From what I understand, nail guns are typically just.22 caliber and would have different sound from the pressure wave. The question then would be, can we detect the difference and is the difference still detectable at a distance or after echoes/reflections?
As soon as you do ban them, I'm going to protest that the supreme court has an offensive name (ok, not a trademark but still a name) because their assumption that they are supreme is very offensive to me.
Every time UPS gets a new driver, they stop delivering packages to my house. I'm... lucky, in that I have an even numbered house on the odd side of the street and about an eighth of a mile off relative to the rest of the numbering system. Google maps has the right location and FedEx never has a problem, but each and every time UPS gets a new driver, I have to call them and tell them to have their driver look up my address on Google maps. Then the package arrives the next day.
For a long time the US postal service has been losing money, they posted a 5.6 billion loss in 2016. I think they would be more than happy to grow their service but can they grow in a way that is profitable for the USPS that doesn't cost more than e-commerce is willing to pay?
People are REALLY going to hate this, but there is no 100% secure network service. Computer networks were designed for sharing information between nodes. The idea of keeping others out of that sharing was added on later. On a large interconnected network like the Internet it is impossible to do 100%. I can feel the nerd rage boiling here and the claims that "you don't know what you are talking about!". But save it. Reality tells us otherwise. If it is on a network, it isn't secure.
This, the only truly secure network device has been disconnected form the network. The most secure network devices make it very difficult for the authorized user to access the system and extremely difficult for anyone else to access. Just about everything a network device does to make it easier to access and use just makes it less secure.
But you also need to be extremely careful with your definitions. Let us start with saying Nazi's are evil. Next if we say Nazi's eugenics programs were evil, seems like killing or sterilizing people with traits you don't like is pretty evil. So we say eugenics is evil?
But eugenics is the attempt to breed out undesirable traits in humans. Is this evil? What if we consider gene therapy a form of eugenics. Would a form of gene therapy that eliminates the gene that causes higher rates of cancer be evil? But isn't this just Nazi eugenics all over again?
Sure I'm going to extremes but stereotyping people or ideas as evil, without understanding the basis of the ideas or believes, leads to trouble. The Nazi isn't evil, the Nazi belief in superiority of race and generally being an asshat is the problem.
Science is about challenging belief with evidence, particularly procedurally documented and experimentally generated evidence. In other cases it is observationally generated or synthesized by review of existing literature. All are valid. Disagreeing for the sake of disagreement, objecting for the sake of grandstanding, and claiming belief in the face of contrary evidence are poor imitations and must be called out as a deluded faker.
And while most science should be based on observed behavior, or at least proven formulas, everything has human interpretation involved. Given a hundred scientists, there should at least be two (usually more) interpretations of a set of data and the minority should never be rejected just because it is the minority. All opinions should be accepted or rejected based on careful consideration.
No law should EVER be based on religious stuff, and certainly religion should never be a reason why should be able to discriminate without problems, but if you say the same thing outside religion your bound to get in trouble..
Fully agreed, legally or in general, no one should be discriminated against for anything they chose to do in private (an many case in public) that does not have any impact on other people's lives. Specifically anything that does not harm anyone else but in general to me, so much of what people do in private is never even noticed by anyone else, so should not matter. This includes religious choices, no one should be discriminated against for their choice in what to believe in, or not believe in, as well as any other choice in their life. Other areas are sexuality, drug use, and many areas where people think they can enforce their questionable morality on people's private life.
When things become public and harm others, things change. I don't care how drunk someone becomes until they physically attack someone or drive drunk, risking other people's well being. Laws on sex with minors probably go beyond what is necessary but some of the things they were created to prevent, such as sex trafficking of minors, are some of the lowest acts performed by mankind. Making drugs illegal is also severe overkill on something that should have just been regulated, like alcohol, but at least these laws (in part) exist because of the public harm from drugs.
So things are not black and white but I feel extremes in either direction on laws saying what people can and cannot do are bad. People need to be free to express themselves but not free to take advantage of others, or harm others by their own choices.
Is it religion or education? How much intolerance do you still see in well educated areas (US is well educated on average but some areas more than others), while you still have religious people among the educated (even if less religious people among the educated)?
And if the only option does have them (thinking small appliances, not cars), find the wifi and break it. If the device stops working, return it as defective (as in fails to operate without the crap I don't want).
I have the same thing when it comes to news articles. I like ones I can read, I never watch video. This is because I can read, and interrupt reading, at my own pace with less problems in text than with a video.
Google scholar can search for documents in sites you have a subscription to, sounds like something similar for general or new search. Of course I expect it costs money for Google to handle each case, I'm sure WSJ could afford to pay for that...
You are saying you would WANT to attend a college that considers such a thing?
The choices here are getting somewhat limited. Universities used to be open to just about any thoughts and ideas, but that seems to no longer be the case at most of them. Harvard did well recently in that they said there won't be any speech codes, trigger words, or safe spaces, but then they go and do this.
While Harvard is certainly within their rights and overall I agree with their take on those topics, I'm not so sure that this is a good idea. Not so much on religious grounds, but more commonly, what happens if somebody makes a joke in bad taste? Their career prospects have to be ruined a la donglegate? Just doesn't seem right IMO.
If they are going to do this, I'd rather it be up front, rather than something subtle like dropping students for not meeting image standards after they put in a year or two of college. Though here we have a couple of state schools that are not ivy league but are well respected by the local businesses and will get you a good job without the private school politics or prices, so I may have a different perspective.
No, it doesn't say those things. It says if you're an asshole you're not welcome here.
To repeat what should have been bloody obvious to you: Who gets to define "asshole." ? Suppose a college withdraws acceptances for some kids who post that they put their faith in $DEITY over government, for example?
You are saying you would WANT to attend a college that considers such a thing?
Nice to know, I will definitely switch to an apple computer as soon as their price is the same as an ASUS or Lenovo laptop and I can change the hard drive or memory. (tangent rant I know, but these are the reasons I haven't switched to an Apple or upgraded from my galaxy s5 to a newer galaxy yet).
If you have to have the cheapest shit, that's what you get.
Well when I have so much money I can blow it on paying more for a product that gets the job done as well as a cheaper product, I'll consider it. M$ is annoying but rarely impacts productivity, worked at a place with Linux and the bugs are much more frequent.
I'll agree with that. I think being informal is often the best for a learning environment but that is the environment I cultivate with my students, not my boss (until I get to know them).
Nice to know, I will definitely switch to an apple computer as soon as their price is the same as an ASUS or Lenovo laptop and I can change the hard drive or memory. (tangent rant I know, but these are the reasons I haven't switched to an Apple or upgraded from my galaxy s5 to a newer galaxy yet).
I had two different college professors in my CS classes I took the past two semesters. One that was very casual and involved the students in discussions of topics. The other that spent nearly all of the class disseminating material to the class and little to no time just talking with the students. I learned a lot more with the more casual environment. Respect is important but too many professors seem to think respect means putting themselves above the level of the student in many ways.
they shouldn't use Apple or Linux because of the lack of document compatibility with customers and suppliers. So this leaves us with...
This leaves us with Apple and Linux, which do not have document compatibility problems. Only Microsoft does. Honestly, just cut that turd loose and let it float away into oblivion.
I tried open source office products (never tried Apple, I like the OS but not the price premium) when working on my Thesis in college. They mostly work but some weird format inconsistencies crept into word document and excel formulas kept getting mangled. I just couldn't use the open source programs if I wanted to send my paper to a professor.
Slashdot Mirror
From what I understand, nail guns are typically just .22 caliber and would have different sound from the pressure wave. The question then would be, can we detect the difference and is the difference still detectable at a distance or after echoes/reflections?
I so wish I could mod up responses to my own comments at times ;p
As soon as you do ban them, I'm going to protest that the supreme court has an offensive name (ok, not a trademark but still a name) because their assumption that they are supreme is very offensive to me.
Every time UPS gets a new driver, they stop delivering packages to my house. I'm ... lucky, in that I have an even numbered house on the odd side of the street and about an eighth of a mile off relative to the rest of the numbering system. Google maps has the right location and FedEx never has a problem, but each and every time UPS gets a new driver, I have to call them and tell them to have their driver look up my address on Google maps. Then the package arrives the next day.
For a long time the US postal service has been losing money, they posted a 5.6 billion loss in 2016. I think they would be more than happy to grow their service but can they grow in a way that is profitable for the USPS that doesn't cost more than e-commerce is willing to pay?
This, the only truly secure network device has been disconnected form the network.
True, but that kinda rules out email as a thing.
Well you can move data on external drives, but now your security is open to viruses so...
Good points, at this rate it probably wont be long before technology just reads your thoughts from hundreds of miles away...
People are REALLY going to hate this, but there is no 100% secure network service. Computer networks were designed for sharing information between nodes. The idea of keeping others out of that sharing was added on later. On a large interconnected network like the Internet it is impossible to do 100%. I can feel the nerd rage boiling here and the claims that "you don't know what you are talking about!". But save it. Reality tells us otherwise. If it is on a network, it isn't secure.
This, the only truly secure network device has been disconnected form the network. The most secure network devices make it very difficult for the authorized user to access the system and extremely difficult for anyone else to access. Just about everything a network device does to make it easier to access and use just makes it less secure.
http://islamicsupremecouncil.o...
But you also need to be extremely careful with your definitions. Let us start with saying Nazi's are evil. Next if we say Nazi's eugenics programs were evil, seems like killing or sterilizing people with traits you don't like is pretty evil. So we say eugenics is evil?
But eugenics is the attempt to breed out undesirable traits in humans. Is this evil? What if we consider gene therapy a form of eugenics. Would a form of gene therapy that eliminates the gene that causes higher rates of cancer be evil? But isn't this just Nazi eugenics all over again?
Sure I'm going to extremes but stereotyping people or ideas as evil, without understanding the basis of the ideas or believes, leads to trouble. The Nazi isn't evil, the Nazi belief in superiority of race and generally being an asshat is the problem.
Science is about challenging belief with evidence, particularly procedurally documented and experimentally generated evidence. In other cases it is observationally generated or synthesized by review of existing literature. All are valid. Disagreeing for the sake of disagreement, objecting for the sake of grandstanding, and claiming belief in the face of contrary evidence are poor imitations and must be called out as a deluded faker.
And while most science should be based on observed behavior, or at least proven formulas, everything has human interpretation involved. Given a hundred scientists, there should at least be two (usually more) interpretations of a set of data and the minority should never be rejected just because it is the minority. All opinions should be accepted or rejected based on careful consideration.
No law should EVER be based on religious stuff, and certainly religion should never be a reason why should be able to discriminate without problems, but if you say the same thing outside religion your bound to get in trouble..
Fully agreed, legally or in general, no one should be discriminated against for anything they chose to do in private (an many case in public) that does not have any impact on other people's lives. Specifically anything that does not harm anyone else but in general to me, so much of what people do in private is never even noticed by anyone else, so should not matter. This includes religious choices, no one should be discriminated against for their choice in what to believe in, or not believe in, as well as any other choice in their life. Other areas are sexuality, drug use, and many areas where people think they can enforce their questionable morality on people's private life.
When things become public and harm others, things change. I don't care how drunk someone becomes until they physically attack someone or drive drunk, risking other people's well being. Laws on sex with minors probably go beyond what is necessary but some of the things they were created to prevent, such as sex trafficking of minors, are some of the lowest acts performed by mankind. Making drugs illegal is also severe overkill on something that should have just been regulated, like alcohol, but at least these laws (in part) exist because of the public harm from drugs.
So things are not black and white but I feel extremes in either direction on laws saying what people can and cannot do are bad. People need to be free to express themselves but not free to take advantage of others, or harm others by their own choices.
Is it religion or education? How much intolerance do you still see in well educated areas (US is well educated on average but some areas more than others), while you still have religious people among the educated (even if less religious people among the educated)?
And if the only option does have them (thinking small appliances, not cars), find the wifi and break it. If the device stops working, return it as defective (as in fails to operate without the crap I don't want).
I have the same thing when it comes to news articles. I like ones I can read, I never watch video. This is because I can read, and interrupt reading, at my own pace with less problems in text than with a video.
Google scholar can search for documents in sites you have a subscription to, sounds like something similar for general or new search. Of course I expect it costs money for Google to handle each case, I'm sure WSJ could afford to pay for that...
You are saying you would WANT to attend a college that considers such a thing?
The choices here are getting somewhat limited. Universities used to be open to just about any thoughts and ideas, but that seems to no longer be the case at most of them. Harvard did well recently in that they said there won't be any speech codes, trigger words, or safe spaces, but then they go and do this.
While Harvard is certainly within their rights and overall I agree with their take on those topics, I'm not so sure that this is a good idea. Not so much on religious grounds, but more commonly, what happens if somebody makes a joke in bad taste? Their career prospects have to be ruined a la donglegate? Just doesn't seem right IMO.
If they are going to do this, I'd rather it be up front, rather than something subtle like dropping students for not meeting image standards after they put in a year or two of college. Though here we have a couple of state schools that are not ivy league but are well respected by the local businesses and will get you a good job without the private school politics or prices, so I may have a different perspective.
No, it doesn't say those things. It says if you're an asshole you're not welcome here.
To repeat what should have been bloody obvious to you: Who gets to define "asshole." ? Suppose a college withdraws acceptances for some kids who post that they put their faith in $DEITY over government, for example?
You are saying you would WANT to attend a college that considers such a thing?
In any culture there are extremists, it is nice to hear from a sane member of a culture often portrayed as extreme in general.
Nice to know, I will definitely switch to an apple computer as soon as their price is the same as an ASUS or Lenovo laptop and I can change the hard drive or memory. (tangent rant I know, but these are the reasons I haven't switched to an Apple or upgraded from my galaxy s5 to a newer galaxy yet).
If you have to have the cheapest shit, that's what you get.
Well when I have so much money I can blow it on paying more for a product that gets the job done as well as a cheaper product, I'll consider it. M$ is annoying but rarely impacts productivity, worked at a place with Linux and the bugs are much more frequent.
I'll agree with that. I think being informal is often the best for a learning environment but that is the environment I cultivate with my students, not my boss (until I get to know them).
Nice to know, I will definitely switch to an apple computer as soon as their price is the same as an ASUS or Lenovo laptop and I can change the hard drive or memory. (tangent rant I know, but these are the reasons I haven't switched to an Apple or upgraded from my galaxy s5 to a newer galaxy yet).
I had two different college professors in my CS classes I took the past two semesters. One that was very casual and involved the students in discussions of topics. The other that spent nearly all of the class disseminating material to the class and little to no time just talking with the students. I learned a lot more with the more casual environment. Respect is important but too many professors seem to think respect means putting themselves above the level of the student in many ways.
I have a number of professors I would love you to convince that I don't need to give them Microsoft documents. Best of luck.
they shouldn't use Apple or Linux because of the lack of document compatibility with customers and suppliers. So this leaves us with...
This leaves us with Apple and Linux, which do not have document compatibility problems. Only Microsoft does. Honestly, just cut that turd loose and let it float away into oblivion.
I tried open source office products (never tried Apple, I like the OS but not the price premium) when working on my Thesis in college. They mostly work but some weird format inconsistencies crept into word document and excel formulas kept getting mangled. I just couldn't use the open source programs if I wanted to send my paper to a professor.