was during the 90s in a public high school, so it wasn't like the population was simply unbalanced. This is hardly a new problem. Our education system simply doesn't engage with boys and hasn't for years at this point.
If you want links, though, it isn't hard to find them:
Itâ(TM)s Time to Worry: Boys Are Rapidly Falling Behind Girls in School How to Make School Better for Boys: Start by acknowledging that boys are languishing while girls are succeeding. Education: Boys Falling Behind Girls in Many Areas (Paywalled, so I have no idea what it says)
Those were just the top results on Google.
Indeed. Our educational system simply doesn't engage with kids in general, it's just that girls don't act out the general frustration in as obvious a fashion as boys do. By the time you get to higher education, you've selected out the kids who really can't deal with it at all. No other modern industry has the failure rate that we accept as normal in our educational system.
Teachers also have a much higher education level than the average worker. Teachers make below average wages compared to workers with the same level of education.
Which is largely because.... they're mostly women.
Thanks for pointing this out. Teachers in almost all communities make an above average wage. In most districts, they have benefits that are far above average. The 2012 Chicago teacher's strike was a great example. Teachers asked for a 30% raise over 4 years, and ended up getting about 17.6%. Nationwide, the average wage increase for 2012-2014 was just about 1%. The median salary is $76,000, and the school district covers 88% of the cost of health benefits, nearly 10% better than the state average for all employers. They also contribute to a defined benefit pension plan and a contribution based retirement plan similar to a 401k. They work 39 weeks a year, and have paid sick time and paid vacation on top of that. In Chicago, the median income for a household - not a person but for a household - was $38,625. Men had a median income of $35,154.
This means that men are being systematically taken advantage of. There are 32,000 teachers in Chicago, and with so many of the being women, the difference is that men are being deprived of jobs that are substantially above average in pay and benefits, to the tunes of tens of million of dollars a year.
Where is the outrage over this?
Public school teachers in Chicago? The extra salary is combat pay. .01%, that's attacked as classism; they're supposed to reserve their antagonism for the working class folks next door who make more than they do.
These figures just demonstrate the effect of the diminished role of unions in modern employment. Private school teachers, who are not unionized don't make near these sums or benefits, nor do they have protections like tenure. Teaching is skilled labor, with a high degree of responsibility, requiring lots of post-secondary education; the points usually brought up to defend the high incomes of medical doctors. As anybody with a PhD can tell you, that's not what determines income; it's supply and demand.
When the 99.99% complain about the
Cutting the salaries of teachers or any other unionized workers won't raise your income any; quite the opposite, as they will then be motivated to compete with you in the job market, allowing your employer to bid lower. The cure is not to get teachers or other unions to join into the race to the bottom which has characterized salaries and wages and benefits for the past 30 years.
3rd Wave feminism is about materialism (jobs are a resource, we are fighting men for them), sexual liberation (we have sex with who we want, and if or when the kids come along, society (all men, or the guy I was seeing at the time, or the last guy I saw) pay for it), paternal monopoly (men have no right to their children, society and women have more rights than they do), and public shaming of men because they are men (many, many examples). It is a dogma of domination only a very small minority of real fools agree with.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/12/04/the-sexodus-part-1-the-men-giving-up-on-women-and-checking-out-of-society/ http://www.breitbart.com/londo...
The net effect of this dogma is that upwards of 10% of men over 45 in the US are unmarried and have no children; in Japan that statistic is up to 25%. The trend is increasing 1% year over year, which means within the current 18 to 25 crowd in the US, about 30-40% of those boys in that group will never get married, and never have kids, out of choice; for Japan that statistic is going to be 45%-55% higher. Now if you look at the increasingly violent trends in fetishism in Japan and now the US, and the increase in "lad culture", the net result is eventually going to be something very, very horrific and bloody. Those roosters are starting to come home to roost; about once a month now, fetishist porn stars are ending up behind bars for maiming or killing people with drugs or various cutting tools.
If you treat men like animals, they will act like animals. And really, ever since Carrie Nation in the 1800's, that's what feminism has really been about, is about getting men not to act like a bunch of petulant children and to have some discipline and self respect.
How about we end this social equality bullshit before it does some real and permanent damage?
Soo... women having sex with lots of people leads to lots of men having no sex, which leads to them cutting people up? Who were these men having sex with before, they need to continue.