Grazier didn't just make sure that there was a reason for what we saw - bullets instead of lasers - but also that when the science bit did break into the open, it was more mind-blowing than the writers could have conceived - such as when the humans discover their mechanical Cylon persecutors have evolved to look human.
Yes, that is one sentence.
But I don't think "evolved" is applicable in this situation.
There's never one around when you need to pull a wounded man out of the battlefield and then carry him to a field hospital.
Soldiers were doing that in WWI without the need for robot-suits.
Not to mention that the future of killing is drones. Giving troops their own robot-suits makes each soldier that much more expensive when the drone takes them out.
If your mission plan requires the troops to carry 200lbs of equipment themselves then whomever wrote that plan needs to be shot. That's what we have vehicles for.
Think the aliens scene where they use the lifters to load the dropship.
This is about funding something they saw in a sci-fi movie.
Yes, in the military you do spend a lot of time moving stuff from point A to point B. Which is why the military has so many machines that do that. Machines that do not have fragile humans as an integral part of them. Yes, it takes a bit more time to put the equipment on a pallet. But when something goes wrong, you don't have to send the forklift to the doctor to have its bones set. You can have the forklift back in operation in less than a day.
Sixty-one percent of Americans said the President should have the ability to shut down portions of the Internet in the event of a coordinated malicious cyber attack, according to research by Unisys.
And 39% think that during an "attack" the President should NOT be able to shut down the route used by the attackers.
I'm thinking that that 39% include the people who understand that "cyber attack" is a meaningless term and that no authority should be granted on the basis of a meaningless term.
Here, try this instead:
Sixty-one percent of Americans said the President should have the ability to shut down portions of FaceBook in the event of a coordinated malicious FaceBook attack, according to research by Unisys.
If it makes as much sense as the original then there is a problem.
You end up with a clusterfuck of email messages from people that can be unrelated to your specific task and multiple versions of documentation that you need to track down in 200 attachments. You need to communicate with that one vendor? Search through 5,000 emails to find his email address instead of looking through a contact list in the project management software. Email just does not make sense.
I prefer to use email to document who said what, when and how that got into the documentation.
Email isn't a substitute for a contact list. But it does show you who provided which names for the contact list. If someone sends you an additional name for the contact list, it should be placed on the contact list. It should NOT be left in email.
I'm sure it makes my face a dreaded on, but I am a huge fan of going to talk to people face to face because it gets my stuff done.
Exactly. My co-workers do the same thing. They want to interrupt what I'm working on (no matter how time sensitive or whatever) so that THEIR issues can be handled.
It's easier for them to do that than it is for them to plan their projects so that the resources needed are available at the time they're needed.
The last place I worked, I took Wednesdays off and worked on Sundays. I got my entire week of work done in 1 day with no interruptions.
On the other hand I see my co-workers more worried about their fantasy sports teams than whether they've tested the latest patches before deploying them.
Seriously.
The good people ARE over-worked and over-scheduled even when they correctly manage their time.
The not-so-good people are ALSO over-worked and over-scheduled because they chose different priorities.
But how do you distinguish between the two groups from the outside? I mean, other than "which people call on which people when their projects explode".
Something tells me that Kennedy is the only Justice who didn't realize the loopholes existed.
Who cares whether loopholes exist or not? You do NOT make laws that depend upon OTHER laws to be complete.
If you believe that existing law X will handle the "loopholes" in new law Y that is no reason to support Y. Because you cannot depend upon X always being ruled as "Constitutional" or even enforced or not contradicted by new law Z.
But if you could poll people individually, what citizens of a 3rd world nation wouldn't want to be an American, or Europian for that matter. Oh hell, the influx in immigration is proof alone.
While the average citizen WOULD jump at the opportunity to move to Europe or the USofA... that does NOT mean that the average citizen would NOT fight against the USofA should the USofA invade his country.
It's a simple difference between friendly and hostile.
The cost of computing should come down, he reasoned, thanks to improving processing speeds and storage capacities. New, more powerful development tools and frameworks should also ease the cost of deployment. Yet IT expenditures continue to go up by about 3 percent to 5 percent a year.
That's because as it because possible to do more in X hours... more is demanded by management.
As more space becomes available, more data is stored. Older data is not discarded.
But the patent office would have to require a WORKING prototype of whatever you're trying to patent.
The biggest problem is that the patent office will now accept patent applications for items that do not exist. This allows companies to block other inventors by having a patent filed prior to the inventor inventing the invention.
Seriously, if you think your people are good enough to write a SECURE operating system from the ground up, then shouldn't they be good enough to take existing code and determine whether that is secure enough for them?
Even Linux for that matter. The NSA has already done some of the work with SE Linux.
In addition to tech, I'd advise teaching 2-3 languages, or anything else that is high volume, low density (ie: builds up lots of neurons but doesn't require a hell of a lot of connections between them), as the ages 11-18 especially is when the brain's growth is at a maximum.
But they have to be different language groups. Learning English and German is good... but not as good as learning English and Japanese. Because English and Japanese are less alike than English and German and, therefore, do not re-use the same connections.
That's not really a problem with the concept of homeschooling, or schooling in general. Just people who don't listen or have no desire to learn.
And who then pass that limitation onto their children. Which is why we need public schools. So that the children at least have access to the information that their parents did not learn or rejected.
PARTICULARLY if those subjects are considered "useless" by the parents.
Which is where school differs from vocational training.
How often are you going to see the problem already reduced to 3*27 without the solution being included?
Only in textbooks.
In the real world, you need to have a decent understanding of math in order to understand how to phrase the problem in the correct way.
If you have 4 apples and 3 oranges and you give someone 1 apple, how many apples do you have? You'd be amazed at how many people would read that and say 6.
Without the ability to handle the "easy" stuff in your head, you cannot move to the more abstract issues found in the real world. You will not be able to recognize extraneous information and remove it from the equation.
No, I view a school as a place that is supposed to grant you the resources (as well as a helpful mentor) needed to receive an education that will relate to your desired profession.
So how is that different from vocational training?
So can homeschooling. In fact, the basics are likely the easiest to teach due to them being so well known.
You might want to reconsider that in light of how badly the average person does on basic science knowledge. For example, evolution.
That way you'll waste less time on idiotic policies, have no chance of failing an entire year simply because you failed a single useless class that has nothing to do with your desired profession, have more choice, and be able to solve problems mostly on your own.
That's good if you view school as a vocational training site.
Homeschooling is good. But mostly in the sense of getting parents involved in their children's school work. Most of the parents turn the job over to the teachers.
In my view, school teaches you the basics. Your parents help with that teaching (and include their own moral / religious views on it) and THEN you work on vocational training.
And the basics include the ability to do basic math. Even if you need a pencil and paper to do it. Calculators give answers. They don't tell you if you've phrased the problem correctly.
Gotta agree. We didn't have word processors when I went to school. The best I had was a manual typewriter.
Having a word processor would have resulted in me getting my papers done sooner... but not better.
Now, finishing them faster would have been a better thing for me personally. But it would not have improved my education at all. What helped my education was my desire to read everything I could find.
Which is why I still prefer books today. A book can survive a lot more than a laptop or Kindle can.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, that is one sentence.
But I don't think "evolved" is applicable in this situation.
Soldiers were doing that in WWI without the need for robot-suits.
Not to mention that the future of killing is drones.
Giving troops their own robot-suits makes each soldier that much more expensive when the drone takes them out.
If your mission plan requires the troops to carry 200lbs of equipment themselves then whomever wrote that plan needs to be shot.
That's what we have vehicles for.
This is about funding something they saw in a sci-fi movie.
Yes, in the military you do spend a lot of time moving stuff from point A to point B.
Which is why the military has so many machines that do that. Machines that do not have fragile humans as an integral part of them.
Yes, it takes a bit more time to put the equipment on a pallet. But when something goes wrong, you don't have to send the forklift to the doctor to have its bones set. You can have the forklift back in operation in less than a day.
There are lots of models out there being developed for consumers with physical issues.
I'd rather see the government putting some money into those than trying to build something they saw on some crap Sci-Fi movie.
Yeah, I've seen the sci-fi movies. But this just seems stupid to me. It doesn't appear to be flexible. And flexible is what you need in combat.
... walking into someone by accident WHEN YOU ARE FOUR.
Remember, this is an age group that still pees or poops itself when out playing.
And 39% think that during an "attack" the President should NOT be able to shut down the route used by the attackers.
I'm thinking that that 39% include the people who understand that "cyber attack" is a meaningless term and that no authority should be granted on the basis of a meaningless term.
Here, try this instead:
If it makes as much sense as the original then there is a problem.
I prefer to use email to document who said what, when and how that got into the documentation.
Email isn't a substitute for a contact list.
But it does show you who provided which names for the contact list.
If someone sends you an additional name for the contact list, it should be placed on the contact list. It should NOT be left in email.
Exactly. My co-workers do the same thing. They want to interrupt what I'm working on (no matter how time sensitive or whatever) so that THEIR issues can be handled.
It's easier for them to do that than it is for them to plan their projects so that the resources needed are available at the time they're needed.
The last place I worked, I took Wednesdays off and worked on Sundays. I got my entire week of work done in 1 day with no interruptions.
On the other hand I see my co-workers more worried about their fantasy sports teams than whether they've tested the latest patches before deploying them.
Seriously.
The good people ARE over-worked and over-scheduled even when they correctly manage their time.
The not-so-good people are ALSO over-worked and over-scheduled because they chose different priorities.
But how do you distinguish between the two groups from the outside? I mean, other than "which people call on which people when their projects explode".
Who cares whether loopholes exist or not? You do NOT make laws that depend upon OTHER laws to be complete.
If you believe that existing law X will handle the "loopholes" in new law Y that is no reason to support Y.
Because you cannot depend upon X always being ruled as "Constitutional" or even enforced or not contradicted by new law Z.
This goes beyond "naive".
While the average citizen WOULD jump at the opportunity to move to Europe or the USofA ... that does NOT mean that the average citizen would NOT fight against the USofA should the USofA invade his country.
It's a simple difference between friendly and hostile.
But from his original statement:
That's because as it because possible to do more in X hours ... more is demanded by management.
As more space becomes available, more data is stored. Older data is not discarded.
Evil person gives sacred information to our enemies. Holy troops threatened! Tune in at 11.
vs
Some guy posts some stuff and people don't die.
Which do you think will get more eyes and sell more ads?
People wouldn't change their behaviour even if X was different. They're just using X as an easy rationalisation for their existing bias.
But the patent office would have to require a WORKING prototype of whatever you're trying to patent.
The biggest problem is that the patent office will now accept patent applications for items that do not exist. This allows companies to block other inventors by having a patent filed prior to the inventor inventing the invention.
Yeah, it isn't shocking. Mostly because I'm beyond being shocked by anything those idiots do.
If it's physical, they can understand it. They put gas in their cars. They take the cars in to have the oil changed. And so forth.
But software can't be touched. A server running the latest patches looks the same as a server without them.
Unless there is a problem in the software that they are experiencing, they don't understand it.
We run a lot of HP servers.
HP publishes firmware / software updates.
I'm the only person in the department that applies them to any of the servers.
"If it's not broken, why fix it?"
Seriously, if you think your people are good enough to write a SECURE operating system from the ground up, then shouldn't they be good enough to take existing code and determine whether that is secure enough for them?
Even Linux for that matter. The NSA has already done some of the work with SE Linux.
But they have to be different language groups. Learning English and German is good ... but not as good as learning English and Japanese. Because English and Japanese are less alike than English and German and, therefore, do not re-use the same connections.
I don't understand that reply.
And who then pass that limitation onto their children. Which is why we need public schools. So that the children at least have access to the information that their parents did not learn or rejected.
PARTICULARLY if those subjects are considered "useless" by the parents.
Which is where school differs from vocational training.
How often are you going to see the problem already reduced to 3*27 without the solution being included?
Only in textbooks.
In the real world, you need to have a decent understanding of math in order to understand how to phrase the problem in the correct way.
If you have 4 apples and 3 oranges and you give someone 1 apple, how many apples do you have?
You'd be amazed at how many people would read that and say 6.
Without the ability to handle the "easy" stuff in your head, you cannot move to the more abstract issues found in the real world. You will not be able to recognize extraneous information and remove it from the equation.
That is why you learn to do 3*27 in your head.
So how is that different from vocational training?
You might want to reconsider that in light of how badly the average person does on basic science knowledge. For example, evolution.
That's good if you view school as a vocational training site.
Homeschooling is good. But mostly in the sense of getting parents involved in their children's school work. Most of the parents turn the job over to the teachers.
In my view, school teaches you the basics. Your parents help with that teaching (and include their own moral / religious views on it) and THEN you work on vocational training.
And the basics include the ability to do basic math. Even if you need a pencil and paper to do it. Calculators give answers. They don't tell you if you've phrased the problem correctly.
Gotta agree. We didn't have word processors when I went to school. The best I had was a manual typewriter.
Having a word processor would have resulted in me getting my papers done sooner ... but not better.
Now, finishing them faster would have been a better thing for me personally. But it would not have improved my education at all. What helped my education was my desire to read everything I could find.
Which is why I still prefer books today. A book can survive a lot more than a laptop or Kindle can.