If the news used "Christian terrorists" to refer the general act of Christian extremists attacking abortion clinics, do you have any problems with such usage?
No, why would I or anyone else have problem with this? If the news said "A group of christian terrorists attacked an abortion clinic" or "A group of christian extremists attacked an abortion clinic" then that's very descriptive. They are in no way implying that all christians are terrorists. Same as saying that "a group of greenpeace terrorists blew up a whaling boat". That doesn't mean that everyone in greenpeace is a terrorist. Greenpeace the organization might disavow them but it's still descriptive if the group claims to be operating under their flag. Westboro Baptist Church is an example of an extremist christian group. They are for the most part non-violent so are not what we would generally call terrorists but they are routinely called "christian extremists" even though there are plenty of christians and baptists that would prefer that neither of those names were associated with that group. Another point I might add is that when Westboro Baptist Church shows up at an event there is usually a large number of other Christian groups doing counterprotests and disavowing their association.
I think it only works when we know exactly where the observer is. Which mean the we must detect them before they detect us, which is unlikely for aliens that can threaten us from interstellar distances.
I don't think it is an April Fool, it is more like a thought experiment.
Any alien that is a threat to us from interstellar distances is likely going to have much much better ways of detecting us than shadows. It could be a thought experiment of how an alien who wants to hide from us could hide from us but that would likely require them to already be here and understand what we are attempting and actually care that we discover their home planet light years away that we have no means to actually reach. Not to mention that if it was started now, this magical shield would take X lightyears to start being effective. For advanced aliens without FTL travel, they could have detected us hundreds of years ago and have ships in route already.
Quantity has nothing to do with a vocabulary question.
Sure it does. If there are one or two or three groups then it's easy to name them by name but if there are hundreds of groups with hundreds of names, then it's easy to group them under the generic title of "islamic terrorists" just like we group school shooters under the generic term "school shooters" even though there are several different types of school shooters and we classify homicides as gang related or non-gang related.
Also, for profiling, it makes sense to spend a little more time looking at the muslims than at the general population when you're talking about airport security. On the other hand, I'm perfectly fine with abortion clinics screening people carrying bibles a little more closely (even though I can't even tell you when the last bombing of a clinic was compared to the hundreds of muslim attacks in the last year alone)
Because of the percentage of terrorist attacks worldwide that are committed by muslims it just makes sense to classify the attackers as either "islamic terrorists" or "non-islamic terrorists". Just the same as it makes sense to classify stuff as "school shootings" and "other public place shootings". We do the same with "gang related violence" and non-gang related violence. It helps with seeing trends and helping predict future attacks. A few decades ago it was "postal workers" but as that group is no longer a significant problem we don't talk about it anymore.
Not do away with, just require Google to pay a licensing fee if they intend to show it.
Keep in mind Google makes money off your videos via advertising. They absolutely should pay for music used in that content.
So why should music be singled out? Why not pay the guests at the wedding for appearing in the video? What about the creator of the wedding dress? What about the 15 million other people and things that went into making that dance possible? Everything is built on everything else. We are all standing on the shoulders of giants. I have no problem with the people who write music getting paid but there should be large areas of fair use and even with that, I'm not sure perpetual royalties are the best method. The creator of C++, the pc, ram, harddrive, the internet, etc.... don't get perpetual royalties and if they did it would probably break the internet. In order for society to advance we need to be able to build from and expand on what came before.
I know if I moved to the US I would not sign up with a carrier that was so behind the times.
The problem with that is that verizon for the most part has the best coverage and at this point it would cost too much for them to switch all their towers. If you have to have a sim card you can go with att with the second best coverage but even then they many times lock down the phone so that it only works with them. So even if you assume that CDMA is worse, it still offers the best coverage. Honestly, a $20 activation fee in the grand scheme of things wouldn't be a deal breaker for me as I only upgrade every 2-5 years. It's all the other costs for ATT/verizon that keep me on tmobile. I get free wifi calling, free tethering, and unlimited everything for $50/month. I can take the weaker coverage for the $1000+ a year that I am saving on my phone bill.
But can you explain why the consumer should pay more than 5% of the fare for the simple service of: "I'm at location X, find a nearby taxi willing to go to location Y?" 20% booking commission is outrageous.
Can you name any service that charges less than 10%? Amazon, ebay, itunes, youtube, etc.. all charge a fairly hefty fee for bringing the customer to seller. Craigslist is the exception but they even charge significant prices in certain markets and they only have very basic search functions and have no way to bill or rate the other side. In theory you could hitch a ride on craigslist but not quickly. The best we can hope for is that competition continues to drive the price down but a company that has more drivers/clients and better features will continue to command a premium. The other thing that will help prices continue to drop is to make sure that uber, etc.. doesn't prevent drivers from driving for multiple services. A peer to peer service would be best but there is no real incentive for a company to create such a thing and there are plenty of incentives for a company to try to corner the market.
Don't know if this is an April Fools article or not, but with Net Neutrality no mobile carrier is allowed to restrict tethering on any mobile device nor charge a fee for it, so I don't see why anyone actually needs public wifi anymore.
In my experience, most of the time, public wifi is still faster than tethering. It's also usually free and unlimited compared to the expensive per gig pricing of tethering.
I don't think it's a huge burden. First-time customers would have to put in the password, but it's not like they're going to say "oh, you're making me put in a password for the wifi? I'll go eat somewhere else". Non-first-timers would already have the password saved.
But if you don't change the password at least semi-regularly then it's trivial for the password to be leaked to those same non-customers. The most secure (and annoying) system is where the password is on your receipt and is specific to you. There is a coffeeshop in my town that does that and also has it expire after 1 hour. No idea if it meets their business goals or not but they somehow manage to still have one of the slowest connections in town so I rarely go there.
So hackers only have to try about 30 places on average to get in.
It says 97% accuracy within the building and 10 inch resolution so if that 3% failure rate was double or even triple then that's still accurate to less than 3 feet which would be plenty accurate enough. Honestly, I'm just guessing and 97% accuracy is almost meaningless in this context. It would be much better to say "accurate to 10 inches +/- 5 inches" or something along those lines or "works reliably 97% of the time and 3% of the time someone inside the building can't connect" which would be the other likely failure mode.
I hate to confirm the bias, but I'll readily admit that I'm contributing to the problem. I don't know about "obese," but I could stand to lose 10 pounds, by which I really mean 20 pounds, and only at losing 30 pounds would I approach unhealthily skinny. I keep up some active hobbies like fishing and vegetable gardening (and eating fish and vegetables), but my work and my play tend to keep me seated in front of computers most of the day. As a result I weigh more than I'd like.
I think you're confirming that modern society today is too concerned about being overweight and not concerned enough about being underweight. I'm in the same boat as you. I would be underweight if I lost 30 pounds but I have no desire to lose 30 pounds. Every once in a while you hear about a nasty strain of flu that is killing the "ultra healthy". My suspicion is that these "ultra healthy" are actually getting killed by not having enough reserve to help them thru their sickness. There are obviously plenty of obese people but I don't think someone with 10-20 pounds of "reserves" should even be considered fat. We are designed to have reserves and it's unhealthy not to have some. You'll be thankful for those reserves if you ever get seriously ill and can't eat for a week or two. Moreover, there are plenty of other factors more important than weight. I know "overweight" people that regularly exercise and underweight people that sit in front of their computers 24/7 eating nothing but doritos and mountain dew. I would guarantee that the overweight person who regularly exercises has better overall heart, lung, and body health than the skinny person who doesn't exercise.
You realize that all these doom and gloom scenarios you're forecasting have literally always been the problem with cars?
The big difference is the frequency of occurrence? How many times have you lost your keys and weren't able to find them? I've NEVER permanently lost my the keys to my car. I might misplace them and I've even left them in a store or restaurant a handful of time but I've always been able to find them. I've also never lost a cellphone. On the other hand, I've broken my cellphone multiple times and my cell phone battery has gone dead on me more times than I can count. Whether it is not being near a charger, using it too much, or forgetting to charge it at night. This isn't a super big deal under normal circumstances but becomes a much bigger deal if you need a working cellphone to start your car. How do you even drive to the nearest cell phone store to buy a replacement phone?
He did give the data to a foreign national, largely because he knew that if he only gave it to US reporters it could be too easily hushed.
He gave it to foreign reporters of one of our closest allies. Using "foreign national" although technically true is propaganda that makes it sound like he gave it to the military commander of one of our enemies as many people don't even know what "foreign national" even means. Why not use the truth and say that he gave "limited access to British Reporters"? Because that doesn't sound near as scary as "he gave top secret documents to foreign nationals" does.
Snowden wasn't at all circumspect. He took a huge data dump containing data dangerous to US national security
This is the quickest way to get everything. He didn't have the time to decide which pieces he needed. Moreover, the vastness is one of the things he was whistleblowing about. Without a ton of data it would have been hard to prove.
and handed it off to a foreign national.
Do you have proof of this? My understanding is it has mostly been very select reporters who have had access and the stuff that has been release has been screened prior to release.
And he did it all because he's an attention whore. If he had done it the right way, we wouldn't even know his name.
No, he did it because he was paranoid. He was scared that if noone knew his name then it would be easy for him to just disappear. It's not like the government wasn't going to figure out who the mole was. This way, everyone else knows who the mole is too so it's much harder for him to be eliminated. Also, having a name to face makes it more believable versus the standard tin-foil hat crowd that says "our sources" and rightfully noone believes them.
People don't think of you as having Big Data because you DON'T. Those numbers don't even qualify as Largish data. more middle of the road
I wouldn't even call it middle of the road. The company I work for has plenty of tables with more that 1 million records and I don't consider ourself big data. We do have some amount of data mining but we're still on standard servers with standard harddrives that are below capacity. I think of big data (at a bare minimum) as data that exceeds the capacity of a normal harddrive. If all your data can still fit on a single harddrive then you're not big data yet. So basically if you're not counting space in TBs then you're not big data.
But teaching to code is like that driver's ed class teaching metallurgy or weight engineering; just as neither of those skills are necessary for a driver, learning to code has no real benefit to the average computer user.
Most STEM stuff I see (in grade school at least ) is more about teaching kids to think and how the world works than teaching them to code. They use stuff like snap circuits, lego mindstorm, littlebits, scratch, and tinkercad. In lego mindstorm, it's less about programming and more about solving how to use a few simple instructions and a few simple legos to accomplish a simple task. With snap circuits and littlebits, it's about explaining what makes the modern world tick and again, solving simple problems. I don't think anyone is seriously trying to get everyone to be a coder but getting everyone to understand a little more about the basic underpinnings of the modern world and how to creatively solve problems is a good thing. Yes, we need more creativity but not necessarily the type of creativity that is taught in art class. The type of creativity that we need is creativity in problem solving which is what most grade school STEM stuff is trying to teach.
There needs to be a mod option for "dumbass" but troll will do.
There is nothing in the GPL that demands that RH do anything other than what they are doing for RHEL.
You can paywall GPL code, idiot.
Fedora is the test version.
If RHEL is out of license compliance, Fedora would do nothing to solve that.
shh
I never said it wasn't within their rights nor did I say they are out of compliance. They release the source of the parts of their OS that they are required to do so. The average user is not going to have the skills nor desire to compile their own OS. Nothing that you said negates the fact that where previously they were releasing a free open source version of redhat in parallel with their commercial version, when they switched and no longer released a free open source version that the open source community who was used to using redhat had to scramble to get something usable again. redhat went one step further than most companies and even makes them stripe out any reference to the name redhat which is probably considerable work. CentOS is fine now but it was a rough at the very beginning. I actually switched to mandrake/mandriva when they did that and have since switched to ubuntu. Previously I had owned purchased copies of redhat but I don't trust them anymore.
The free version of RHEL is CentOS or Scientific Linux, not Fedora. Fedora is, as you note, a upstream, fast-moving, bleeding-edge, "test" OS. If that's not what you want then you're using the wrong thing.
CentOS was created without Redhat's help when Redhat discontinued and tried to kill the open source version of their product. The gave everyone fedora so they could technically be in compliance with the open source license but they had enough glue that was not open source so that centos and fedora had to jump thru a bunch of hoops to be usable at all. So, no, CentOS is not the officially sanctioned open source version of Redhat. Redhat tried (and luckily failed) to kill off the open source version of their product.
This is why most preppers collect "junk" or Constitutional silver. It's a lot easier to handle day-to-day small transactions because it's recognizable and hard to inflate. Gold is for storing long-term wealth, not buying milk and bread.
Note that I agree with Bill Still wrt monetary reform. But in a post collapse scenario, silver will be king along with alcohol, cigs medical supplies and knowledge and anything of actual use. Search shtfplan.com for Bosnia. That's how it'll prolly turn out, assuming no large-scale nuke warfare.
In a total collapse, people *might* accept silver but I'm not sure constitutional silver is going to do you any good. The average person can't tell the difference between a silver quarter and the silver plated coins we have today and even if they can, what makes you think anyone will trust it more than the money that just collapsed? Sure, you can make arguments all day long but I'm not sure it's a sure thing as it's still just symbolic and has no real use in the day to day. On the other hand, gasoline, food, ammunition, and medicine are useful in any scenario. My first gut reaction is to figure out how to create antibiotic ointment in my basement as this would be a very valuable skill. This, however, only works in a stationary scenario where people trust or can see that your antibiotics actually work and you're not selling snake oil. Hundreds of pounds of food is also problematic if you're on the move. For price/weight ammunition would probably be one of the most valuable but is a very fixed supply and very hard to manufacture without a bunch of heavy equipment. Skills and physical labor are about the only highly portable currency that are a sure thing. The best thing is to stay in one place where you can gain trust from your neighbors and stockpile food and don't have to worry about portability. If I was going to be a prepper, I would try to find a way to have a 3 year rotating stock of canned goods, gasoline, and ammunition and forget about gold/silver. After that, I would try to acquire the skills for creating gun powder, reloading shells, and creating basic antibiotics and other commonly needed medicines in my basement. Oh, and gardening skills.
I honestly can't tell if you're being deliberately funny or not.
There is no way I would want to stay in something like that but a full height room the same size as a king size bed with a TV in the corner, wifi, and a real wooden lockable door and I would be fine. I only use the bed, the wifi, and occasionally the TV. I have no need for the sofa, coffee table, lamps, and all the other wasted space in a typical motel room. A room with an 8ft ceiling the size of a king size bed (or maybe a couple feet on one side to walk) would be fine. Have a 4ft shelf at the end of the bed for a microwave, small fridge, coffee maker, and TV. You've now more than doubled the capacity of your motel so presumably should be able to charge half the price. Oh, and if I stay more than one night and less than a week, don't include any room service and give me an additional discount as noone I know changes their sheets at home every night.
However, I would personally never stay somewhere with a shared bathroom! That's a bit _too_ "European" for my tastes:-)
I personally would prefer a communal bathroom to a shared bathroom. It obviously needs to be clean but vacationing I use plenty of public toilets in restaurants, etc.. I see no reason that I need a private one in the room that I only come back to at night to crash in. A shower is a different story but again I had no problems with clean communal showers while in college and if the price is right, that's just fine but my preference is probably a freshly cleaned pay per use shower. So basically just give me a clean bed, a tv, and a closet and give me someplace close where I can pay to take a shower. Most motels that I've stayed in in the USA could easily be half the size and be fine (not to mention that most are 2 double beds even if there is only one person). Unfortunately hostels kindof miss it on the other end. I do want a clean, private, bed to sleep in. Hostels are neither clean nor private. Give me a room just big enough for my bed but give me a key please. Bed/breakfasts in Great Britain were almost perfect for me. Most of them were small bedrooms in private homes and only slightly more expensive than hostels but they were clean with a nearby shower and a lockable door.
Gold bug or not, if money became worthless or too restrictive people would find other ways. Unleaded gas, beans, rice, canned goods, there are a host of items that are as good as if not better than gold and which could easily be used to determine value. A cow will cost you 1000 cans of vegetable or 300 gallons of gas. Sure, not as convenient as saying $800 but still very workable in a pinch. A can of vegetables or a gallon of gas has a very know value to virtually everyone.
I'd be happy just being able to transfer my purchases to third party. That way I can sell, gift, trade with another game, exchange for drugs, whatever. I don't want a Microsoft Marketplace for this sort of thing. I just want them to get out of the way.
Yes. This. This would be a much better deal. Have a microsoft marketplace if you want or let them sell them on ebay or whereever. The key would be to have a license key that can be transferred from one device to another. Ideally it would work for movies too and work across platforms so I can watch a movie I purchased on itunes on amazon (I can dream can't I) but even if it only worked inside amazon or inside itunes, having the ability to sell or gift a single purchase to someone else would be a huge advancement from where we are today.
Do you expect to sell a used copy of NCAA 2006 today for 50% of its original value?
Which is why 10% across the board is stupid. A 10 year old game shouldn't be worth even 10% while if I play a game for a month and want to sell it back and the physical version is still selling for full price then why shouldn't I get close to full price for the digital version?
I'm not a huge gamer but I see it a lot with movies. For many titles, it would be cheaper for me to buy a used movie, watch it, and resell it than it is to rent a movie for a day on amazon.
It's actually negative 90% since you lose the game. You aren't gaining anything unless you *really* need the cash.
You are gaining something if you NEVER play the game. Selling back a game that I never plan on playing again for anything is better than nothing. That's basically what 10% is. It's the same as movie buybacks that pay $1 per movie or less. The only reasons to do that are if you really need the cash, you want to clear out space in your apartment and/or you hate the movie and never plan on watching it again. That being said, I've sold college text books back for 50 cents because I had no desire to keep them after the semester was over. I've also sold amazon reserve units on their secondary market. That's a much better deal, I think you get close to 50% once all is said and done. But in that case amazon probably started the secondary market to prevent someone else starting one.
Slashdot Mirror
If the news used "Christian terrorists" to refer the general act of Christian extremists attacking abortion clinics, do you have any problems with such usage?
No, why would I or anyone else have problem with this? If the news said "A group of christian terrorists attacked an abortion clinic" or "A group of christian extremists attacked an abortion clinic" then that's very descriptive. They are in no way implying that all christians are terrorists. Same as saying that "a group of greenpeace terrorists blew up a whaling boat". That doesn't mean that everyone in greenpeace is a terrorist. Greenpeace the organization might disavow them but it's still descriptive if the group claims to be operating under their flag. Westboro Baptist Church is an example of an extremist christian group. They are for the most part non-violent so are not what we would generally call terrorists but they are routinely called "christian extremists" even though there are plenty of christians and baptists that would prefer that neither of those names were associated with that group. Another point I might add is that when Westboro Baptist Church shows up at an event there is usually a large number of other Christian groups doing counterprotests and disavowing their association.
I think it only works when we know exactly where the observer is.
Which mean the we must detect them before they detect us, which is unlikely for aliens that can threaten us from interstellar distances.
I don't think it is an April Fool, it is more like a thought experiment.
Any alien that is a threat to us from interstellar distances is likely going to have much much better ways of detecting us than shadows. It could be a thought experiment of how an alien who wants to hide from us could hide from us but that would likely require them to already be here and understand what we are attempting and actually care that we discover their home planet light years away that we have no means to actually reach. Not to mention that if it was started now, this magical shield would take X lightyears to start being effective. For advanced aliens without FTL travel, they could have detected us hundreds of years ago and have ships in route already.
Quantity has nothing to do with a vocabulary question.
Sure it does. If there are one or two or three groups then it's easy to name them by name but if there are hundreds of groups with hundreds of names, then it's easy to group them under the generic title of "islamic terrorists" just like we group school shooters under the generic term "school shooters" even though there are several different types of school shooters and we classify homicides as gang related or non-gang related.
Also, for profiling, it makes sense to spend a little more time looking at the muslims than at the general population when you're talking about airport security.
On the other hand, I'm perfectly fine with abortion clinics screening people carrying bibles a little more closely (even though I can't even tell you when the last bombing of a clinic was compared to the hundreds of muslim attacks in the last year alone)
Because of the percentage of terrorist attacks worldwide that are committed by muslims it just makes sense to classify the attackers as either "islamic terrorists" or "non-islamic terrorists". Just the same as it makes sense to classify stuff as "school shootings" and "other public place shootings". We do the same with "gang related violence" and non-gang related violence. It helps with seeing trends and helping predict future attacks. A few decades ago it was "postal workers" but as that group is no longer a significant problem we don't talk about it anymore.
Not do away with, just require Google to pay a licensing fee if they intend to show it.
Keep in mind Google makes money off your videos via advertising. They absolutely should pay for music used in that content.
So why should music be singled out? Why not pay the guests at the wedding for appearing in the video? What about the creator of the wedding dress? What about the 15 million other people and things that went into making that dance possible? Everything is built on everything else. We are all standing on the shoulders of giants. I have no problem with the people who write music getting paid but there should be large areas of fair use and even with that, I'm not sure perpetual royalties are the best method. The creator of C++, the pc, ram, harddrive, the internet, etc.... don't get perpetual royalties and if they did it would probably break the internet. In order for society to advance we need to be able to build from and expand on what came before.
I know if I moved to the US I would not sign up with a carrier that was so behind the times.
The problem with that is that verizon for the most part has the best coverage and at this point it would cost too much for them to switch all their towers. If you have to have a sim card you can go with att with the second best coverage but even then they many times lock down the phone so that it only works with them.
So even if you assume that CDMA is worse, it still offers the best coverage. Honestly, a $20 activation fee in the grand scheme of things wouldn't be a deal breaker for me as I only upgrade every 2-5 years. It's all the other costs for ATT/verizon that keep me on tmobile. I get free wifi calling, free tethering, and unlimited everything for $50/month. I can take the weaker coverage for the $1000+ a year that I am saving on my phone bill.
But can you explain why the consumer should pay more than 5% of the fare for the simple service of: "I'm at location X, find a nearby taxi willing to go to location Y?" 20% booking commission is outrageous.
Can you name any service that charges less than 10%? Amazon, ebay, itunes, youtube, etc.. all charge a fairly hefty fee for bringing the customer to seller. Craigslist is the exception but they even charge significant prices in certain markets and they only have very basic search functions and have no way to bill or rate the other side. In theory you could hitch a ride on craigslist but not quickly. The best we can hope for is that competition continues to drive the price down but a company that has more drivers/clients and better features will continue to command a premium. The other thing that will help prices continue to drop is to make sure that uber, etc.. doesn't prevent drivers from driving for multiple services. A peer to peer service would be best but there is no real incentive for a company to create such a thing and there are plenty of incentives for a company to try to corner the market.
Don't know if this is an April Fools article or not, but with Net Neutrality no mobile carrier is allowed to restrict tethering on any mobile device nor charge a fee for it, so I don't see why anyone actually needs public wifi anymore.
In my experience, most of the time, public wifi is still faster than tethering. It's also usually free and unlimited compared to the expensive per gig pricing of tethering.
I don't think it's a huge burden. First-time customers would have to put in the password, but it's not like they're going to say "oh, you're making me put in a password for the wifi? I'll go eat somewhere else". Non-first-timers would already have the password saved.
But if you don't change the password at least semi-regularly then it's trivial for the password to be leaked to those same non-customers. The most secure (and annoying) system is where the password is on your receipt and is specific to you. There is a coffeeshop in my town that does that and also has it expire after 1 hour. No idea if it meets their business goals or not but they somehow manage to still have one of the slowest connections in town so I rarely go there.
TFA: "It works with 97% accuracy"
So hackers only have to try about 30 places on average to get in.
It says 97% accuracy within the building and 10 inch resolution so if that 3% failure rate was double or even triple then that's still accurate to less than 3 feet which would be plenty accurate enough. Honestly, I'm just guessing and 97% accuracy is almost meaningless in this context. It would be much better to say "accurate to 10 inches +/- 5 inches" or something along those lines or "works reliably 97% of the time and 3% of the time someone inside the building can't connect" which would be the other likely failure mode.
This is why certain people shouldn't read SlashDot on...April Fools Day.
(In fact, I'm only here today to watch and comment on the OVER-reaction of people who don't realize what SlashDot becomes on April 1.)
Sadly, this was first posted yesterday and appears to possibly not be an April Fool's joke.
I hate to confirm the bias, but I'll readily admit that I'm contributing to the problem. I don't know about "obese," but I could stand to lose 10 pounds, by which I really mean 20 pounds, and only at losing 30 pounds would I approach unhealthily skinny. I keep up some active hobbies like fishing and vegetable gardening (and eating fish and vegetables), but my work and my play tend to keep me seated in front of computers most of the day. As a result I weigh more than I'd like.
I think you're confirming that modern society today is too concerned about being overweight and not concerned enough about being underweight. I'm in the same boat as you. I would be underweight if I lost 30 pounds but I have no desire to lose 30 pounds. Every once in a while you hear about a nasty strain of flu that is killing the "ultra healthy". My suspicion is that these "ultra healthy" are actually getting killed by not having enough reserve to help them thru their sickness. There are obviously plenty of obese people but I don't think someone with 10-20 pounds of "reserves" should even be considered fat. We are designed to have reserves and it's unhealthy not to have some. You'll be thankful for those reserves if you ever get seriously ill and can't eat for a week or two. Moreover, there are plenty of other factors more important than weight. I know "overweight" people that regularly exercise and underweight people that sit in front of their computers 24/7 eating nothing but doritos and mountain dew. I would guarantee that the overweight person who regularly exercises has better overall heart, lung, and body health than the skinny person who doesn't exercise.
You realize that all these doom and gloom scenarios you're forecasting have literally always been the problem with cars?
The big difference is the frequency of occurrence? How many times have you lost your keys and weren't able to find them? I've NEVER permanently lost my the keys to my car. I might misplace them and I've even left them in a store or restaurant a handful of time but I've always been able to find them. I've also never lost a cellphone. On the other hand, I've broken my cellphone multiple times and my cell phone battery has gone dead on me more times than I can count. Whether it is not being near a charger, using it too much, or forgetting to charge it at night. This isn't a super big deal under normal circumstances but becomes a much bigger deal if you need a working cellphone to start your car. How do you even drive to the nearest cell phone store to buy a replacement phone?
He did give the data to a foreign national, largely because he knew that if he only gave it to US reporters it could be too easily hushed.
He gave it to foreign reporters of one of our closest allies. Using "foreign national" although technically true is propaganda that makes it sound like he gave it to the military commander of one of our enemies as many people don't even know what "foreign national" even means. Why not use the truth and say that he gave "limited access to British Reporters"? Because that doesn't sound near as scary as "he gave top secret documents to foreign nationals" does.
Snowden wasn't at all circumspect. He took a huge data dump containing data dangerous to US national security
This is the quickest way to get everything. He didn't have the time to decide which pieces he needed. Moreover, the vastness is one of the things he was whistleblowing about. Without a ton of data it would have been hard to prove.
and handed it off to a foreign national.
Do you have proof of this? My understanding is it has mostly been very select reporters who have had access and the stuff that has been release has been screened prior to release.
And he did it all because he's an attention whore. If he had done it the right way, we wouldn't even know his name.
No, he did it because he was paranoid. He was scared that if noone knew his name then it would be easy for him to just disappear. It's not like the government wasn't going to figure out who the mole was. This way, everyone else knows who the mole is too so it's much harder for him to be eliminated. Also, having a name to face makes it more believable versus the standard tin-foil hat crowd that says "our sources" and rightfully noone believes them.
People don't think of you as having Big Data because you DON'T. Those numbers don't even qualify as Largish data. more middle of the road
I wouldn't even call it middle of the road. The company I work for has plenty of tables with more that 1 million records and I don't consider ourself big data. We do have some amount of data mining but we're still on standard servers with standard harddrives that are below capacity. I think of big data (at a bare minimum) as data that exceeds the capacity of a normal harddrive. If all your data can still fit on a single harddrive then you're not big data yet. So basically if you're not counting space in TBs then you're not big data.
But teaching to code is like that driver's ed class teaching metallurgy or weight engineering; just as neither of those skills are necessary for a driver, learning to code has no real benefit to the average computer user.
Most STEM stuff I see (in grade school at least ) is more about teaching kids to think and how the world works than teaching them to code. They use stuff like snap circuits, lego mindstorm, littlebits, scratch, and tinkercad. In lego mindstorm, it's less about programming and more about solving how to use a few simple instructions and a few simple legos to accomplish a simple task. With snap circuits and littlebits, it's about explaining what makes the modern world tick and again, solving simple problems. I don't think anyone is seriously trying to get everyone to be a coder but getting everyone to understand a little more about the basic underpinnings of the modern world and how to creatively solve problems is a good thing. Yes, we need more creativity but not necessarily the type of creativity that is taught in art class. The type of creativity that we need is creativity in problem solving which is what most grade school STEM stuff is trying to teach.
Bullshit
There needs to be a mod option for "dumbass" but troll will do.
There is nothing in the GPL that demands that RH do anything other than what they are doing for RHEL.
You can paywall GPL code, idiot.
Fedora is the test version.
If RHEL is out of license compliance, Fedora would do nothing to solve that.
shh
I never said it wasn't within their rights nor did I say they are out of compliance. They release the source of the parts of their OS that they are required to do so. The average user is not going to have the skills nor desire to compile their own OS. Nothing that you said negates the fact that where previously they were releasing a free open source version of redhat in parallel with their commercial version, when they switched and no longer released a free open source version that the open source community who was used to using redhat had to scramble to get something usable again. redhat went one step further than most companies and even makes them stripe out any reference to the name redhat which is probably considerable work. CentOS is fine now but it was a rough at the very beginning. I actually switched to mandrake/mandriva when they did that and have since switched to ubuntu. Previously I had owned purchased copies of redhat but I don't trust them anymore.
The free version of RHEL is CentOS or Scientific Linux, not Fedora. Fedora is, as you note, a upstream, fast-moving, bleeding-edge, "test" OS. If that's not what you want then you're using the wrong thing.
CentOS was created without Redhat's help when Redhat discontinued and tried to kill the open source version of their product. The gave everyone fedora so they could technically be in compliance with the open source license but they had enough glue that was not open source so that centos and fedora had to jump thru a bunch of hoops to be usable at all. So, no, CentOS is not the officially sanctioned open source version of Redhat. Redhat tried (and luckily failed) to kill off the open source version of their product.
This is why most preppers collect "junk" or Constitutional silver. It's a lot easier to handle day-to-day small transactions because it's recognizable and hard to inflate. Gold is for storing long-term wealth, not buying milk and bread.
Note that I agree with Bill Still wrt monetary reform. But in a post collapse scenario, silver will be king along with alcohol, cigs medical supplies and knowledge and anything of actual use. Search shtfplan.com for Bosnia. That's how it'll prolly turn out, assuming no large-scale nuke warfare.
In a total collapse, people *might* accept silver but I'm not sure constitutional silver is going to do you any good. The average person can't tell the difference between a silver quarter and the silver plated coins we have today and even if they can, what makes you think anyone will trust it more than the money that just collapsed? Sure, you can make arguments all day long but I'm not sure it's a sure thing as it's still just symbolic and has no real use in the day to day. On the other hand, gasoline, food, ammunition, and medicine are useful in any scenario. My first gut reaction is to figure out how to create antibiotic ointment in my basement as this would be a very valuable skill. This, however, only works in a stationary scenario where people trust or can see that your antibiotics actually work and you're not selling snake oil. Hundreds of pounds of food is also problematic if you're on the move. For price/weight ammunition would probably be one of the most valuable but is a very fixed supply and very hard to manufacture without a bunch of heavy equipment. Skills and physical labor are about the only highly portable currency that are a sure thing. The best thing is to stay in one place where you can gain trust from your neighbors and stockpile food and don't have to worry about portability. If I was going to be a prepper, I would try to find a way to have a 3 year rotating stock of canned goods, gasoline, and ammunition and forget about gold/silver. After that, I would try to acquire the skills for creating gun powder, reloading shells, and creating basic antibiotics and other commonly needed medicines in my basement. Oh, and gardening skills.
I honestly can't tell if you're being deliberately funny or not.
There is no way I would want to stay in something like that but a full height room the same size as a king size bed with a TV in the corner, wifi, and a real wooden lockable door and I would be fine. I only use the bed, the wifi, and occasionally the TV. I have no need for the sofa, coffee table, lamps, and all the other wasted space in a typical motel room. A room with an 8ft ceiling the size of a king size bed (or maybe a couple feet on one side to walk) would be fine. Have a 4ft shelf at the end of the bed for a microwave, small fridge, coffee maker, and TV. You've now more than doubled the capacity of your motel so presumably should be able to charge half the price. Oh, and if I stay more than one night and less than a week, don't include any room service and give me an additional discount as noone I know changes their sheets at home every night.
However, I would personally never stay somewhere with a shared bathroom! That's a bit _too_ "European" for my tastes :-)
I personally would prefer a communal bathroom to a shared bathroom. It obviously needs to be clean but vacationing I use plenty of public toilets in restaurants, etc.. I see no reason that I need a private one in the room that I only come back to at night to crash in. A shower is a different story but again I had no problems with clean communal showers while in college and if the price is right, that's just fine but my preference is probably a freshly cleaned pay per use shower. So basically just give me a clean bed, a tv, and a closet and give me someplace close where I can pay to take a shower. Most motels that I've stayed in in the USA could easily be half the size and be fine (not to mention that most are 2 double beds even if there is only one person). Unfortunately hostels kindof miss it on the other end. I do want a clean, private, bed to sleep in. Hostels are neither clean nor private. Give me a room just big enough for my bed but give me a key please. Bed/breakfasts in Great Britain were almost perfect for me. Most of them were small bedrooms in private homes and only slightly more expensive than hostels but they were clean with a nearby shower and a lockable door.
Gold bug or not, if money became worthless or too restrictive people would find other ways. Unleaded gas, beans, rice, canned goods, there are a host of items that are as good as if not better than gold and which could easily be used to determine value. A cow will cost you 1000 cans of vegetable or 300 gallons of gas. Sure, not as convenient as saying $800 but still very workable in a pinch. A can of vegetables or a gallon of gas has a very know value to virtually everyone.
I'd be happy just being able to transfer my purchases to third party. That way I can sell, gift, trade with another game, exchange for drugs, whatever. I don't want a Microsoft Marketplace for this sort of thing. I just want them to get out of the way.
Yes. This. This would be a much better deal. Have a microsoft marketplace if you want or let them sell them on ebay or whereever. The key would be to have a license key that can be transferred from one device to another. Ideally it would work for movies too and work across platforms so I can watch a movie I purchased on itunes on amazon (I can dream can't I) but even if it only worked inside amazon or inside itunes, having the ability to sell or gift a single purchase to someone else would be a huge advancement from where we are today.
Do you expect to sell a used copy of NCAA 2006 today for 50% of its original value?
Which is why 10% across the board is stupid. A 10 year old game shouldn't be worth even 10% while if I play a game for a month and want to sell it back and the physical version is still selling for full price then why shouldn't I get close to full price for the digital version?
I'm not a huge gamer but I see it a lot with movies. For many titles, it would be cheaper for me to buy a used movie, watch it, and resell it than it is to rent a movie for a day on amazon.
It's actually negative 90% since you lose the game.
You aren't gaining anything unless you *really* need the cash.
You are gaining something if you NEVER play the game. Selling back a game that I never plan on playing again for anything is better than nothing. That's basically what 10% is. It's the same as movie buybacks that pay $1 per movie or less. The only reasons to do that are if you really need the cash, you want to clear out space in your apartment and/or you hate the movie and never plan on watching it again. That being said, I've sold college text books back for 50 cents because I had no desire to keep them after the semester was over. I've also sold amazon reserve units on their secondary market. That's a much better deal, I think you get close to 50% once all is said and done. But in that case amazon probably started the secondary market to prevent someone else starting one.