Seconded, regarding the Livescribe. A friend of mine had one of these. It worked very well, and he could make "electronic" notes and drawings faster than anyone else in a meeting. I've been thinking of getting one myself.
Yeah, I think he did intentionally make it look like a possible bomb. He probably thought is looked cool. I think the prank went further than he wanted/expected, and then he did the best thing he could: he denied it. If he had confessed, then he would have been charged with "making terroristic threats" or "terroristic activity". That would be an open opportunity to throw him in prison, put him and his family on a watch list, etc. Screw that.
But his actions sure don't merit a free ride anywhere.
1. They come after you
2. You claim that the government did it.
3. They say "you have no evidence that we did it, and we won't disclose any actions we may or may not have taken because of national security. By the way, anything that you think is evidence is now classified.
4. You lose.
This is analogous to those situations in which someone sues the government for running an illegal dragnet, and they counter by saying you have no standing because you don't know that you were actually involved. P.S. the records are classified.
I don't have a problem with it at all. I was just wondering what the locals thought. It's a name with powerful imagery, so I assume that there would be either great acceptance or great opposition.
they are to the point they are totally automating the cranes, and the Rail Mounted Gantries (RMG) and Rubber Tired Gantries (RTGs) in the port, with humans JUST acting as safety overrides.
Yeah. I used to be in the Bay Area, but not anymore. I recently got a call from a Google recruiter.
Recruiter: "I'd like to talk with you about a role at Google."
Me: "Is this for a job in the Bay Area?"
Recruiter: "Yes, it is."
Me: "Thanks for your interest, buy Google won't pay me enough to be able to afford to live there, like I can live in XXXX."
This. Rail transport is incredibly efficient, compared to trucks or planes. One of the rail companies has a radio ad that touts something like "one gallon of fuel to move a ton 300 miles". Yet, often goods get thrown onto trucks for long-haul transport.
I get that it is logistically more difficult to put something on to a train, but damn, they're efficient.
New York State passed a bill in June 2014 to prohibit people from having their photo taken (or taking it themselves) while "hugging, patting or otherwise touching tigers."
In related news, the government of India passed a law to prohibit people from having their photo taken (or taking it themselves) while "hugging, patting or otherwise touching the Statue of Liberty."
And those tips from that Enterpriseprojects.com article? Empty buzzwords.
This. A thousand times, this.
I thought I was having a brain aneurism when I read "move at the speed of trust". What is that? Some kind of lame-o version of Green Lantern's power?
Then they pulled out the horrid "DevOps" cliche'. In reality those guys transitioned from a 40-year-old mainframe and software to something more modern. What's that you say? Your version control, integration, builds, and automated testing got faster? What a surprise!
That sounds like a "situation", but not necessarily a "problem". Yet, U.S. unemployment is generally rising. I can think of two possible causes. (1) Production efficiency in the U.S. is still outstripping the population, and (2) jobs are being sent out of the U.S. because labor is cheaper elsewhere in places where population continues to rise.
"If a factory installs hundreds of robots and now no longer needs to hire people, there needs to be a way to redistribute some of those savings..."
In order to touch those savings, the savings would need to be taxed out of the company that owns the factory. We can't even accomplish that now. Companies just "pass the value to their shareholders", or make their executives into hundred-millionaires.
I hate to say it, but it would seem to be more sensible to encourage FEWER PEOPLE to be made. (No, I did not say "eliminate or kill people". I said "make fewer people" going forward.) The root problem is that the ratio of jobs/people is declining. "Basic Income" is like "calling 'existence' a job", i.e. creating more "jobs". This ratio would also be improved by having "fewer people".
Yes, and also there is a point of diminishing returns, even if her goal was to just "fight the good fight", or something. She lost in court, and it often makes less and less sense to continue as the losses pile up.
On a side question: what support would she deserve, if the case is without merit? You gave a good explanation of why "government" support is now excluded. What other support do you mean?
"This doesn't mean that she didn't felt discriminated, and should be denied all support."
If it's without merit, then it's without merit, right?
Slashdot Mirror
alispguru did not say that they would not be able to get a warrant. Only that they would need one, as per legal process.
In what country was it confiscated, if you don't mind saying?
Seconded, regarding the Livescribe. A friend of mine had one of these. It worked very well, and he could make "electronic" notes and drawings faster than anyone else in a meeting. I've been thinking of getting one myself.
Use vim to write a markdown document. Markdown is WYSIWYG-ish.
Use pandoc to convert it to almost any other popular format.
What the heck is a "tender"?
Yeah, I think he did intentionally make it look like a possible bomb. He probably thought is looked cool. I think the prank went further than he wanted/expected, and then he did the best thing he could: he denied it. If he had confessed, then he would have been charged with "making terroristic threats" or "terroristic activity". That would be an open opportunity to throw him in prison, put him and his family on a watch list, etc. Screw that.
But his actions sure don't merit a free ride anywhere.
Here's how that would work out:
1. They come after you
2. You claim that the government did it.
3. They say "you have no evidence that we did it, and we won't disclose any actions we may or may not have taken because of national security. By the way, anything that you think is evidence is now classified.
4. You lose.
This is analogous to those situations in which someone sues the government for running an illegal dragnet, and they counter by saying you have no standing because you don't know that you were actually involved. P.S. the records are classified.
IANAL.
Don't you ever say Hello? -- Eliza
I don't have a problem with it at all. I was just wondering what the locals thought. It's a name with powerful imagery, so I assume that there would be either great acceptance or great opposition.
Thanks for the insights.
"The Viking Squad"? Okay. What do your countrypeople generally think of that name?
Thank goodness the guys in the U.S. did not go for a catchy name, or we'd probably have "Team America, World Police".
That's an interesting juxtaposition with the movie "On The Waterfront" .
Yeah. I used to be in the Bay Area, but not anymore. I recently got a call from a Google recruiter.
Recruiter: "I'd like to talk with you about a role at Google."
Me: "Is this for a job in the Bay Area?"
Recruiter: "Yes, it is."
Me: "Thanks for your interest, buy Google won't pay me enough to be able to afford to live there, like I can live in XXXX."
Maybe the government will step in, just to keep us all in one spot - too dangerous to let out of slashdot.
FTFY.
That's cogent and insightful. Why'd you post anonymously?
This. Rail transport is incredibly efficient, compared to trucks or planes. One of the rail companies has a radio ad that touts something like "one gallon of fuel to move a ton 300 miles". Yet, often goods get thrown onto trucks for long-haul transport.
I get that it is logistically more difficult to put something on to a train, but damn, they're efficient.
I'd mod you up, if I had any more points.
Heck, they even removed features from the vanilla game at launch-time. They have over-promised and under-delivered since day 1.
It's lighter.
In related news, the government of India passed a law to prohibit people from having their photo taken (or taking it themselves) while "hugging, patting or otherwise touching the Statue of Liberty."
This. A thousand times, this.
I thought I was having a brain aneurism when I read "move at the speed of trust". What is that? Some kind of lame-o version of Green Lantern's power?
Then they pulled out the horrid "DevOps" cliche'. In reality those guys transitioned from a 40-year-old mainframe and software to something more modern. What's that you say? Your version control, integration, builds, and automated testing got faster? What a surprise!
That sounds like a "situation", but not necessarily a "problem". Yet, U.S. unemployment is generally rising. I can think of two possible causes. (1) Production efficiency in the U.S. is still outstripping the population, and (2) jobs are being sent out of the U.S. because labor is cheaper elsewhere in places where population continues to rise.
The population problem is global.
"If a factory installs hundreds of robots and now no longer needs to hire people, there needs to be a way to redistribute some of those savings..."
In order to touch those savings, the savings would need to be taxed out of the company that owns the factory. We can't even accomplish that now. Companies just "pass the value to their shareholders", or make their executives into hundred-millionaires.
I hate to say it, but it would seem to be more sensible to encourage FEWER PEOPLE to be made. (No, I did not say "eliminate or kill people". I said "make fewer people" going forward.) The root problem is that the ratio of jobs/people is declining. "Basic Income" is like "calling 'existence' a job", i.e. creating more "jobs". This ratio would also be improved by having "fewer people".
No, I don't know how to achieve that either.
Exactly.
Yes, and also there is a point of diminishing returns, even if her goal was to just "fight the good fight", or something. She lost in court, and it often makes less and less sense to continue as the losses pile up.
On a side question: what support would she deserve, if the case is without merit? You gave a good explanation of why "government" support is now excluded. What other support do you mean?
"This doesn't mean that she didn't felt discriminated, and should be denied all support."
If it's without merit, then it's without merit, right?
AC wrote this (with my emphasis added):
"Surely if she wants to actively fight gender discrimination she should push it as long as she can."
I'm tempted to agree, and to conclude that it was not really her goal to actively fight gender discrimination.