If the current patent mess had been in place when cars were first industrialized
It was. George B. Selden is credited as being an early patent troll. He patented a version of the internal combustion engine, then went around demanding licensing fees from automobile manufacturers. It was eventually overturned, but was a early indicator of the problems in the patent system. Read more here: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2012/11/05/the-original-patent-troll.aspx
Everything that follows is personal opinion, so I can't provide an citations. Sorry.
Are they expecting us to all go back and live in caves?
Only a distinct minority. As with any movement, there is an extreme that recommends an extreme action. These people understand the physics and know there is no replacement for these power sources, but they don't care. Any cost is acceptable.
There is another group in the movement that I describe as the "corporate conspiracy" crowd. In my experience this group tends to blame corporate greed for the bad outcomes with regards to the environment. The topic of nuclear shutdown in Japan came up over a year ago, and I recall responding to someone that blamed greed for the location chosen for Fukushima. I pointed out that they needed a massive body of water to assist in cooling the plant and Japan isn't known for its huge rivers or lakes. They placed it somewhere with enough water to keep it functional, not because they were being overly greedy. I think the "corporate conspiracy" crowd only partially understands the physics behind power generation, and always assume corporate greed is preventing the better solutions from being available. To the extent that old reactors are still active, they may be right, but there really is no magical solution that will make everything better.
That leads me to the final group, the ones I feel have no real understanding of the physics behind power generation. My perspective on this group is that they become the proof of Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law. The technology is so hard for them to understand, that they treat it as magic. And of course, being magic, anything is magically possible. So obviously, solar and wind will work perfectly and everything will be great (magically).
Unfortunately, on the topic of nuclear power, those three environmentally focused groups are assisted by the NIMBYs and people with poor risk understanding. This group has no real interest in the environmental movement, but radiation is scary so we better not. It is like the risk problem we see with terrorism. Every once in a while something goes horribly wrong, and a small group of people is affected. Meanwhile, our usual day-to-day activities will cause more deaths every year than that occasional horrible event, but we will concentrate all our efforts in preventing that horrible event from ever happening again.
It really is a much larger problem than just the "environmentalists" described in the quote from your post. I don't know that I even have a solution.
As a "Generation Y" person (according to their stats) who lives in the UK , I can tell you that most people of my generation (that I've known/met across Europe), and the one below it (born mid-late 90's), would love to own a car. However many just can't afford it, the costs, the fuel, the taxes, the insurance (espcially this) are just too high.
As someone who has been working with 20-somethings from the UK for the past 5 years, I have to say overall they have been quite surprised as just how cheap many of the things are here when compared to the UK. Gas is cheaper by a significant amount sure, but even the base price of the car and the insurance tend to be significantly cheaper, and that is not even factoring in the dollar being worth less than the pound. A few of them have been sent to the US to receive training from the senior engineers over here, and the last few times I've been amused as they somehow swing getting muscle cars (Ford Mustangs or Chevy Camaros) from the rental companies, just because its unheard of for someone that young to have something that powerful in the UK. Seems like they go for bragging rights back home, so it does sound familiar that they would love to have the performance cars if they could afford them back home.
Coolness has nothing to do with it. We are being forced away from them. Those old guys are telling us what kids think because it is those old guys who have made owning a car (or a home for that matter) impossible for us.
Next thing I'll hear is how "Generation Y" thinks its uncool to own a home, and we'd rather spend our lives renting due to the "flexibility" it offers us.
(Yes, I know this is somewhat UK/Europe centric, but I'm sure there are similar concerns across the pond as well).
I'd say this is more of a mixed bag. My sister, who qualifies as the last of Generation X almost first of Generation Y, didn't get her drivers license and car until she pretty much was required to as there was no one able to drive her and no other way to hang our with friends. I was at college at the time, and I knew someone who still didn't have a drivers license. The thing they had in common was they both did see having a car as an annoying necessity and not something cool or something to be excited about. On the flip side, I work with a number of people from the same generation who are very big into cars and have gone out of the way to get nicer or higher performance models. Having a good car is very important to them, to the point where one guy placed a factory order to get exactly what he wanted.
I think the article may be more correct in the US, where outside of major metro areas, driving is just something you are expected to do, as opposed to something more exclusive and expensive like it is in the UK and Europe.
That's true. I've also checked the odometer and speedometer against the the highway mileposts and at low speeds against the automatic radar stations that say "Your speed is: X". For the mileposts, I time how long it takes me to drive ten miles according the milepost signs on a flat stretch of road in very light traffic so I don't have to change lanes. On the Honda Civic Hybrid, the speedometer is accurate to within a mile per hour at 70 mph as well as 25 mph. Pretty good. As far as I can tell, the odometer is accurate to within a tenth of a mile or so as well, but I haven't checked with the new set of tires I got, which might have changed things.
From all of this, it seems like Honda is doing a better job of accuracy than some of the other car makers. Perhaps that suit against Hyundai about falsely reporting the fuel economy was warranted. I felt the one against Honda probably wasn't, i.e., Honda was sued because many people didn't get the advertised fuel economy, but I've not had a problem. I have heard rumors that BMW sets their speedometers about 5 mph faster than the real world as a marketing thing to fool their drivers into thinking the cars are faster than they are, but never saw any proof. Apparently this kind of thing really does happen.
I also agree that the odometer accuracy is important, but as far as I can tell from my tests, it is. I think the fault lies with whatever my car is using to determine how quickly it is using the fuel.
As for the Hyundai problem, it was that independent testing of their MPG claims didn't meet the manufacturer's claims. Remember, the EPA doesn't actually test all new vehicles. It defined a test that manufacturers are supposed to follow and then self-report. The EPA then sometimes double checks the numbers with independent testing. For Hyundai and Kia, they got busted for their numbers not matching the defined tests, not over how well the defined tests compared to the real world.
That being said, my car was not one of the ones that Hyundai had to revise. For city driving, I do generally make the city number, but just barely. For highway, I have only been on one long trip, and it didn't quite make the highway MPG, but got very close. However, both of those measurements were from my manual calculations. The trip computer indicated I exceeded the car's rated highway mileage by more than 3 MPG, but my calculation says it didn't. I really feel my manual calculations are more accurate.
I have made that calculation, and many others besides. My trip MPG is consistently ~1 mpg off the one I calculate from the gas pumps at fill-up and from the odometer. While not perfect, you couldn't realistically ask for a better estimate than that.
And if my car were that accurate, I'd probably be happier. Mine is overly optimistic by pretty much a minimum of 10% over, sometimes worse. Is it also never incorrect in the other direction. The trip computer has never reported lower than the calculated number. I suspect it may go hand in hand with Hyundai's and Kia's problem that required them to revise their stated EPA estimates downwards a number of months ago.
The main point I was trying to make was mostly just to confirm the numbers with a second source if possible. If I wasn't, I would be telling people my car is about 2-3 MPG more efficient than it really seems to be.
I agree. On my car with a built-in MPG screen, if I drive well, I get about 26.5 to 27 MPG on a car that's rated 23/31. Driving through town poorly, my wife gets about 23. Driving straight through to Vegas (from SoCal), I've gotten 32. And this was on the old "inaccurate" EPA scale. Seems pretty accurate to me.
I would recommend you consider double checking your car's trip computer calculation against the tripometer and gas pump readout method of manually calculating miles per gallon. I bought a Hyundai with a trip computer that includes Avg. MPG as one of its readouts. Prior to owning that car I had gotten into the habit of resetting the tripometer on my car at every fuel up after writing down the miles from the tripometer and gallons from the pump readout (then just divide the miles travelled vs gallons to refuel the tank). I kept up that habit after getting the Hyundai and found that the manual calculation method consistently reports 2-4 MPG lower than the trip computer. If your trip computer is anything as optimistic as mine, then you may actually be getting less than you think.
Even though they mention T-Mobile support for LTE, if you look closer at the frequency support on the phone's specs at HTC's site, there is something important to note.
HSPA/WCDMA: 850/1900/2100 MHz
This will not support T-Mobile 3G in a number of areas where they haven't converted AWS from HSPA+ use to LTE use. For people considering this phone for T-Mobile, you may get stuck on 2G depending on where you live.
You got a "Senior Software Engineer" title at age of 26? O.o
Sorry, pal, but I think your company had spoiled you badly.
I disagree. The original post mentions 5 years of service with the company. I've found a number of companies that put their engineers to level 3 positions around the 5 year mark (usually between 4-6 years in my experiences). By level 3 I mean:
1. Junior Software Engineer
2. Software Engineer
3. Senior Software Engineer
I don't find the possibility of him receiving a senior title after five years all that shocking. I think most competent people should be able to manage that. I received my level 3 promotion within that same range. Keep in mind titles may vary from company to company, but that is how it works for my present job and my previous job.
I'd imagine that not all work places have a shower either.
This.
I've scanned the other comments, and not seen much discussion on showering or other hygiene issues when you arrive at work. I have a number of friends that work in offices within a few miles of mine, and one of the common complaints I heard from them was that the people who biked to their workplace didn't clean up, leaving them trapped in a cubicle with a smelly co-worker all day.
I typically bike for exercise outside of work hours, so I know that I'm healthy enough to bike to work (its a shorter distance than my usual rides) and I know it would allow me to eliminate other exercise by combining my commute with exercise. However, I still don't like the option as I don't want to become the offensive smelly co-worker that everyone hates. (I do find the increased commute time and weather concerns put me off biking to work as well, but I think the need for a shower at work is the biggest problem I have at the moment.)
I had read the New Yorker article previously, and while it is clear to me that Ravi was not a good or innocent person, there is something that I see common in other posts that bothers me.
There was no stored video of any sexual encounter.
Ravi used iChat to activate a webcam on his computer remotely. He viewed the video stream with a female friend in a nearby dorm. He did not have any setup to capture the video for future use. This means there was no blackmail attempts (also mentioned in other posts). As mentioned in the New Yorker article, there was an attempt to organize a viewing party of some sort, but it was canceled. The images didn't make youtube or any other public venue at any point in time.
You want to condemn Ravi for spying or wiretapping violations, that makes sense. But the sheer misinformation I keep seeing posted here about videos and blackmail disturbs me.
I had the same thing happen to me on Sunday. I swear the only sites I had open were my college's e-courses page and Slashdot.
However, per the other reply, performing a system restore from safe mode was really fast as clearing out the problem. From there, found out the A/V software was no longer updating (fixed that), found my JRE was not updating (fixed that), and found Flash was out of date (probably not the cause, but also fixed that).
Technical reasons decided where to put the reactor. Like all nuclear power plants, Fukushima needed a massive body of water to assist in cooling the plant. Japan isn't known for its huge rivers or lakes, so the coast becomes the default location to place power plants.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with some of your conclusions.
They were born into one of the most, if not the most, prosperous times in the history of humanity. The foundation of this prosperity was planted by their hard-working ancestors, and they grew up in it and eventually inherited it, so they can't actually take any credit for it.
They were lucky. Their immediate ancestors were the group of people who caused the Great Depression, still considered to be the worst economic collapse this country has ever experienced. The government was largely unsuccessful at fixing it until World War II rolled around and restarted our economy. Suddenly the manufacturing capacity was needed to supply ourselves and our allies with weapons.
In hindsight, this was the peak of middle-class America.
I'll agree with that, but point to WWII as the source again. Must of the rest of the industrialised world had been destroyed by war. Factories and production through out Europe and Japan had been destroyed to win the war. The US responded by rebuilding them, which involved selling our industrialised services to them. When you are the biggest or only source of an item or service, of course you will be doing well.
One such concept that they embraced was outsourcing/offshoring.
This to me is just the conclusion of the rebuild efforts. The US being the only source of high tech products was not a sustainable model. Other countries were sure to develop similar abilities. An example, you never hear much about non-American cars from the 50s. But with the 60s you start to hear more about European cars (like the VW bus so popular with the hippies you metioned) and with the 70s you start to see the sales of some of the now iconic Japanese cars (like the Honda Accord). Similarly during the 50s airliners were generally a US product from companies like Boeing, Lockheed, and Douglas. Once the 70s rolls around and you see the start of Airbus.
The Boomer's precious offshoring, outsourcing and "free trade" destroyed the American manufacturing sector in the 1980s and 1990s.
No, our economy would have declined even had none of those practices ever been employed. We had it good selling to the entire world after a major war. The rest of the world caught up, wanted their share of the pie, and were willing to do things cheaper than we were. We would have lost sales to the rest of the world either way.
So in conclusion, the Boomer's ancestors f-ed things up every bit as badly as we did (the Great Depression), WWII saved our economy and we were lucky there were no major strikes on the US mainland, and finally the world recovered and our position as the dominant producer became unsustainable.
Do you honestly think arresting people would have met with any smaller number of complaints to BART than turning off cell phone towers did? I can absolutely see headlines about the horrible BART police arresting innocent, peaceful protesters.
I think the protesters put the BART authorities in a no-win situation. Based on everything I have read and heard, the protesters were planning to be disruptive and attempting to coordinate in a way to avoid the police. Had BART done nothing, I think they would have been blamed for any bad that came out of the protests. Obviously, if the protesters did something bad and BART knew they were going to be there, BART should have done something to stop them. If the protests had somehow gotten out of hand (see London riots), BART likely would have been sued by anyone injured.
On the flip side, it seems to me that any action BART took would have reflected bad on them as well. Obviously shutting off the BART run cell towers was not well met. I don't think arrests would have worked out well either. What is left? Searching people as the enter BART? That hasn't gone well for the TSA a lot of the time. I can't really think of what other action BART could have taken to try to protect their other riders from any problems generated by the protests.
I think the only way this would have worked out well if is BART indicated they needed to not protest on the platforms and the protesters listened and agreed to protest outside the stations.
The G2 (Desire Z) is an amazing device. CM 7.0.2 running nicely here. One thing I really miss about my G1 is the keyboard...
The G2 has a keyboard. Its true the G2 keyboard is a 4 row instead of a 5 row like the G1, but its usable. However, ever since I replaced my G1 with a G2, I typically used the swype virtual keyboard instead of the physical one. Its possible to extract swype from the original ROM if you backed it up before flashing CM. That is what I did. Swype + CM 7.0.3 is nice.
This is local politics. Need to keep the money flowing into NASA to keep the constituency happy, regardless of your party affiliation. Plus NASA's budget vs. the entire budget is close to nothing. Just like that recent budget "cut" the republicans were bragging about was like less than 1% savings on the entire budget. I guess you could say the victory is that it didn't go up, but whatever. Still seems pretty crappy.
Exactly. NASA's budget has generally been less than 1% of the national budget for well over a decade. Even if you cut all of NASA, is wouldn't have equalled the number of billions claimed for the most recent budget cut. NASA's budget was never was truly huge either, peaking at 4.4% during the Apollo era. I think people have historically overestimated just how much money is currently spent on NASA, all things considered.
That being said, this is not what we need at the moment. When NASA achieved the moon landing, it was gulping down the budget at a significantly higher rate than now. The last thing we need is a new spending initiative when we are having so much trouble cutting the budget. Politicians will always have some pet project in their home district. That is no excuse for adding spending while everyone else is trying to cut the budget. As much as I have loved the space program in the past, I hope this gets shot down until the country can afford it.
They will be. Sony got hit with tons of lawsuits, and they weren't using software that could steal your password. This just took corporate big brother behavior to a whole new level of invasive.
Even in locations with greater amount of competition the service doesn't get any better. In my location we can choose from AT&T, Comcast, Bright House (Time Warner), and Clear. Even with more choices the service doesn't get any better.
I had a similar experience with AT&T that eventually caused me to leave for Bright House. Their DSLAM suddenly decided it didn't like talking to my DSL modem, and it would just stop responding entirely. The first time it happened, a tech came out, checked my equipment and home wiring and declared them in working order. He then reset the DSLAM port and everything started working for a couple more weeks. Then it failed again. I spent over an hour on hold trying to tell them the problem was on their end. On the same day I got a bill from AT&T wanting $80 for the service visit even though the problem was on their side. I cancelled the next day.
So far Bright House has been fair, but they wanted absurdly low caps in their trials, so I'm not sure how long until they attempt that here, especially if AT&T pulls off their cap. Comcast is a total joke, and though Clear is still an option, their speeds are not going to be what I get now. I'm expecting a day in the future where all services have caps on them, just because these companies won't stop pushing for them.
UK uses 2100MHz for 3G data. 900 and 1800MHz are the GSM bands.
1800 MHz is UMTS Band III and 900MHZ is UMTS Band VIII, see UMTS Frequency Bands. While they are more commonly GSM bands, they can be used for UMTS (3G) data.
That being said, its my understanding that Band I (2100MHz) is far more widely deployed throughout the UK (and the rest of Europe). In the US ATT uses UMTS Bands II and V (1900 & 850), while T-Mobile uses UMTS Band IV (1700/2100). From what I can tell, most (if not all) T-Mobile phones sold in the US are actually Band I/IV phones, allowing them to run on 2100MHz networks in the UK and other locations in Europe. An ATT phone without Band I capabilities would likely have no 3G in large parts of the UK.
This is false. I own both a HTC G1 and a Samsung Vibrant which both have the US T-Mobile 3G frequencies and I had no problems using T-Mobile's prepaid 3G network in the UK. The only caveat is to make sure that the phones are unlocked so they will accept a UK SIM card.
That is the same I experienced with my G1, but I used a prepaid O2 sim. Most smartphones these days seem to be quad-band GSM, so 2G/EDGE should work anywhere in the world. While it is true that T-Mo uses 1700/2100 for UMTS in the US, most of their phones can support running 2100 only. I checked before I went in Dec. 2010 and found that nearly all the UK carriers use 2100 in some capacity. I was there for nearly three weeks and had 3G indicated while I was in more populated areas.
a near-ban on new construction (in the US at least, I'm not sure about Japan)
I don't think Japan has the same problems. In the wikipedia article on Fukushima I, it indicated that two new reactors are planned to come online in the next few years, both using more advanced designs. Since reactor 1 is now 40 years old and each of the planned reactors have a output three times the original, I wouldn't be surprised if reactor 1 wasn't taken offline for an extended "inspection" if they got new advanced design reactors 7 and 8 running.
It should also be noted that in the various reactors sites around Japan, they frequently seem to have only some of the reactors present operating, while the others are offline for inspections or upgrades. I think the Japanese authorities take safety seriously, and will decommission older units as newer and safer units are brought online.
Parents need to remind their children that the Internet isn't some special place unattached to reality. That glowing box connects you to real computers operated by real, physical people in real, ordinary places on the physical planet Earth. Actions taken on the internet have repercussions offline, and vice versa. Defamatory statements are not magically protected just because they appear on 'teh internets'. Disappointingly, it seems that certain Slashdot posters are also unaware of this reality.
Fully agreed. I think this is core to the problem at hand. Just deleting the comments won't fix anything either. The internet is self-archiving in many ways. Think carefully before posting. Don't do anything on the internet that you wouldn't do in the real world just because you can delete it later.
I also find it interesting that not a single quote in the actual article even has one of the kids saying "I'm sorry." They say they wish they hadn't done it or didn't want to hurt his reputation, but not that they are sorry about telling such horrible lies?
A 12 year old child does not have the same knowledge of right and wrong that a respectable adult has.
I would agree to that.
Most 12 year old's knowledge of right and wrong is essentially this: was I told to do this, or not.
Now I've stopped agreeing. I believe by age 12 most kids recognise what would best be described by "levels" of wrongness. If they take a cookie after Mom or Dad said no, maybe they miss dessert or have to go to bed early. If they lie about their grades maybe they don't get internet for a while or lose the allowance or similar. If they lie about the teacher doing criminal acts..... I think you get the point. They had to know if they got caught that the consequences were going to be more severe.
This is an opportunity to help the kids understand *why* something is right and wrong, because they just screwed up big time and you have the time to make a point that they will actually listen to. This is what it means to be an educator, whether you are a teacher or a parent.
Punishment is just a first step in helping a child learn from their mistakes. If that's where the guidance ends, one had better "hope" they don't do it again, because praying is the only chance there is. They'll just learn to not get caught.
And we are back to agreeing. Hopefully there are a lot of explanations occurring to indicate why this kind of act is so bad (lasting effect on career, potential incarceration of an innocent man, etc.). But I don't think that means to don't give a level of punishment appropriate to the crime. As I said before, they should recognise the levels of wrongness. If you let them off easy while saying its a really, really bad thing they did, it presents a mixed message because the punishment didn't fit the crime.
What is happening here is worse than all of that -- one student is being expelled, which is another way to say "it's not our problem." The rest are being threatened with expulsion or movement into a school for people with behavioral problems if they try to escalate the issue. This is not the way to help kids grow.
And having looked at the article again, its not the kid who said pedophile or the kid who said rapist getting expelled, its the kid who said bipolar. That may seem weird, but we don't have the school records. Maybe that kid getting expelled is a repeat offender who has received multiple warnings. Maybe he was on his last chance. We don't know. For us to make judgements on if the punishment was appropriate would probably require more information that the school can't legally give us about the background of the kids in question.
Also, my response to the original post was more trying to make the point that this was punishment, not bullying by the adults. It may very well be stronger punishment than it should, but it might not. I personally think the expulsion may be over the top as well, but I can't say for certain the child didn't deserve it in light of their past at the school that we don't know about.
Slashdot Mirror
If the current patent mess had been in place when cars were first industrialized
It was. George B. Selden is credited as being an early patent troll. He patented a version of the internal combustion engine, then went around demanding licensing fees from automobile manufacturers. It was eventually overturned, but was a early indicator of the problems in the patent system. Read more here: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2012/11/05/the-original-patent-troll.aspx
Everything that follows is personal opinion, so I can't provide an citations. Sorry.
Are they expecting us to all go back and live in caves?
Only a distinct minority. As with any movement, there is an extreme that recommends an extreme action. These people understand the physics and know there is no replacement for these power sources, but they don't care. Any cost is acceptable.
There is another group in the movement that I describe as the "corporate conspiracy" crowd. In my experience this group tends to blame corporate greed for the bad outcomes with regards to the environment. The topic of nuclear shutdown in Japan came up over a year ago, and I recall responding to someone that blamed greed for the location chosen for Fukushima. I pointed out that they needed a massive body of water to assist in cooling the plant and Japan isn't known for its huge rivers or lakes. They placed it somewhere with enough water to keep it functional, not because they were being overly greedy. I think the "corporate conspiracy" crowd only partially understands the physics behind power generation, and always assume corporate greed is preventing the better solutions from being available. To the extent that old reactors are still active, they may be right, but there really is no magical solution that will make everything better.
That leads me to the final group, the ones I feel have no real understanding of the physics behind power generation. My perspective on this group is that they become the proof of Arthur C. Clarke's Third Law. The technology is so hard for them to understand, that they treat it as magic. And of course, being magic, anything is magically possible. So obviously, solar and wind will work perfectly and everything will be great (magically).
Unfortunately, on the topic of nuclear power, those three environmentally focused groups are assisted by the NIMBYs and people with poor risk understanding. This group has no real interest in the environmental movement, but radiation is scary so we better not. It is like the risk problem we see with terrorism. Every once in a while something goes horribly wrong, and a small group of people is affected. Meanwhile, our usual day-to-day activities will cause more deaths every year than that occasional horrible event, but we will concentrate all our efforts in preventing that horrible event from ever happening again.
It really is a much larger problem than just the "environmentalists" described in the quote from your post. I don't know that I even have a solution.
Workers managed to set a cell tower on fire while welding in Florida. I do wonder if those 12-16 hour work days contributed to that mistake.
As a "Generation Y" person (according to their stats) who lives in the UK , I can tell you that most people of my generation (that I've known/met across Europe), and the one below it (born mid-late 90's), would love to own a car. However many just can't afford it, the costs, the fuel, the taxes, the insurance (espcially this) are just too high.
As someone who has been working with 20-somethings from the UK for the past 5 years, I have to say overall they have been quite surprised as just how cheap many of the things are here when compared to the UK. Gas is cheaper by a significant amount sure, but even the base price of the car and the insurance tend to be significantly cheaper, and that is not even factoring in the dollar being worth less than the pound. A few of them have been sent to the US to receive training from the senior engineers over here, and the last few times I've been amused as they somehow swing getting muscle cars (Ford Mustangs or Chevy Camaros) from the rental companies, just because its unheard of for someone that young to have something that powerful in the UK. Seems like they go for bragging rights back home, so it does sound familiar that they would love to have the performance cars if they could afford them back home.
Coolness has nothing to do with it. We are being forced away from them. Those old guys are telling us what kids think because it is those old guys who have made owning a car (or a home for that matter) impossible for us.
Next thing I'll hear is how "Generation Y" thinks its uncool to own a home, and we'd rather spend our lives renting due to the "flexibility" it offers us.
(Yes, I know this is somewhat UK/Europe centric, but I'm sure there are similar concerns across the pond as well).
I'd say this is more of a mixed bag. My sister, who qualifies as the last of Generation X almost first of Generation Y, didn't get her drivers license and car until she pretty much was required to as there was no one able to drive her and no other way to hang our with friends. I was at college at the time, and I knew someone who still didn't have a drivers license. The thing they had in common was they both did see having a car as an annoying necessity and not something cool or something to be excited about. On the flip side, I work with a number of people from the same generation who are very big into cars and have gone out of the way to get nicer or higher performance models. Having a good car is very important to them, to the point where one guy placed a factory order to get exactly what he wanted.
I think the article may be more correct in the US, where outside of major metro areas, driving is just something you are expected to do, as opposed to something more exclusive and expensive like it is in the UK and Europe.
That's true. I've also checked the odometer and speedometer against the the highway mileposts and at low speeds against the automatic radar stations that say "Your speed is: X". For the mileposts, I time how long it takes me to drive ten miles according the milepost signs on a flat stretch of road in very light traffic so I don't have to change lanes. On the Honda Civic Hybrid, the speedometer is accurate to within a mile per hour at 70 mph as well as 25 mph. Pretty good. As far as I can tell, the odometer is accurate to within a tenth of a mile or so as well, but I haven't checked with the new set of tires I got, which might have changed things. From all of this, it seems like Honda is doing a better job of accuracy than some of the other car makers. Perhaps that suit against Hyundai about falsely reporting the fuel economy was warranted. I felt the one against Honda probably wasn't, i.e., Honda was sued because many people didn't get the advertised fuel economy, but I've not had a problem. I have heard rumors that BMW sets their speedometers about 5 mph faster than the real world as a marketing thing to fool their drivers into thinking the cars are faster than they are, but never saw any proof. Apparently this kind of thing really does happen.
I also agree that the odometer accuracy is important, but as far as I can tell from my tests, it is. I think the fault lies with whatever my car is using to determine how quickly it is using the fuel.
As for the Hyundai problem, it was that independent testing of their MPG claims didn't meet the manufacturer's claims. Remember, the EPA doesn't actually test all new vehicles. It defined a test that manufacturers are supposed to follow and then self-report. The EPA then sometimes double checks the numbers with independent testing. For Hyundai and Kia, they got busted for their numbers not matching the defined tests, not over how well the defined tests compared to the real world.
That being said, my car was not one of the ones that Hyundai had to revise. For city driving, I do generally make the city number, but just barely. For highway, I have only been on one long trip, and it didn't quite make the highway MPG, but got very close. However, both of those measurements were from my manual calculations. The trip computer indicated I exceeded the car's rated highway mileage by more than 3 MPG, but my calculation says it didn't. I really feel my manual calculations are more accurate.
I have made that calculation, and many others besides. My trip MPG is consistently ~1 mpg off the one I calculate from the gas pumps at fill-up and from the odometer. While not perfect, you couldn't realistically ask for a better estimate than that.
And if my car were that accurate, I'd probably be happier. Mine is overly optimistic by pretty much a minimum of 10% over, sometimes worse. Is it also never incorrect in the other direction. The trip computer has never reported lower than the calculated number. I suspect it may go hand in hand with Hyundai's and Kia's problem that required them to revise their stated EPA estimates downwards a number of months ago.
The main point I was trying to make was mostly just to confirm the numbers with a second source if possible. If I wasn't, I would be telling people my car is about 2-3 MPG more efficient than it really seems to be.
I agree. On my car with a built-in MPG screen, if I drive well, I get about 26.5 to 27 MPG on a car that's rated 23/31. Driving through town poorly, my wife gets about 23. Driving straight through to Vegas (from SoCal), I've gotten 32. And this was on the old "inaccurate" EPA scale. Seems pretty accurate to me.
I would recommend you consider double checking your car's trip computer calculation against the tripometer and gas pump readout method of manually calculating miles per gallon. I bought a Hyundai with a trip computer that includes Avg. MPG as one of its readouts. Prior to owning that car I had gotten into the habit of resetting the tripometer on my car at every fuel up after writing down the miles from the tripometer and gallons from the pump readout (then just divide the miles travelled vs gallons to refuel the tank). I kept up that habit after getting the Hyundai and found that the manual calculation method consistently reports 2-4 MPG lower than the trip computer. If your trip computer is anything as optimistic as mine, then you may actually be getting less than you think.
Even though they mention T-Mobile support for LTE, if you look closer at the frequency support on the phone's specs at HTC's site, there is something important to note.
HSPA/WCDMA: 850/1900/2100 MHz
This will not support T-Mobile 3G in a number of areas where they haven't converted AWS from HSPA+ use to LTE use. For people considering this phone for T-Mobile, you may get stuck on 2G depending on where you live.
You got a "Senior Software Engineer" title at age of 26? O.o
Sorry, pal, but I think your company had spoiled you badly.
I disagree. The original post mentions 5 years of service with the company. I've found a number of companies that put their engineers to level 3 positions around the 5 year mark (usually between 4-6 years in my experiences). By level 3 I mean:
1. Junior Software Engineer
2. Software Engineer
3. Senior Software Engineer
I don't find the possibility of him receiving a senior title after five years all that shocking. I think most competent people should be able to manage that. I received my level 3 promotion within that same range. Keep in mind titles may vary from company to company, but that is how it works for my present job and my previous job.
I'd imagine that not all work places have a shower either.
This.
I've scanned the other comments, and not seen much discussion on showering or other hygiene issues when you arrive at work. I have a number of friends that work in offices within a few miles of mine, and one of the common complaints I heard from them was that the people who biked to their workplace didn't clean up, leaving them trapped in a cubicle with a smelly co-worker all day.
I typically bike for exercise outside of work hours, so I know that I'm healthy enough to bike to work (its a shorter distance than my usual rides) and I know it would allow me to eliminate other exercise by combining my commute with exercise. However, I still don't like the option as I don't want to become the offensive smelly co-worker that everyone hates. (I do find the increased commute time and weather concerns put me off biking to work as well, but I think the need for a shower at work is the biggest problem I have at the moment.)
I had read the New Yorker article previously, and while it is clear to me that Ravi was not a good or innocent person, there is something that I see common in other posts that bothers me.
There was no stored video of any sexual encounter.
Ravi used iChat to activate a webcam on his computer remotely. He viewed the video stream with a female friend in a nearby dorm. He did not have any setup to capture the video for future use. This means there was no blackmail attempts (also mentioned in other posts). As mentioned in the New Yorker article, there was an attempt to organize a viewing party of some sort, but it was canceled. The images didn't make youtube or any other public venue at any point in time.
You want to condemn Ravi for spying or wiretapping violations, that makes sense. But the sheer misinformation I keep seeing posted here about videos and blackmail disturbs me.
I had the same thing happen to me on Sunday. I swear the only sites I had open were my college's e-courses page and Slashdot.
However, per the other reply, performing a system restore from safe mode was really fast as clearing out the problem. From there, found out the A/V software was no longer updating (fixed that), found my JRE was not updating (fixed that), and found Flash was out of date (probably not the cause, but also fixed that).
Even then, it seemed like I remember hearing a ton about the radiation that came from CRT monitors.
I just makes me think, these will become popular like CFLs. Then suddenly! "Oh no radiation danger!" And then it will be time for the next technology.
Business decided where to put the reactor
Uh, no.
Technical reasons decided where to put the reactor. Like all nuclear power plants, Fukushima needed a massive body of water to assist in cooling the plant. Japan isn't known for its huge rivers or lakes, so the coast becomes the default location to place power plants.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with some of your conclusions.
They were born into one of the most, if not the most, prosperous times in the history of humanity. The foundation of this prosperity was planted by their hard-working ancestors, and they grew up in it and eventually inherited it, so they can't actually take any credit for it.
They were lucky. Their immediate ancestors were the group of people who caused the Great Depression, still considered to be the worst economic collapse this country has ever experienced. The government was largely unsuccessful at fixing it until World War II rolled around and restarted our economy. Suddenly the manufacturing capacity was needed to supply ourselves and our allies with weapons.
In hindsight, this was the peak of middle-class America.
I'll agree with that, but point to WWII as the source again. Must of the rest of the industrialised world had been destroyed by war. Factories and production through out Europe and Japan had been destroyed to win the war. The US responded by rebuilding them, which involved selling our industrialised services to them. When you are the biggest or only source of an item or service, of course you will be doing well.
One such concept that they embraced was outsourcing/offshoring.
This to me is just the conclusion of the rebuild efforts. The US being the only source of high tech products was not a sustainable model. Other countries were sure to develop similar abilities. An example, you never hear much about non-American cars from the 50s. But with the 60s you start to hear more about European cars (like the VW bus so popular with the hippies you metioned) and with the 70s you start to see the sales of some of the now iconic Japanese cars (like the Honda Accord). Similarly during the 50s airliners were generally a US product from companies like Boeing, Lockheed, and Douglas. Once the 70s rolls around and you see the start of Airbus.
The Boomer's precious offshoring, outsourcing and "free trade" destroyed the American manufacturing sector in the 1980s and 1990s.
No, our economy would have declined even had none of those practices ever been employed. We had it good selling to the entire world after a major war. The rest of the world caught up, wanted their share of the pie, and were willing to do things cheaper than we were. We would have lost sales to the rest of the world either way.
So in conclusion, the Boomer's ancestors f-ed things up every bit as badly as we did (the Great Depression), WWII saved our economy and we were lucky there were no major strikes on the US mainland, and finally the world recovered and our position as the dominant producer became unsustainable.
The protestors should be arrested
Do you honestly think arresting people would have met with any smaller number of complaints to BART than turning off cell phone towers did? I can absolutely see headlines about the horrible BART police arresting innocent, peaceful protesters.
I think the protesters put the BART authorities in a no-win situation. Based on everything I have read and heard, the protesters were planning to be disruptive and attempting to coordinate in a way to avoid the police. Had BART done nothing, I think they would have been blamed for any bad that came out of the protests. Obviously, if the protesters did something bad and BART knew they were going to be there, BART should have done something to stop them. If the protests had somehow gotten out of hand (see London riots), BART likely would have been sued by anyone injured.
On the flip side, it seems to me that any action BART took would have reflected bad on them as well. Obviously shutting off the BART run cell towers was not well met. I don't think arrests would have worked out well either. What is left? Searching people as the enter BART? That hasn't gone well for the TSA a lot of the time. I can't really think of what other action BART could have taken to try to protect their other riders from any problems generated by the protests.
I think the only way this would have worked out well if is BART indicated they needed to not protest on the platforms and the protesters listened and agreed to protest outside the stations.
The G2 (Desire Z) is an amazing device. CM 7.0.2 running nicely here. One thing I really miss about my G1 is the keyboard...
The G2 has a keyboard. Its true the G2 keyboard is a 4 row instead of a 5 row like the G1, but its usable. However, ever since I replaced my G1 with a G2, I typically used the swype virtual keyboard instead of the physical one. Its possible to extract swype from the original ROM if you backed it up before flashing CM. That is what I did. Swype + CM 7.0.3 is nice.
This is local politics. Need to keep the money flowing into NASA to keep the constituency happy, regardless of your party affiliation. Plus NASA's budget vs. the entire budget is close to nothing. Just like that recent budget "cut" the republicans were bragging about was like less than 1% savings on the entire budget. I guess you could say the victory is that it didn't go up, but whatever. Still seems pretty crappy.
Exactly. NASA's budget has generally been less than 1% of the national budget for well over a decade. Even if you cut all of NASA, is wouldn't have equalled the number of billions claimed for the most recent budget cut. NASA's budget was never was truly huge either, peaking at 4.4% during the Apollo era. I think people have historically overestimated just how much money is currently spent on NASA, all things considered.
That being said, this is not what we need at the moment. When NASA achieved the moon landing, it was gulping down the budget at a significantly higher rate than now. The last thing we need is a new spending initiative when we are having so much trouble cutting the budget. Politicians will always have some pet project in their home district. That is no excuse for adding spending while everyone else is trying to cut the budget. As much as I have loved the space program in the past, I hope this gets shot down until the country can afford it.
They should be prosecuted over crap like this.
They will be. Sony got hit with tons of lawsuits, and they weren't using software that could steal your password. This just took corporate big brother behavior to a whole new level of invasive.
Even in locations with greater amount of competition the service doesn't get any better. In my location we can choose from AT&T, Comcast, Bright House (Time Warner), and Clear. Even with more choices the service doesn't get any better.
I had a similar experience with AT&T that eventually caused me to leave for Bright House. Their DSLAM suddenly decided it didn't like talking to my DSL modem, and it would just stop responding entirely. The first time it happened, a tech came out, checked my equipment and home wiring and declared them in working order. He then reset the DSLAM port and everything started working for a couple more weeks. Then it failed again. I spent over an hour on hold trying to tell them the problem was on their end. On the same day I got a bill from AT&T wanting $80 for the service visit even though the problem was on their side. I cancelled the next day.
So far Bright House has been fair, but they wanted absurdly low caps in their trials, so I'm not sure how long until they attempt that here, especially if AT&T pulls off their cap. Comcast is a total joke, and though Clear is still an option, their speeds are not going to be what I get now. I'm expecting a day in the future where all services have caps on them, just because these companies won't stop pushing for them.
UK uses 2100MHz for 3G data. 900 and 1800MHz are the GSM bands.
1800 MHz is UMTS Band III and 900MHZ is UMTS Band VIII, see UMTS Frequency Bands. While they are more commonly GSM bands, they can be used for UMTS (3G) data.
That being said, its my understanding that Band I (2100MHz) is far more widely deployed throughout the UK (and the rest of Europe). In the US ATT uses UMTS Bands II and V (1900 & 850), while T-Mobile uses UMTS Band IV (1700/2100). From what I can tell, most (if not all) T-Mobile phones sold in the US are actually Band I/IV phones, allowing them to run on 2100MHz networks in the UK and other locations in Europe. An ATT phone without Band I capabilities would likely have no 3G in large parts of the UK.
This is false. I own both a HTC G1 and a Samsung Vibrant which both have the US T-Mobile 3G frequencies and I had no problems using T-Mobile's prepaid 3G network in the UK. The only caveat is to make sure that the phones are unlocked so they will accept a UK SIM card.
That is the same I experienced with my G1, but I used a prepaid O2 sim. Most smartphones these days seem to be quad-band GSM, so 2G/EDGE should work anywhere in the world. While it is true that T-Mo uses 1700/2100 for UMTS in the US, most of their phones can support running 2100 only. I checked before I went in Dec. 2010 and found that nearly all the UK carriers use 2100 in some capacity. I was there for nearly three weeks and had 3G indicated while I was in more populated areas.
a near-ban on new construction (in the US at least, I'm not sure about Japan)
I don't think Japan has the same problems. In the wikipedia article on Fukushima I, it indicated that two new reactors are planned to come online in the next few years, both using more advanced designs. Since reactor 1 is now 40 years old and each of the planned reactors have a output three times the original, I wouldn't be surprised if reactor 1 wasn't taken offline for an extended "inspection" if they got new advanced design reactors 7 and 8 running.
It should also be noted that in the various reactors sites around Japan, they frequently seem to have only some of the reactors present operating, while the others are offline for inspections or upgrades. I think the Japanese authorities take safety seriously, and will decommission older units as newer and safer units are brought online.
Parents need to remind their children that the Internet isn't some special place unattached to reality. That glowing box connects you to real computers operated by real, physical people in real, ordinary places on the physical planet Earth. Actions taken on the internet have repercussions offline, and vice versa. Defamatory statements are not magically protected just because they appear on 'teh internets'. Disappointingly, it seems that certain Slashdot posters are also unaware of this reality.
Fully agreed. I think this is core to the problem at hand. Just deleting the comments won't fix anything either. The internet is self-archiving in many ways. Think carefully before posting. Don't do anything on the internet that you wouldn't do in the real world just because you can delete it later.
I also find it interesting that not a single quote in the actual article even has one of the kids saying "I'm sorry." They say they wish they hadn't done it or didn't want to hurt his reputation, but not that they are sorry about telling such horrible lies?
A 12 year old child does not have the same knowledge of right and wrong that a respectable adult has.
I would agree to that.
Most 12 year old's knowledge of right and wrong is essentially this: was I told to do this, or not.
Now I've stopped agreeing. I believe by age 12 most kids recognise what would best be described by "levels" of wrongness. If they take a cookie after Mom or Dad said no, maybe they miss dessert or have to go to bed early. If they lie about their grades maybe they don't get internet for a while or lose the allowance or similar. If they lie about the teacher doing criminal acts..... I think you get the point. They had to know if they got caught that the consequences were going to be more severe.
This is an opportunity to help the kids understand *why* something is right and wrong, because they just screwed up big time and you have the time to make a point that they will actually listen to. This is what it means to be an educator, whether you are a teacher or a parent.
Punishment is just a first step in helping a child learn from their mistakes. If that's where the guidance ends, one had better "hope" they don't do it again, because praying is the only chance there is. They'll just learn to not get caught.
And we are back to agreeing. Hopefully there are a lot of explanations occurring to indicate why this kind of act is so bad (lasting effect on career, potential incarceration of an innocent man, etc.). But I don't think that means to don't give a level of punishment appropriate to the crime. As I said before, they should recognise the levels of wrongness. If you let them off easy while saying its a really, really bad thing they did, it presents a mixed message because the punishment didn't fit the crime.
What is happening here is worse than all of that -- one student is being expelled, which is another way to say "it's not our problem." The rest are being threatened with expulsion or movement into a school for people with behavioral problems if they try to escalate the issue. This is not the way to help kids grow.
And having looked at the article again, its not the kid who said pedophile or the kid who said rapist getting expelled, its the kid who said bipolar. That may seem weird, but we don't have the school records. Maybe that kid getting expelled is a repeat offender who has received multiple warnings. Maybe he was on his last chance. We don't know. For us to make judgements on if the punishment was appropriate would probably require more information that the school can't legally give us about the background of the kids in question.
Also, my response to the original post was more trying to make the point that this was punishment, not bullying by the adults. It may very well be stronger punishment than it should, but it might not. I personally think the expulsion may be over the top as well, but I can't say for certain the child didn't deserve it in light of their past at the school that we don't know about.