"I eat meat all day long, but I pay someone else to eat only vegetables too, so that's alright, isn't it?"
The analogy doesn't fit here. The electrical wires carry both renewable energy and non-renewable energy. You can't filter out renewable energy just for you. Instead you buy renewable energy to be added to the grid.
Mod parent up. I was going to post something similar.
Wasn't there an article yesterday saying that the battery problems with the G7 Note largely due to it being too thin? Which, given the circumstances seems to be a fairly strong thesis for the trouble. So why try to go thinner?
Samsung's problem was with the Galaxy Note 7 not the S7. (TFA is about the S8.) And the problem was not that the Note 7 was too thin, but that it was too thin for the battery. They should have provided about 0.5 mm room for expansion. They didn't, and as a result, the battery was squeezed when it expanded, and parts of its internals touched that were not supposed to. And kaboom.
I get there's a lead time on design and engineering and that it's quite likely this particular design has been in the works before the Note 7 was even out the door. But it seems like poor management to not backup and start over just to be certain the same design flaws don't happen again. Starting by not having thinness as a goal.
Given the disastrous blowback from the Note 7, I doubt they'll let anything in the 8th generation leave the factory until it's ready.
Disclosure: I own an S5. It does get warm if I'm charging it in my car with Google Maps running and it's in sunlight. But otherwise it has been trouble-free as far as heat is concerned.
That's funny, because we said the same things about Obama in regards to being a community organizer, and we were all called racists for it.
If that happened, then perhaps it's because his résumé is much longer than just "community organizer." That's what he did before he got his degree from Harvard Law School. After that he worked as a civil rights attorney, taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, served in the Illinois State Senate and the US Senate, and then became the 44th POTUS.
But in spite of that, you still want to call him a "community organizer?" That may not be racist but it certainly is disingenuous.
Either way, it does not speak well of the Trump transition team. I see this morning Trump nominated a medical doctor who thinks dietary supplements can cure cancer, AIDS and multiple sclerosis to be the next Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
Well at least he's not going to be Surgeon General.
In all seriousness, I think that Ben Carson is an intelligent and accomplished man. And that's why I'm bewildered at the stuff he has said in public since he started his run for the Republican nomination last year.
If AI makes people obsolete, who will those companies peddle their wares to, and obtain income from? The Martians?
Let's be optimistic for a second. If robots and AI take over more and more of the jobs that humans used to do, then the products those jobs produce will decrease in price. Perhaps they'll decrease to the point where they cost little or nothing. And then we may be in a Star Trek TNG society where money doesn't exist, because duh, nobody needs to buy anything.
I admit the above may be unlikely. But for discussion, consider it as a possibility.
Bad luck if you're watching a film that has a sand storm or fog in it. The banding artifacts caused by compression make those scenes nearly unwatchable
This. I'm not sure whether it's the fault of Netflix or the ISP (throttle much?) but any scene that has a background with a smooth gradient of intensity or color shows those banding artifacts. It's incredibly distracting and annoying.
As for FORTRAN, all the fortran developers I know are generally slobs. They'd never touch these books.
Former FORTRAN programmer here. I hope I am a living example of how it is possible to enlighten FORTRAN programmers... by teaching them to program in some other language. Almost any post-FORTRAN language can help, but those in the C-family are an excellent starting-point.
The most important criterion for choosing a language to solve a problem is its expressive power in the problem-domain. When you show a FORTRAN programmer just how much easier their problem can be to solve in another language, you're on the path to converting them.
That said, FORTRAN has grudgingly evolved over the decades. But it has always been behind other languages.
You gotta hand it to the guy for negotiating for the rights to the software. He kinda was *TRYING* to do the right thing by making sure he had the proper rights to the software (presumably before he sold it himself). A more unscrupulous man might just have stolen the software and used it to start his own business without any notification at all.
There is no way to parse what he did as the "right thing." He stole from his former employer and sabotaged their system. And then tried to extort them for the rights to his software.
He should have been a professional and just walked away. Or at least he should have talked to a lawyer about his claim to the software he wrote. Although most likely his employment agreement considered it a "work for hire" so he had no claim.
What is your carbon footprint? Is that the carbon that you actually contain, or is that the carbon you require to live? Or, is that the carbon you choose to alter because you like a nicer quality of life than what it minimally required to live?
It's the third one, sort of. Your "carbon footprint" is the amount of carbon compounds per unit time that your existence puts into the air. That include everything associated with your existence. Not just the carbon in you and what you exhale, excrete, etc., but also the amount of carbon put into the air: to make the electricity you use; to drive your car; to make the food you eat, the clothes you wear, the house you live in; and so on.
The OP's question on the carbon footprint of the enzymes was analogous: what's the entire carbon budget associated with manufacturing, transporting, distributing, and maintaining a solution based on this technology? The ideal case, as TFS mentions, is to incorporate the enzyme into a living organism that can take care of several of the above steps. Whether this technology turns out to be carbon-negative will be answered in due course.
That is the only problem with running Linux on Dell hardware: you need to use their preferred OS (Ubuntu 14.04) and no other version. You also need to install their proprietary drivers or nothing on machine works. Instead of, you know, contributing their drivers upstream so you could install a newer OS version...
For what it's worth, Dell didn't install Ubuntu 14.04 for me. I did it myself. So, there are no proprietary drivers on my system, as far as I know.
I'm typing this right now on a Dell laptop with Ubuntu 14.04 installed. I have never encountered a problem connecting to WiFi that was due to the software.
Maybe a bit off topic, but you used the word "misogynistic," which means "hatred of women."
Appreciation of beauty is not hatred. Lust is not hatred. Thinking of women as sexual beings is not hatred. The word "misogynist" is thrown around by feminists and social justice warriors in abundance, and they are all using it wrong.
It is true, there are men in the world that hate women, but it is not at all reasonable to lump in with them men who like looking at women naked (which is to say, all straight men).
The OP's point was about "how misogynistic web development environments are for women" -- not how pictures of beautiful women in magazines is purportedly misogynistic.
If I may risk presenting the feminists' argument, I think it is that porn is not necessarily misogynistic, but that it has the potential to foster a devaluation of women into a role of objects of sexual gratification. And that can encourage misogynistic thinking. Any feminists who are following this thread are welcome to correct me.
ejaculating into someone's face (male or female) is kinda hard to frame as an act of respect... I mean, maybe for some people it is, but that's not generally why they do it in porn.
Agreed, it doesn't seem like an act of respect on the giver's part.
But I think it's an act of supplication, on the recipient's part. Which I suppose can be arousing in a sexual context between consensual partners.
I don't need anyone protecting me from photographs.
So, if someone secretly photographs you masturbating and posts it online, you're fine with that?
I don't need anyone protecting me from mean tweets.
But someone else may need protection from your mean tweets, and those of others. Cyberbullying has driven many people to suicide.
I don't need anyone protecting my feelings.
I don't think it's possible to protect anyone's feelings anyway. Not in the sense we're discussing here.
Everyone needs protection from superior firepower
The internet is one of the most potent kinds of 'firepower' we have ever seen. It can let someone inflict asymmetric and widespread harm to another's reputation from a device they can hold in their hand. It can be used to inspire people to commit terrible acts. And of course, it has brought many great things that I see no reason to give up. My point is that there are other kinds of 'firepower' besides the ones you mean.
I, for one, simply enjoy [watching SJWs] froth about human traits. They've been trying to shame us all into suppressing them for too long.
There are plenty of human traits that we suppress with laws. Traits like violence (which can cause injury or death), negligence (see violence), avarice (which can cause theft), and so on.
There are other human traits whose consequences do not rise to the level required to suppress with laws, but they are discouraged through social mores and codes of conduct. Traits like impatience (which causes people to butt into lines or disrupt public gatherings), gratification (which leads to people doing things that disturb others in their presence, like farting or smoking), and so on.
And there are other human traits that may be offensive to some, but we agree collectively to tolerate nonetheless. Traits like self-validation (which can lead to a talker trapping you in a conversation), or stubbornness (which limits what you can accomplish in a relationship with someone.)
Whether we decide to suppress, discourage, or tolerate a particular human trait comes down to what extent the exercise of that trait can cause harm to others.
The Feminist message is that women need to be protected.
I've got news for you: Each of us needs to be protected from something. And it's too difficult for each of us to take all of that responsibility to protect ourselves individually. That's why we live together in societies. make rules, and empower others to enforce them.
Slashdot Mirror
So, am I about to reach 100% veganism if:
"I eat meat all day long, but I pay someone else to eat only vegetables too, so that's alright, isn't it?"
The analogy doesn't fit here. The electrical wires carry both renewable energy and non-renewable energy. You can't filter out renewable energy just for you. Instead you buy renewable energy to be added to the grid.
Mod parent up. I was going to post something similar.
Wasn't there an article yesterday saying that the battery problems with the G7 Note largely due to it being too thin? Which, given the circumstances seems to be a fairly strong thesis for the trouble. So why try to go thinner?
Samsung's problem was with the Galaxy Note 7 not the S7. (TFA is about the S8.) And the problem was not that the Note 7 was too thin, but that it was too thin for the battery. They should have provided about 0.5 mm room for expansion. They didn't, and as a result, the battery was squeezed when it expanded, and parts of its internals touched that were not supposed to. And kaboom.
I get there's a lead time on design and engineering and that it's quite likely this particular design has been in the works before the Note 7 was even out the door. But it seems like poor management to not backup and start over just to be certain the same design flaws don't happen again. Starting by not having thinness as a goal.
Given the disastrous blowback from the Note 7, I doubt they'll let anything in the 8th generation leave the factory until it's ready.
Disclosure: I own an S5. It does get warm if I'm charging it in my car with Google Maps running and it's in sunlight. But otherwise it has been trouble-free as far as heat is concerned.
Obviously it's people with small hands!
/ I didn't say any names...
With a username like Oswald McWeany, you don't have to.
Guess who's not buying an S8?
The burn victims?
I wouldn't blame them for lacking the, uh, courage.
None the less, solar power is cheaper than oil by far, by coal a little, and nearly on par with natural gas. It will pass gas in the next few years.
And thereby provide yet another source of energy.
Whatever it is, he certainly put an end to using brain surgeon as a synonym for really smart.
I wonder when a former rocket scientist will run for president.
Obligatory sketch from That Mitchell and Webb Look.
That's funny, because we said the same things about Obama in regards to being a community organizer, and we were all called racists for it.
If that happened, then perhaps it's because his résumé is much longer than just "community organizer." That's what he did before he got his degree from Harvard Law School. After that he worked as a civil rights attorney, taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago, served in the Illinois State Senate and the US Senate, and then became the 44th POTUS.
But in spite of that, you still want to call him a "community organizer?" That may not be racist but it certainly is disingenuous.
Either way, it does not speak well of the Trump transition team. I see this morning Trump nominated a medical doctor who thinks dietary supplements can cure cancer, AIDS and multiple sclerosis to be the next Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
Well at least he's not going to be Surgeon General.
In all seriousness, I think that Ben Carson is an intelligent and accomplished man. And that's why I'm bewildered at the stuff he has said in public since he started his run for the Republican nomination last year.
If AI makes people obsolete, who will those companies peddle their wares to, and obtain income from? The Martians?
Let's be optimistic for a second. If robots and AI take over more and more of the jobs that humans used to do, then the products those jobs produce will decrease in price. Perhaps they'll decrease to the point where they cost little or nothing. And then we may be in a Star Trek TNG society where money doesn't exist, because duh, nobody needs to buy anything.
I admit the above may be unlikely. But for discussion, consider it as a possibility.
Electric cars are magic and don't have moving parts that need to be lubricated?
The point is that they don't have oil pans. So, no oil changes.
Bad luck if you're watching a film that has a sand storm or fog in it. The banding artifacts caused by compression make those scenes nearly unwatchable
This. I'm not sure whether it's the fault of Netflix or the ISP (throttle much?) but any scene that has a background with a smooth gradient of intensity or color shows those banding artifacts. It's incredibly distracting and annoying.
As for FORTRAN, all the fortran developers I know are generally slobs. They'd never touch these books.
Former FORTRAN programmer here. I hope I am a living example of how it is possible to enlighten FORTRAN programmers ... by teaching them to program in some other language. Almost any post-FORTRAN language can help, but those in the C-family are an excellent starting-point.
The most important criterion for choosing a language to solve a problem is its expressive power in the problem-domain. When you show a FORTRAN programmer just how much easier their problem can be to solve in another language, you're on the path to converting them.
That said, FORTRAN has grudgingly evolved over the decades. But it has always been behind other languages.
It can be assumed that if the username/password works access is authorized
Authorized by the computer system, yes. But not authorized by the employer.
You gotta hand it to the guy for negotiating for the rights to the software. He kinda was *TRYING* to do the right thing by making sure he had the proper rights to the software (presumably before he sold it himself). A more unscrupulous man might just have stolen the software and used it to start his own business without any notification at all.
There is no way to parse what he did as the "right thing." He stole from his former employer and sabotaged their system. And then tried to extort them for the rights to his software.
He should have been a professional and just walked away. Or at least he should have talked to a lawyer about his claim to the software he wrote. Although most likely his employment agreement considered it a "work for hire" so he had no claim.
What is your carbon footprint? Is that the carbon that you actually contain, or is that the carbon you require to live? Or, is that the carbon you choose to alter because you like a nicer quality of life than what it minimally required to live?
It's the third one, sort of. Your "carbon footprint" is the amount of carbon compounds per unit time that your existence puts into the air. That include everything associated with your existence. Not just the carbon in you and what you exhale, excrete, etc., but also the amount of carbon put into the air: to make the electricity you use; to drive your car; to make the food you eat, the clothes you wear, the house you live in; and so on.
The OP's question on the carbon footprint of the enzymes was analogous: what's the entire carbon budget associated with manufacturing, transporting, distributing, and maintaining a solution based on this technology? The ideal case, as TFS mentions, is to incorporate the enzyme into a living organism that can take care of several of the above steps. Whether this technology turns out to be carbon-negative will be answered in due course.
Well, I for one welcome the glycophosphate resistant weeds we created from Roundup ready crops overlords.
FTFY
That is the only problem with running Linux on Dell hardware: you need to use their preferred OS (Ubuntu 14.04) and no other version. You also need to install their proprietary drivers or nothing on machine works. Instead of, you know, contributing their drivers upstream so you could install a newer OS version...
For what it's worth, Dell didn't install Ubuntu 14.04 for me. I did it myself. So, there are no proprietary drivers on my system, as far as I know.
BTW, my machine is a Latitude E6430.
No, I haven't moved to 16.04 yet, mostly to stay consistent with installs on other machines in my dojo.
It's a Latitude E6430, if you're wondering.
I'm typing this right now on a Dell laptop with Ubuntu 14.04 installed. I have never encountered a problem connecting to WiFi that was due to the software.
Maybe a bit off topic, but you used the word "misogynistic," which means "hatred of women."
Appreciation of beauty is not hatred. Lust is not hatred. Thinking of women as sexual beings is not hatred. The word "misogynist" is thrown around by feminists and social justice warriors in abundance, and they are all using it wrong.
It is true, there are men in the world that hate women, but it is not at all reasonable to lump in with them men who like looking at women naked (which is to say, all straight men).
The OP's point was about "how misogynistic web development environments are for women" -- not how pictures of beautiful women in magazines is purportedly misogynistic.
If I may risk presenting the feminists' argument, I think it is that porn is not necessarily misogynistic, but that it has the potential to foster a devaluation of women into a role of objects of sexual gratification. And that can encourage misogynistic thinking. Any feminists who are following this thread are welcome to correct me.
ejaculating into someone's face (male or female) is kinda hard to frame as an act of respect... I mean, maybe for some people it is, but that's not generally why they do it in porn.
Agreed, it doesn't seem like an act of respect on the giver's part.
But I think it's an act of supplication, on the recipient's part. Which I suppose can be arousing in a sexual context between consensual partners.
I don't need anyone protecting me from photographs.
So, if someone secretly photographs you masturbating and posts it online, you're fine with that?
I don't need anyone protecting me from mean tweets.
But someone else may need protection from your mean tweets, and those of others. Cyberbullying has driven many people to suicide.
I don't need anyone protecting my feelings.
I don't think it's possible to protect anyone's feelings anyway. Not in the sense we're discussing here.
Everyone needs protection from superior firepower
The internet is one of the most potent kinds of 'firepower' we have ever seen. It can let someone inflict asymmetric and widespread harm to another's reputation from a device they can hold in their hand. It can be used to inspire people to commit terrible acts. And of course, it has brought many great things that I see no reason to give up. My point is that there are other kinds of 'firepower' besides the ones you mean.
I, for one, simply enjoy [watching SJWs] froth about human traits. They've been trying to shame us all into suppressing them for too long.
There are plenty of human traits that we suppress with laws. Traits like violence (which can cause injury or death), negligence (see violence), avarice (which can cause theft), and so on.
There are other human traits whose consequences do not rise to the level required to suppress with laws, but they are discouraged through social mores and codes of conduct. Traits like impatience (which causes people to butt into lines or disrupt public gatherings), gratification (which leads to people doing things that disturb others in their presence, like farting or smoking), and so on.
And there are other human traits that may be offensive to some, but we agree collectively to tolerate nonetheless. Traits like self-validation (which can lead to a talker trapping you in a conversation), or stubbornness (which limits what you can accomplish in a relationship with someone.)
Whether we decide to suppress, discourage, or tolerate a particular human trait comes down to what extent the exercise of that trait can cause harm to others.
The Feminist message is that women need to be protected.
I've got news for you: Each of us needs to be protected from something. And it's too difficult for each of us to take all of that responsibility to protect ourselves individually. That's why we live together in societies. make rules, and empower others to enforce them.