Maybe what we need is a hybrid jury -- empanel the usualy "jury of your peers" the way they do now, but also have a parallel panel of experts in the field of law (ie, lawyers, judges, law professors or lay experts with some demonstrated knowledge, but not people practicing in the field itself -- no engineers or whatever the subject matter is) in question and require some supermajority or absolute majority for a verdict -- ie, the "common man" has to agree with the experts, but the experts also have to agree with the common man to reach a verdict.
There's probably a lot that would make this complicated, but in many cases it seems that the traditional "jury of your peers" made sense in 1800 when an educated man was someone whose knowledge equaled the information in a single Sunday issue of the New York Times.
In very complex cases (think elaborate accounting trials, patent litigation, medical cases) the general tactic of picking people with zero knowledge of any aspect of the case turns the trial from a presentation of the facts and arguments into a sales pitch designed to sway a jury who doesn't know any better.
AirPlay mirroring though kind of covers the gap between large-screen device usage (ie, XBox) and what you can do locally on the iPhone or iPad. I bought an AppleTV on a lark and find I use the mirroring function a lot in the living room when I find something worth throwing up on the screen. It can be a little weird touching the screen in my hand but looking at the screen across the room, but it works pretty well with games you can control via accelerometer.
I'd like to see some more apps available for AppleTV, but I think a broader benefit would be wider licensing of the AirPlay mirroring capabiity to TV/AV receiver makers.
IMHO the intangible benefit of space travel isn't the science or technology or astro-mining, it's the sense of *going somehwere* as a species that is largely independent of whatever socio-political-religious backgrounds we came from. It's about moving forward and not trying to just focus on the past and the scores left to settle.
We lack that now and civilization has become largely about hoarding what's left, with all the obvious results we see around us.
I work for a small consulting company. We have an office, but in an inconvenient location in the metro area. There are times where I find myself without a specific place to go but where the time spent commuting back home is kind of time wasted, and at home I'm always dealing with the commotion of home.
Lately I've been thinking it would be kind of cool to have one of those Ford Transit Connects as my daily work car, but with a desk-type setup in the back where I could work on all the miscellaneous bullshit that fills the blank time between projects at client sites without hauling ass across town to locations where I won't get anything done.
In some cases, I could probably work on remote project stuff AT the client IN the van as many clients have detectable wifi outside the building.
About the only thing that would be tough would be dealing with heat and air conditioning. These little vans don't have giant engines and sitting parked they may not be able to provide adequate cooling for the back. Heat I'd be less worried about from a comfort perspective, but I suppose it depends on the outside temperature (-10F might be hard to deal with).
The van itself would make for a fun project, but I suspect that the conversion costs wouldn't be worthwhile.
Used M3s are pretty risk unless you know the seller well or you're personally a really good BMW mechanic.
A late-model, one-owner car might be in pretty good shape, but in any other circumstance you worry about how badly it's been beaten on. And then there's maintenance and repairs -- BMW stands for "bring money with"
A M3 is stupid expensive to maintain; a friend with a 2009 ragtop paid something like $1200 for a set of tires after he punctured the sidewall. Not including the flatbed tow trip 250 miles back home where they had the right machine to demount and remount the low profile tires.
740s are mostly the same deal in terms of maintenance. Outside of warranty lots goes wrong with these cars and it is expensive to fix. Which is why so many 5-6 year old high end luxury cars seem available for so cheap. I saw a two-owner 5-6 year old Mercedes S600 with 55,000 miles on a local used car web site for $20k.
I've only bought 4 TVs brand new since 1990, and they all worked fine when I got rid of 3 of them, including the 22 year old Trinitron. I got rid of them not because they broke, but because they were all functionally obsolete in some way.
I think what's needed isn't really longer life but coming up with some way to eliminate as much of the intelligence as possible from the display. Set top boxes kind of do this, but they're not really meant to be "display controllers" and don't perform some of the intelligence functions of the TV itself.
We need a "controller" and a "display" with an interface between them that is high resolution/bandwidth enough to handle at least 3 generations of future TV (ie, 4k, 8k, 16k..).
The controller should do everything that the built-in controller on a TV does now: switch between inputs, providing scaling, upconvert/downconvert for input sources to match the display itself, ATSC tuning (perhaps with cable card capability), P-I-P and other alternative display modes, provide basic audio functions and some of the "smart TV" functions you see cropping up now everywhere.
You can do this now with a combination of maybe a tuner with HDMI switching and a DVR, but it's kind of a compromise. Even a $1200 Pioneer receiver won't downconvert HDMI to a component-connected TV (or, more maddeningly, digital audio to analog).
With a controller designed to actually replace the intelligence and features within a TV, replacing your display would be easier and have no impact on the devices that send you video signals.
Fortunately I'm not in charge of handling any PCI compliance, so I don't know what's involved. I do know that I've seen PCI compliance reports with all kinds of red flags surrounding existing email services, but I'll freely admit I don't understand it.
I doubt there's any IT department in a large organization supporting POP3. Any large organization is likely to be Outlook/Exchange, either supporting OutlookAnywhere (Outlook via RPC over HTTPS) or "normal" Outlook over VPN (or maybe both).
And since you're so adamant that it's just a matter of enabling a service or editing inetd.conf, it's pretty obvious your totally clueless about what's actually involved in providing highly available email to thousands of people.
I'd wager it's that it's just one more thing to keep track of.
In a small IT shop, adding IMAP support might not be a big deal, but in bigger shops it can involve all kinds of IT bureaucracy involving security reviews, training a bunch of people for support, added testing and validation, and on and on and on, and many of these requirements are not foot dragging or empire building by IT PHBs but externally imposed requirements by law (SOX, HIPPA, PCI) or by other entities (parent companies, audit standards, non-IT security, etc).
And even beyond this, technically it could involve more than just changing the service status from Disabled to Automatic, particularly in large, multisite Exchange implementations that involve multiple CAS and Mailbox servers.
So in a large shop when you add in all the overhead coupled with the usual constraints on money, time and manpower, it's not at all surprising that "IT" doesn't care to cater to people setting their own standards or deviating from standards organizationally agreed to.
Have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, I'm not at all surprised that someone in IT said "use Outlook".
No, the railroads had to build their tracks, but the government gave them a massive land grant upon which to build their tracks, accounting for tens of thousands of square miles of land. Or did you think that they bought that land?
Furthermore, the railroads largely invented the corporate giveaway from the government in the 19th century and you can still see it on your 1040 tax form where there are special sections specific to people who work/worked for railroads.
IMHO, most of the war on marijuana has historically been about keeping low end laborers laboring, instead of just being subsistence workers for themselves. This was applied to Mexicans and Blacks in the pre-civil rights era, and likely a large part of the reason it was opposed when it became more mainstream in the 1960s.
I don't doubt for a minute that there's more than a little of that mindset remaining, especially considering so much of what is considered valuable in this country relates to financial gain and material accumulation.
This was my thought -- a chance to cut hardware costs and office space costs (since two can now share everything, cube, PC, phone, and maybe the chair next).
But it also occurred to me that it has a subtle, Stalinesque aspect to it since it creates a situation where you have both an opportunity for collective discipline as well as a natural system for reporting on each other, which seems ideal when pairing ladder-climbing Junior developers with Senior developers.
It seems like the utility would be best served for part-time engagement (ie, half time or something) or on a specific project basis. However you did it, finding the correct pairs sounds like a daunting prospect since working closely with someone is a dodgy business.
As far as I'm concerned, this study really doesn't matter -- even if it *is* right from a methodology and execution perspective, which I'm kind of questioning based on my reading of the news article about it where the only comments were from the Partnership for a Drug Free America, and the fact that it involves self-reporting from surveys.
Regardless, at a gut level, it seems risky to *encourage* teens to use mind-altering drugs, be it pot, booze or Adderall (it's funny, we never hear these people want to run studies showing the risk of putting developing brains on anti-depressants or stimulants).
But all of this seems to miss the point -- it seems like people opposed to marijuana legalization point to studies like this with a "SEE!!! IT"S BAD FOR YOU!" attitude, as if the only result that would rationalize legalization is the impossible one (for pot or anything else), where chronic, daily smoking of pot results in nothing more serious than an urge to drink more water.
This won't happen, and it's tiresome to see these kinds of studies used as some kind of justification for continuing a criminal justice empire costing billions of dollars a year that undermines the constitutional rights of everyone that has utterly failed to accomplish its goal.
That'd work really well at hour N-1 of an N hour flight, wouldn't it?
The "problem" of inconvenienced childless assholes would disappear if frustrated parents would be allowed to vent their frustrations on the faces of self-absorbed asshats like you.
We all hate screaming children, especially those of us who fly with them.
What we hate even more are clueless assholes who don't have children telling us what rotten people we are because our three year old lost patience during the last hour of a 6 hour flight delayed two hours.
...we have the safety zealots who believe that if bans of electronic devices in-flight reduce the risk of crashes by.00000001% then the ban makes sense, because, hey, who's in favor of crashing an airplane? (Those of you raising their hands in favor, please stay seated, a TSA agent will be with you shortly).
In the other corner, we have the airlines, who are opposed to in-flight use of devices to the extent that using such devices denies them their God-given right to monetize every last moment spent on an airliner and that even if making a cellular data connection call in flight wasn't likely to be unreliable, it might keep someone from having to spend $19.99 on BoGo in-flight internet service.
Watching, of course, are all the people who have inadvertently and intentionally left their electronics on and somehow managed to land safely at their destination with the most harrowing part of the flight being the gross weirdo in the seat next to them or the smell coming from the aft lavatory.
Let's just say you no longer have a right to any trial. You will be brought before a board of arbitration whose members all have the sufficient background experience with the issues in question (ie, pay stubs from corporate America) and the board's decision will be final. Don't worry about showing up for your arbitration board, they will have all the facts already on which to decide if you are guilty. Private security will arrive at your current location (we know what it is) to deliver your guilty verdict and escort you to a privately run correction facility where you can begin working off your debt to Corporate America at our current penal rate of $0.12 per hour.
The problem with these taxes is that they end up outliving their original purpose. IIRC, there still is a tax on wired phone service designed to support rural telephone connectivity. If there was a new tax it should have some quantitative measure and a hard sunset date after that in case the measures are designed to prevent sunset.
The telephone taxes maybe made sense in the 1950s or 1960s, but even as early as the 1970s all my relatives who lived in rural areas (a farm in south central Kansas, a house 10 miles outside of Washburn, MO in the Ozarks) had 'normal' telephone service with direct dial long distance to/from their houses.
I don't doubt there may be places that lack phone service to this day, but I doubt the tax still imposed does anything for those people. The places unserved are either super poor areas where there's not enough demand for service or super remote locations where the people aren't willing to pay to extend service.
And when it comes to broadband or any other technologically sophisticated service where the cost of providing the service increases as density decreases, I'm not sure we should always subsidize services like this. At some point, choosing to live in a remote location is a lifestyle choice.
I like gourmet food, and in the city I can't go out to eat often enough to keep up with the restaurants with this kind of food. If I decide to live in a remote location, should the local diner be subsidized so that I can get steak au poivre instead of chicken fried steak?
If you want something urban, live in an urban area. If you want a rural lifestyle, live in a rural area. If you want both, open your checkbook.
I don't think they could call it brandishing. I never touched the weapon and it remained holstered in a full, thumbrake holster. I only exposed it, quickly -- and open carry is 100% legal in MN.
But I know how suburban cops operate and I don't think I'll do it again.
I'm skeptical of any solution that doesn't involve just eating food, unless you're advocating foods with specific priobiotic qualities (like maybe yogurt, or some kinds of cheese), and not just a probiotic additive or supplement.
The main reason being is that it shouldn't be necessary for normal health and even then only as a therapy to restore gut flora to some "normal" condition.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe what we need is a hybrid jury -- empanel the usualy "jury of your peers" the way they do now, but also have a parallel panel of experts in the field of law (ie, lawyers, judges, law professors or lay experts with some demonstrated knowledge, but not people practicing in the field itself -- no engineers or whatever the subject matter is) in question and require some supermajority or absolute majority for a verdict -- ie, the "common man" has to agree with the experts, but the experts also have to agree with the common man to reach a verdict.
There's probably a lot that would make this complicated, but in many cases it seems that the traditional "jury of your peers" made sense in 1800 when an educated man was someone whose knowledge equaled the information in a single Sunday issue of the New York Times.
In very complex cases (think elaborate accounting trials, patent litigation, medical cases) the general tactic of picking people with zero knowledge of any aspect of the case turns the trial from a presentation of the facts and arguments into a sales pitch designed to sway a jury who doesn't know any better.
AirPlay mirroring though kind of covers the gap between large-screen device usage (ie, XBox) and what you can do locally on the iPhone or iPad. I bought an AppleTV on a lark and find I use the mirroring function a lot in the living room when I find something worth throwing up on the screen. It can be a little weird touching the screen in my hand but looking at the screen across the room, but it works pretty well with games you can control via accelerometer.
I'd like to see some more apps available for AppleTV, but I think a broader benefit would be wider licensing of the AirPlay mirroring capabiity to TV/AV receiver makers.
...and it didn't work out so well for him in the long run.
IMHO the intangible benefit of space travel isn't the science or technology or astro-mining, it's the sense of *going somehwere* as a species that is largely independent of whatever socio-political-religious backgrounds we came from. It's about moving forward and not trying to just focus on the past and the scores left to settle.
We lack that now and civilization has become largely about hoarding what's left, with all the obvious results we see around us.
I work for a small consulting company. We have an office, but in an inconvenient location in the metro area. There are times where I find myself without a specific place to go but where the time spent commuting back home is kind of time wasted, and at home I'm always dealing with the commotion of home.
Lately I've been thinking it would be kind of cool to have one of those Ford Transit Connects as my daily work car, but with a desk-type setup in the back where I could work on all the miscellaneous bullshit that fills the blank time between projects at client sites without hauling ass across town to locations where I won't get anything done.
In some cases, I could probably work on remote project stuff AT the client IN the van as many clients have detectable wifi outside the building.
About the only thing that would be tough would be dealing with heat and air conditioning. These little vans don't have giant engines and sitting parked they may not be able to provide adequate cooling for the back. Heat I'd be less worried about from a comfort perspective, but I suppose it depends on the outside temperature (-10F might be hard to deal with).
The van itself would make for a fun project, but I suspect that the conversion costs wouldn't be worthwhile.
Used M3s are pretty risk unless you know the seller well or you're personally a really good BMW mechanic.
A late-model, one-owner car might be in pretty good shape, but in any other circumstance you worry about how badly it's been beaten on. And then there's maintenance and repairs -- BMW stands for "bring money with"
A M3 is stupid expensive to maintain; a friend with a 2009 ragtop paid something like $1200 for a set of tires after he punctured the sidewall. Not including the flatbed tow trip 250 miles back home where they had the right machine to demount and remount the low profile tires.
740s are mostly the same deal in terms of maintenance. Outside of warranty lots goes wrong with these cars and it is expensive to fix. Which is why so many 5-6 year old high end luxury cars seem available for so cheap. I saw a two-owner 5-6 year old Mercedes S600 with 55,000 miles on a local used car web site for $20k.
I've only bought 4 TVs brand new since 1990, and they all worked fine when I got rid of 3 of them, including the 22 year old Trinitron. I got rid of them not because they broke, but because they were all functionally obsolete in some way.
I think what's needed isn't really longer life but coming up with some way to eliminate as much of the intelligence as possible from the display. Set top boxes kind of do this, but they're not really meant to be "display controllers" and don't perform some of the intelligence functions of the TV itself.
We need a "controller" and a "display" with an interface between them that is high resolution/bandwidth enough to handle at least 3 generations of future TV (ie, 4k, 8k, 16k..).
The controller should do everything that the built-in controller on a TV does now: switch between inputs, providing scaling, upconvert/downconvert for input sources to match the display itself, ATSC tuning (perhaps with cable card capability), P-I-P and other alternative display modes, provide basic audio functions and some of the "smart TV" functions you see cropping up now everywhere.
You can do this now with a combination of maybe a tuner with HDMI switching and a DVR, but it's kind of a compromise. Even a $1200 Pioneer receiver won't downconvert HDMI to a component-connected TV (or, more maddeningly, digital audio to analog).
With a controller designed to actually replace the intelligence and features within a TV, replacing your display would be easier and have no impact on the devices that send you video signals.
The cell phone company is a government monopoly and/or owned by members of the ruling class. Of course they are exempt.
Fortunately I'm not in charge of handling any PCI compliance, so I don't know what's involved. I do know that I've seen PCI compliance reports with all kinds of red flags surrounding existing email services, but I'll freely admit I don't understand it.
I doubt there's any IT department in a large organization supporting POP3. Any large organization is likely to be Outlook/Exchange, either supporting OutlookAnywhere (Outlook via RPC over HTTPS) or "normal" Outlook over VPN (or maybe both).
And since you're so adamant that it's just a matter of enabling a service or editing inetd.conf, it's pretty obvious your totally clueless about what's actually involved in providing highly available email to thousands of people.
I'd wager it's that it's just one more thing to keep track of.
In a small IT shop, adding IMAP support might not be a big deal, but in bigger shops it can involve all kinds of IT bureaucracy involving security reviews, training a bunch of people for support, added testing and validation, and on and on and on, and many of these requirements are not foot dragging or empire building by IT PHBs but externally imposed requirements by law (SOX, HIPPA, PCI) or by other entities (parent companies, audit standards, non-IT security, etc).
And even beyond this, technically it could involve more than just changing the service status from Disabled to Automatic, particularly in large, multisite Exchange implementations that involve multiple CAS and Mailbox servers.
So in a large shop when you add in all the overhead coupled with the usual constraints on money, time and manpower, it's not at all surprising that "IT" doesn't care to cater to people setting their own standards or deviating from standards organizationally agreed to.
Have been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, I'm not at all surprised that someone in IT said "use Outlook".
All you needed was a paper punch. And some reasonable hand strength No disassembly required.
200 kg motorcyle? My Kawasaki Concours was 750 pounds with a full tank of fuel.
No, the railroads had to build their tracks, but the government gave them a massive land grant upon which to build their tracks, accounting for tens of thousands of square miles of land. Or did you think that they bought that land?
Furthermore, the railroads largely invented the corporate giveaway from the government in the 19th century and you can still see it on your 1040 tax form where there are special sections specific to people who work/worked for railroads.
One of the best posts in this story.
IMHO, most of the war on marijuana has historically been about keeping low end laborers laboring, instead of just being subsistence workers for themselves. This was applied to Mexicans and Blacks in the pre-civil rights era, and likely a large part of the reason it was opposed when it became more mainstream in the 1960s.
I don't doubt for a minute that there's more than a little of that mindset remaining, especially considering so much of what is considered valuable in this country relates to financial gain and material accumulation.
This was my thought -- a chance to cut hardware costs and office space costs (since two can now share everything, cube, PC, phone, and maybe the chair next).
But it also occurred to me that it has a subtle, Stalinesque aspect to it since it creates a situation where you have both an opportunity for collective discipline as well as a natural system for reporting on each other, which seems ideal when pairing ladder-climbing Junior developers with Senior developers.
It seems like the utility would be best served for part-time engagement (ie, half time or something) or on a specific project basis. However you did it, finding the correct pairs sounds like a daunting prospect since working closely with someone is a dodgy business.
As far as I'm concerned, this study really doesn't matter -- even if it *is* right from a methodology and execution perspective, which I'm kind of questioning based on my reading of the news article about it where the only comments were from the Partnership for a Drug Free America, and the fact that it involves self-reporting from surveys.
Regardless, at a gut level, it seems risky to *encourage* teens to use mind-altering drugs, be it pot, booze or Adderall (it's funny, we never hear these people want to run studies showing the risk of putting developing brains on anti-depressants or stimulants).
But all of this seems to miss the point -- it seems like people opposed to marijuana legalization point to studies like this with a "SEE!!! IT"S BAD FOR YOU!" attitude, as if the only result that would rationalize legalization is the impossible one (for pot or anything else), where chronic, daily smoking of pot results in nothing more serious than an urge to drink more water.
This won't happen, and it's tiresome to see these kinds of studies used as some kind of justification for continuing a criminal justice empire costing billions of dollars a year that undermines the constitutional rights of everyone that has utterly failed to accomplish its goal.
That'd work really well at hour N-1 of an N hour flight, wouldn't it?
The "problem" of inconvenienced childless assholes would disappear if frustrated parents would be allowed to vent their frustrations on the faces of self-absorbed asshats like you.
Permit wifi and crack down on screaming children.
We all hate screaming children, especially those of us who fly with them.
What we hate even more are clueless assholes who don't have children telling us what rotten people we are because our three year old lost patience during the last hour of a 6 hour flight delayed two hours.
So the ban is about protecting AT&T and Verizon, and not flyers?
I'd guess that there are more handoffs on the 405 freeway during rush hour than on any given flight.
...we have the safety zealots who believe that if bans of electronic devices in-flight reduce the risk of crashes by .00000001% then the ban makes sense, because, hey, who's in favor of crashing an airplane? (Those of you raising their hands in favor, please stay seated, a TSA agent will be with you shortly).
In the other corner, we have the airlines, who are opposed to in-flight use of devices to the extent that using such devices denies them their God-given right to monetize every last moment spent on an airliner and that even if making a cellular data connection call in flight wasn't likely to be unreliable, it might keep someone from having to spend $19.99 on BoGo in-flight internet service.
Watching, of course, are all the people who have inadvertently and intentionally left their electronics on and somehow managed to land safely at their destination with the most harrowing part of the flight being the gross weirdo in the seat next to them or the smell coming from the aft lavatory.
Let's just say you no longer have a right to any trial. You will be brought before a board of arbitration whose members all have the sufficient background experience with the issues in question (ie, pay stubs from corporate America) and the board's decision will be final. Don't worry about showing up for your arbitration board, they will have all the facts already on which to decide if you are guilty. Private security will arrive at your current location (we know what it is) to deliver your guilty verdict and escort you to a privately run correction facility where you can begin working off your debt to Corporate America at our current penal rate of $0.12 per hour.
The problem with these taxes is that they end up outliving their original purpose. IIRC, there still is a tax on wired phone service designed to support rural telephone connectivity. If there was a new tax it should have some quantitative measure and a hard sunset date after that in case the measures are designed to prevent sunset.
The telephone taxes maybe made sense in the 1950s or 1960s, but even as early as the 1970s all my relatives who lived in rural areas (a farm in south central Kansas, a house 10 miles outside of Washburn, MO in the Ozarks) had 'normal' telephone service with direct dial long distance to/from their houses.
I don't doubt there may be places that lack phone service to this day, but I doubt the tax still imposed does anything for those people. The places unserved are either super poor areas where there's not enough demand for service or super remote locations where the people aren't willing to pay to extend service.
And when it comes to broadband or any other technologically sophisticated service where the cost of providing the service increases as density decreases, I'm not sure we should always subsidize services like this. At some point, choosing to live in a remote location is a lifestyle choice.
I like gourmet food, and in the city I can't go out to eat often enough to keep up with the restaurants with this kind of food. If I decide to live in a remote location, should the local diner be subsidized so that I can get steak au poivre instead of chicken fried steak?
If you want something urban, live in an urban area. If you want a rural lifestyle, live in a rural area. If you want both, open your checkbook.
Minnesota.
I don't think they could call it brandishing. I never touched the weapon and it remained holstered in a full, thumbrake holster. I only exposed it, quickly -- and open carry is 100% legal in MN.
But I know how suburban cops operate and I don't think I'll do it again.
I'm skeptical of any solution that doesn't involve just eating food, unless you're advocating foods with specific priobiotic qualities (like maybe yogurt, or some kinds of cheese), and not just a probiotic additive or supplement.
The main reason being is that it shouldn't be necessary for normal health and even then only as a therapy to restore gut flora to some "normal" condition.