> Hit the windows key, type the first few letters and hit enter. Exactly the same as you would do before.
Why am I having flashbacks to almost exactly identical threads when GNOME3 was excreted? New 'super simple' graphical interface that can't be used with a mouse but if you memorize a bunch of keyboard shortcuts..... It is/is not (at the same time, often with both sides argued in a single post) built for a touch only world. Windows ME will be moving up a notch from the bottom of the list of Microsoft's worst products. But dead last will of course belong to Bob; now and forever.
That won't be a problem for long. This SoC shares the video part with enough other devices that in no time at all there will be 'places' one can go to obtain the required libraries. Much like there is one stop shopping for the Win32 codecs to make Mplayer able to play darned near anything. And nobody is going to care, Broadcom won't, the **AA groups won't care, nobody will. As long as it is just a geeks building media boxes and crap like that, any large institutional user will of course simply work out a licensing agreement. But Broadcom has to charge the Pi Foundation for the codecs they ship and officially support or the whole phony balony shakedown on codec licensing would come crashing down so we are all going to have to do the wink wink nudge nudge schtick.
> You're ignoring the costs of the emergency services to deal with an accident
You are right. I was ignoring a lof things. It is called a back of the envelope calculation, to see if a proposal passes the smell test. Take the most optimistic numbers from the article (almost certainly overcounting every minor injury to inflate the problem and seriously lowballing the price of the proposed solution) and Google up the one missing number (number of cars sold annually) to make a first run through. It failed. If you were expecting a detailed, exhaustive cost benefit analysis would be performed on the spot for the benefit of the mindless hordes on what passes for slashdot these days, who would mostly ignore it anyway if it disagreed with their preconceived notions of the majesty and infallibility of the State, you are delusional. Do the word 'perls before swine' ring any bells?
Bottom line, even if you are obsessed with safety and totalitarian enough to believe in ordering everyone else to implement your pet notions, there are thousands of better places to be a busybody do gooder where you save more lives per million of other people's money spent. If a billion dollars (and that is a ball park of the annual price tag) on cancer research couldn't save 200 lives I'd be really shocked. And yes it really does work that way, money seized and spent on this misguided project of government directed spending isn't available to be taxed and directly spent on research. Do the math. A billion dollars of research or save two hundred people who couldn't see the reverse lights or the new government mandated backup alarms and get out of the way. One or the other. We don't live in such prosperous times we can ignore economic reality any more, we live in an age of limits and can no longer afford to be stupid.
> But I suspect you already knew that and were just trolling.
No, the first post was simply being brief. THIS post is a troll. Please compare and contrast. Just so you will know the difference in the future.
> But everyone who is arguing against this honestly just sound like people did back in the day when they mandated seat belts and air bags.
You know something? You are right. And wrong. This is exactly the same, seatbelts and airbags were mandated way before their time and anyway, where the hell does the government come off ordering us around. They didn't have the right then and don't now. Airbags are only now getting perfected to the point where I feel safe having them in a vehicle. Early units were so expensive that a vehicle with an airbag deployment was pretty much totaled. They KILLED small women and children and it was illegal to disable them until quite recently. So you either forced the ten year old to sit in the back instead of shotgun or you accepted that in an accident the kid was almost certain to die... and that it was ILLEGAL to attempt to fix the problem. Textbook example of what us small government types are on about when we rant about one size fits all big government solutions. Early seatbelts weren't as dangerous but were hugely annoying and again, the early mandated ones added a lot of cost. Let the tech develop on its own and eventually it will get deployed.
But fascists can't wait, they can't allow the market to decide these things because it would be an admission that they aren't the annointed few, fit above all others to rule the clueless rabble who they believe need them to make all of the important decisions for them. If you think rear view cameras are a good idea, PITCH IT TO ME. Make a good enough case and I might opt for one when car shopping. Order me and I'm more likely to say 'screw you hippie!' This idea though, is just dumb. Upthread I did the math and came up with over 4M per life saved. So as a safety measure it therefore should come after we have worked through all of the thousands and thousands of safety improvements that save lives at better returns. At close to a billion dollars to save two hundred lives (absolute best case on the numbers) there are so many better uses for that sort of money that if you yourself can't think of a dozen in a couple of minutes of effort you probably can't think.
Math, it really should be mandatory to vote. Google sez we sell about 16 million cars annually. At the minimum price mentioned of $58 per car that works out to $929 million. Now ASSume it cuts that 200 deaths to zero (it won't) and that works out to what per life? Uh huh. For 4.6M per there are a lot more cost effective ways to save lives. Oh, but there are also people injured. Ok, go that math. For over 50K per injury that is still pretty fracking expensive. And I'd bet good money that a fair chunk of that 17,000 didn't get hurt very badly, perhaps a broken bone. Again assuming a rear camera would cut that number to zero, which it won't.
> If the GOP actually nominates Santorum, this will no longer be an unlikely-sounding conspiracy theory, but an irrefutable fact.
Kinda. I do think a poopstorm is impending. So the only way I want our side in the White House is if we can put somebody there who understands the danger and MIGHT be willing to tackle it. Romney will go 'bipartisan' before getting sworn in. Ron Paul would be ignored by Congress totally, but other than that I"m 100% with him on econonics (and think he is bat shity insane on foreign policy) while with Newt it would be a total crapshoot since he is so erratic. So Santorum. Sure his odds of actually winning are lower but IF he won he could probably turn the ship of state enough to avoid the iceberg in our path. He understand that the establishment will NEVER like him so won't bother trying to compromise to win the approval of the legacy media and also understands Washington well enough to have a decent shot of hammering out a deal.
We are heading off a cliff, but in theory we could avert the disaster at this point. But only barely. It will be rough even in a best case scenario but we aren't quite yet fated for Greece's doom. The question is whether the voters can be made to understand the situation well enough to create the political will to make the sort of changes needed before the die is cast and we lose control of our future as Greece has. Again, the only scenario I see Santorum winning in is exactly that scenario. So supporting him is safer from the owning the disaster angle.
> I don't agree. Politicians are legally allowed to robocall you. Grr.
Well THAT story would be News for Nerds but that isn't the story we were given to generate pageviews for/. over. Of course your first mistake is failing to notice the new corporate overlords ditched the slogan "News for nerds, stuff that matters." long ago.
I mean, come on/., I understand this is election season and some political stories kinda have to go up but try a little harder to pick stories that fit the crowd, K?
I mean, I'm a conservative (and have the terrible karma to prove it) but there just ain't much here to bite into and rile up the conversation. These are the rules, all sides exploit them shamelessly when possible and decry em when they are on the wrong end of em. But the parties make the rules and if they wanted closed primaries they could do that any time they wanted to. I wish they would, even though I'm now in the Santorum camp after Perry's implosion and 'my' guy is the one benefitting this time. If ya are going to have open primaries the parties don't really mean anything so just do like Louisiana and have really open 'jungle primaries.'
Net10 is ok and if you use it much the slightly lower price for voice could be enough to make you stick with it. But I found h20wireless when I was looking for really cheap cell service. $10 or $20 cards that don't expire for 90 days. Text is only $0.05 ea + an extra $0.05 the first text each day but voice is $0.14/min. Net10 makes you top up every 30 days unless you plunk down serious coin for their big card that gives you 180 days. With my minimalist usage the service days is my limit so they aren't so good a deal. And unlike Net10, H2owireless is a bring your own GSM phone SIM card only deal so it works just fine in a cheap Android phone I picked up on eBay, only no data. (They do sell data plans, they just aren't all that remarkable.) H2o resells AT&T service so you basically get their coverage area without the price. Same company also runs a prepaid resell outfit for Verizon so if you have a CDMA phone with a clean ESN you can get that going about as cheap.
If T-Mobile has decent service (not via roaming, that was why I couldn't have em, my zip is roam so they won't sell to me) in your area their prepaid SIM deal is also very cost effective. I got stopped when the web form asked for my zip code or I'd be using them now. The trick is not getting caught in the higher monthly rates to subsidize a handset game, any deal that just sells you a SIM is going to deliver lower monthly rates.
There are options for cheap bastards who think paying $50+ per month to carry a phone is nuts.
> Led by the UN = most of the UN members are crooks, dictators, religious extremists, military leaders...
What is really horrible is that this state of affairs isn't an accident. It was designed that way, to be a Parliment of Tyrants. When the UN was proposed and designed most nation states were unfree hellholes and with the Soviet Block and ChiComs on the rise at the time the trend was not our friend. Yet the design called for one nation state one vote in the General Assembly and with both China and the Soviet Union getting a veto in the Security Council there was zero chance of anything positive ever happening and every chance of great harm. And it was designed that way. Think about it.
So lets turn over control of the Internet to the same bunch of misfits who thought seating Iran to an organization to pontificate on human rights was a good idea. And lets not forget Libya having to get booted out of the Human Rights Council when Kadaffy's body count got so high even the other tyrants were getting embarrased. So oh heck yea, lets turn the Internet over to these thugs, what could possibly go wrong when the Axis of Evil starts writing the RFCs for the Evil Bit and it ain't April Fools.
> Can't think of an equivilent case of utterly using and disposing of people by the left
Karma is already terrible so I can't let this one pass unremarked. How about I mention an even more egregious case of disposing of people by the left?
Might I mention the entire feminist movement? After spending how many years building a national consensus that powerful men shouldn't abuse their position of authority to take advantage of the hired help, that whole movement was promptly thrown under the bus to rewrite the employment rules so a philandering piece of crap with over a decade of track record could be absolved of sexually harrassing the help, random strangers and finally having a lowly intern blow him in the oval office. And how about the example of, oh I dunno, Paula Jones? Long before, as you claim, the Right threw her under the bus, she was one more 'Bimbo Eruption' who was dealth with by the Clinton campaign by having her personal life destroyed.
This article's summary is half true. Lying by omission is almost as bad as by commission though.
What isn't mentioned? Note this: "Peter Gleick, scientist and journalist." Not mentioned are the list of accolades heaped on him (according to his Wikipedia page) for work in Global Warming. In other words he isn't acting as a disinterested scientist or journalist in this affair but as a dedicated partisan to a cause who let winning override ethics. By his own admission.
And "but there is no solid evidence either way" which is true enough on its own. Barring a confession by Gleick we will probably never be 100% certain the memo in question is a forgery. However there is a crapload of circumstantial evidence all pointing that way.
Not saying Heartland doesn't give me heartburn sometimes and I'm firmly in the skeptic camp, with the downmods right here to prove it. But this memo was a setup. It smelt funny from the start and gets riper by the day.
Not saying the idea of 'peak oil' is totally bogus, only that every attempt to predict it has proven wrong. Since the first prediction the peak has been pushed back again and again by offshore drilling, discovering whole new oil fields, the discovery of shale oil, tar sands, fracking and probably a few more before we hit the real peak oil. If I had to make a prediction, admitting mine will probably be as wrong as everyone else's, I'd say we will only identify 'peak oil' in retrospect and not in a forward prediction. We keep doming up with ever more clever ways of getting at the stuff, especially as the price keeps going up. Extraction methods that would have been madness at $5/barrel are very profitable at $100/barrel. At $150 what new tricks will suddenly be commonplace?
I only wish we would get serious while there is plenty of dead dino for plastics and other uses and go all in on moving as much as possible to other things. CNG is something we have out the wazoo here in the US and we don't depend on insane tyrants for any of it. Nuke plants should be a no brainer but the mindless greens hate it and apparently have a veto on our survival.
Yes, eventually dead dinosaur will become so expensive we will shift over to alternatives. But odds we will also figure out ways to either make the basic chemicals we use now at reasonable cost or find practical replacements so no, we won'r suddenly 'do without' synthetic fibers or plastics. Heck, we already have bio derived plastic, it just isn't quite as versatile or inexpensive but give it another decade.
The bigger limit when we run low on dead dinosaur is the big battle of growing food vs growing fuel. If population grows just feeding people on a petro economy will be tough, doing it while growing the fuel just for the agricultural and food distribution needs will be a bitch.
I laugh at these simpletons who think they can run straight line projections into the future and ignore the fact that when we really need something the profit motive usually inspires somebody to figure out a way to get rich. Just looking at the whole peak oil silliness should be enough to convince anyone. 'Hightly respected' experts have been telling is for fifty years we have been about twenty years away from 'peak oil.' It is pretty much the reverse of fusion, where we have been twenty years away from commercial fusion for the last fifty years. The future will be wierder than we can imagine and all predictions over a decade out are usually worthless.
> I just want to know what's going to happen when the Russian Link Farmers figure out that they can sell > the ability to put any candidate they want, on top of the results.
Don't worry, they can't. Many try, some succeed for a brief moment but all fail. If Google (and the few other remaining search engines) weren't totally on board with Savage's antics his little SEO effort would have been blackholed to the bottom of the results years ago just like anyone else who has tried and failed to place and keep a search result at the top of the rankings that isn't useful to Google's valued eyeballs who drive in the revenue.
Thought experiment. Imagine somebody pulling this stunt with another politician with a fairly unigue name. Say the current POTUS. It wouldn't matter how many link farms they had, how many crowdsourced users got in on the act, that site would go to the bottom of the search rankings just as soon as somebody at Google noticed it and would remain there, just like they do anyone who they deem to be abusing their rankings. And they should, the conspicious exception here is what is striking.
Eh? Headline says "Programming error" while the summary says it was some doofus trying to get away with buying off the shelf instead of paying extra for radiation hardened space rated parts and losing. The only good thing in this story was it was an unmanned probe.
> Because of the lack of Ethernet, the Model A is predicted to be more of a niche board...
It is worse. The Model A only has 128MB of ram. Now go read the datasheet they released today and discover that the GPU must claim at least 32MB and can't deliver 1080p30 video without more. So you have 96MB max ram available for Linux on the Model A and will probably have to split it 64/64 for anything multimedia. Forget mainstream Linux in that environment, you are in embedded territory there. OpenWRT for the win.
Normally I'd be joining the chorus complaining about yet another non-news post anout the Raspberry Pi but the release of half the datasheet is real news. Everybody should give Broadcom half a Huzzah! for it. Half is certainly better than nothing and since zero ARM SoC vendors have released anything about their GPUs it is going to take a sustained effort to solve that problem.
Can we put out a memo that EVERY SINGLE science story doesn't need a green religious hook in it? Please? You guys are worse than the most rabid Pentecostal.
I promise you that if you look at the error bars on the 40,000 in and 95,000 numbers the 160 atributed to global warming is lost in the noise. And that is IF you accept that number in the first place which is pretty bogus sounding. Anyone remember just how much energy is in mass anymore? How one kilogram of mass directly converted to energy is so much fricking energy that it would probably power all of civilization for a year or more? So now burning (hint, just a chemical action) some dead dinosaur is releasing the energy equivilent of 160 TONNES? Eh? The mass of the burned material drops by the amount of the released energy and either escapes to space or ends up captured as mass somewhere on Earth. IF one assumes AGW the mass of heating the crust and atmosphere of the earth a tiny fraction of a degree per year isn't going to give tons either. Math people, try it sometime. It works a lot better than your hokey religion.
Exactly right. We don't worry about India having the bomb and last time I checked they were 'brown people' too. They are not likely to use one, especially in a first strike.
We worry about Iran because they are something new, a nuke possessing country who may not be subject to MAD. In the end the 'godless commies' had one thing going for them in the world peace issues of the Cold War. They wanted to rule the world but they didn't really want to 'win' by being the last survivor in a post apocolypse scenario, the party leaders liked the good life and wanted to keep living it, especially since they didn't much believe in an afterlife to be rewarded in for wiping out the enemy in this one for.
We just don't know if Iran would be so constrained. We pretty much have to take Ajad at his word that he doesn't give a crap if atomic hellfire rains down on him after his rightous jihad of nuking Israel and the US, as we would be fools not to. What we don't know is whether the military structure he commands is equally suicidal. Since guessing wrong, and especially considering the pitiful track record of western intelligence regarding things middle eastern/Islamic, could be a civilization extinction event we probably should err on the side of caution. A country burning off scads of natural gas because they don't consider it valuable enough to capture and use probably doesn't actually need nuke power plants for electricity generation.
As a non-idiot I knew this was possible. I fight Chase regularly on this, they send a new card with the stupid chip, I call and roast em, they mail me a new one without the chip. But they tell me at the time that it is a one time only deal and sure enough they send another later in the year on a different card. Yes, because of mergermania I now have three credit cards but they are all Chase. They simply refuse to allow you to permanently opt out of this madness.
Same with wanting to move me to a debit card instead of an ATM card. The ATM card requires a PIN for all transactions and has other safeguards which work in my favor. The debit cards can be used in all sorts of places without a PIN and since it isn't a credit card (despite the Visa logo) the stolen money is gone from your account and you are getting to pay NSF fees all over the place while you fight over it. So I just keep cutting those cards every time they send a new one out and keep using my ancient ATM card. When it stops working I'm out of there.
Not exactly. If you just had a list of numbers that happened to be CC numbers you might be right. But if you had what is typically a list of stolen CC numbers, i.e. a listing of names, billing addreesses, numbers, ccv numbers, date of birth, etc. then you have personal information on people with no provable right to possess it. With all these new privacy laws springing up you may or may not be committing a crime by mere possession of that information.
And yes we might want to think through the 1st Amendment implications a bit before we go even farther down this road of privacy protection. Everything is a balance and when politicians are pushing a bandwagon it is always a good idea to stop and think through why they REALLY want something.
Perhaps my irony detector is busted but I seriously doubt any banker INTENDED to lose a shedload of money and most probably weren't intendiing to blow up the world. The they did do some sockingly stupid things, especially in retrospect. But if we make stupid a crime I doubt we would have enough space if we used a couple of continents as penal colonies.
> Because you're clearly the bastion of real truth, with all your lies and disinformation about what will happen if gay marriage is legal.
Really? You really don't believe gay marriage is part and parcel of the progressive efforts to mainstream homosexuality? Do you really think that society won't be fundamentally changed thereby? Do you really believe that isn't the whole POINT of the exercise? And considering the progressive's track record it is a pretty safe bet the changes will be for the bad.
> Remember, he was trying to get fired because he was gay, and performing sex acts in front of the children.
Not exactly. He was trying to get fired so he could SUE the school for being intolerant of his being gay. But the school and the whole town were so obsessed with tolerance and fear of being called a bigot that they allowed Garrison to have sex with Mr. Slave in front of the children and STILL wouldn't sack his perverted ass, instead sending their children off to tolerance camp for daring to object. In the end even Garrison couldn't take the 'tolerance' anymore and lead to his epic rant about the difference between tolerance and acceptance; the town, in a mad desire to be politically correct, had went from tolerance to a blind acceptance of pretty much anything.
Of course it is South Park and they exagerate to make a point and to be funny. But their points are more often that not valid ones. For the Truth to be funny it usually has to be a painful Truth.
> At least these supposed death threats you've been a victim of were sent by people who had the sense to keep it private.
Um, nope. They are in this article's permanent record for all the world to see and be instructed thereby. Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
> Why would you think this, unless it is similar in your case?
Ok, THIS argument I'm even more tired of, the "if you disagree with letting militant gays redesign society in their image it must mean you are an in the closet self hating gay yourself." That argument is more retarded than the Chewbacca Defense on South Park. By that 'logic' the average Ron Paul/Stormfront racist nutter is secretly black or a jew? Eh?
No, I resist the militant gays because they are just one front in the wider progressive movement to 'transform America' into fail.
Slashdot Mirror
> Hit the windows key, type the first few letters and hit enter. Exactly the same as you would do before.
Why am I having flashbacks to almost exactly identical threads when GNOME3 was excreted? New 'super simple' graphical interface that can't be used with a mouse but if you memorize a bunch of keyboard shortcuts..... It is/is not (at the same time, often with both sides argued in a single post) built for a touch only world. Windows ME will be moving up a notch from the bottom of the list of Microsoft's worst products. But dead last will of course belong to Bob; now and forever.
That won't be a problem for long. This SoC shares the video part with enough other devices that in no time at all there will be 'places' one can go to obtain the required libraries. Much like there is one stop shopping for the Win32 codecs to make Mplayer able to play darned near anything. And nobody is going to care, Broadcom won't, the **AA groups won't care, nobody will. As long as it is just a geeks building media boxes and crap like that, any large institutional user will of course simply work out a licensing agreement. But Broadcom has to charge the Pi Foundation for the codecs they ship and officially support or the whole phony balony shakedown on codec licensing would come crashing down so we are all going to have to do the wink wink nudge nudge schtick.
> You're ignoring the costs of the emergency services to deal with an accident
You are right. I was ignoring a lof things. It is called a back of the envelope calculation, to see if a proposal passes the smell test. Take the most optimistic numbers from the article (almost certainly overcounting every minor injury to inflate the problem and seriously lowballing the price of the proposed solution) and Google up the one missing number (number of cars sold annually) to make a first run through. It failed. If you were expecting a detailed, exhaustive cost benefit analysis would be performed on the spot for the benefit of the mindless hordes on what passes for slashdot these days, who would mostly ignore it anyway if it disagreed with their preconceived notions of the majesty and infallibility of the State, you are delusional. Do the word 'perls before swine' ring any bells?
Bottom line, even if you are obsessed with safety and totalitarian enough to believe in ordering everyone else to implement your pet notions, there are thousands of better places to be a busybody do gooder where you save more lives per million of other people's money spent. If a billion dollars (and that is a ball park of the annual price tag) on cancer research couldn't save 200 lives I'd be really shocked. And yes it really does work that way, money seized and spent on this misguided project of government directed spending isn't available to be taxed and directly spent on research. Do the math. A billion dollars of research or save two hundred people who couldn't see the reverse lights or the new government mandated backup alarms and get out of the way. One or the other. We don't live in such prosperous times we can ignore economic reality any more, we live in an age of limits and can no longer afford to be stupid.
> But I suspect you already knew that and were just trolling.
No, the first post was simply being brief. THIS post is a troll. Please compare and contrast. Just so you will know the difference in the future.
> But everyone who is arguing against this honestly just sound like people did back in the day when they mandated seat belts and air bags.
You know something? You are right. And wrong. This is exactly the same, seatbelts and airbags were mandated way before their time and anyway, where the hell does the government come off ordering us around. They didn't have the right then and don't now. Airbags are only now getting perfected to the point where I feel safe having them in a vehicle. Early units were so expensive that a vehicle with an airbag deployment was pretty much totaled. They KILLED small women and children and it was illegal to disable them until quite recently. So you either forced the ten year old to sit in the back instead of shotgun or you accepted that in an accident the kid was almost certain to die... and that it was ILLEGAL to attempt to fix the problem. Textbook example of what us small government types are on about when we rant about one size fits all big government solutions. Early seatbelts weren't as dangerous but were hugely annoying and again, the early mandated ones added a lot of cost. Let the tech develop on its own and eventually it will get deployed.
But fascists can't wait, they can't allow the market to decide these things because it would be an admission that they aren't the annointed few, fit above all others to rule the clueless rabble who they believe need them to make all of the important decisions for them. If you think rear view cameras are a good idea, PITCH IT TO ME. Make a good enough case and I might opt for one when car shopping. Order me and I'm more likely to say 'screw you hippie!' This idea though, is just dumb. Upthread I did the math and came up with over 4M per life saved. So as a safety measure it therefore should come after we have worked through all of the thousands and thousands of safety improvements that save lives at better returns. At close to a billion dollars to save two hundred lives (absolute best case on the numbers) there are so many better uses for that sort of money that if you yourself can't think of a dozen in a couple of minutes of effort you probably can't think.
Preach!
Math, it really should be mandatory to vote. Google sez we sell about 16 million cars annually. At the minimum price mentioned of $58 per car that works out to $929 million. Now ASSume it cuts that 200 deaths to zero (it won't) and that works out to what per life? Uh huh. For 4.6M per there are a lot more cost effective ways to save lives. Oh, but there are also people injured. Ok, go that math. For over 50K per injury that is still pretty fracking expensive. And I'd bet good money that a fair chunk of that 17,000 didn't get hurt very badly, perhaps a broken bone. Again assuming a rear camera would cut that number to zero, which it won't.
> If the GOP actually nominates Santorum, this will no longer be an unlikely-sounding conspiracy theory, but an irrefutable fact.
Kinda. I do think a poopstorm is impending. So the only way I want our side in the White House is if we can put somebody there who understands the danger and MIGHT be willing to tackle it. Romney will go 'bipartisan' before getting sworn in. Ron Paul would be ignored by Congress totally, but other than that I"m 100% with him on econonics (and think he is bat shity insane on foreign policy) while with Newt it would be a total crapshoot since he is so erratic. So Santorum. Sure his odds of actually winning are lower but IF he won he could probably turn the ship of state enough to avoid the iceberg in our path. He understand that the establishment will NEVER like him so won't bother trying to compromise to win the approval of the legacy media and also understands Washington well enough to have a decent shot of hammering out a deal.
We are heading off a cliff, but in theory we could avert the disaster at this point. But only barely. It will be rough even in a best case scenario but we aren't quite yet fated for Greece's doom. The question is whether the voters can be made to understand the situation well enough to create the political will to make the sort of changes needed before the die is cast and we lose control of our future as Greece has. Again, the only scenario I see Santorum winning in is exactly that scenario. So supporting him is safer from the owning the disaster angle.
> I don't agree. Politicians are legally allowed to robocall you. Grr.
Well THAT story would be News for Nerds but that isn't the story we were given to generate pageviews for /. over. Of course your first mistake is failing to notice the new corporate overlords ditched the slogan "News for nerds, stuff that matters." long ago.
I mean, come on /., I understand this is election season and some political stories kinda have to go up but try a little harder to pick stories that fit the crowd, K?
I mean, I'm a conservative (and have the terrible karma to prove it) but there just ain't much here to bite into and rile up the conversation. These are the rules, all sides exploit them shamelessly when possible and decry em when they are on the wrong end of em. But the parties make the rules and if they wanted closed primaries they could do that any time they wanted to. I wish they would, even though I'm now in the Santorum camp after Perry's implosion and 'my' guy is the one benefitting this time. If ya are going to have open primaries the parties don't really mean anything so just do like Louisiana and have really open 'jungle primaries.'
Net10 is ok and if you use it much the slightly lower price for voice could be enough to make you stick with it. But I found h20wireless when I was looking for really cheap cell service. $10 or $20 cards that don't expire for 90 days. Text is only $0.05 ea + an extra $0.05 the first text each day but voice is $0.14/min. Net10 makes you top up every 30 days unless you plunk down serious coin for their big card that gives you 180 days. With my minimalist usage the service days is my limit so they aren't so good a deal. And unlike Net10, H2owireless is a bring your own GSM phone SIM card only deal so it works just fine in a cheap Android phone I picked up on eBay, only no data. (They do sell data plans, they just aren't all that remarkable.) H2o resells AT&T service so you basically get their coverage area without the price. Same company also runs a prepaid resell outfit for Verizon so if you have a CDMA phone with a clean ESN you can get that going about as cheap.
If T-Mobile has decent service (not via roaming, that was why I couldn't have em, my zip is roam so they won't sell to me) in your area their prepaid SIM deal is also very cost effective. I got stopped when the web form asked for my zip code or I'd be using them now. The trick is not getting caught in the higher monthly rates to subsidize a handset game, any deal that just sells you a SIM is going to deliver lower monthly rates.
There are options for cheap bastards who think paying $50+ per month to carry a phone is nuts.
> Led by the UN = most of the UN members are crooks, dictators, religious extremists, military leaders...
What is really horrible is that this state of affairs isn't an accident. It was designed that way, to be a Parliment of Tyrants. When the UN was proposed and designed most nation states were unfree hellholes and with the Soviet Block and ChiComs on the rise at the time the trend was not our friend. Yet the design called for one nation state one vote in the General Assembly and with both China and the Soviet Union getting a veto in the Security Council there was zero chance of anything positive ever happening and every chance of great harm. And it was designed that way. Think about it.
So lets turn over control of the Internet to the same bunch of misfits who thought seating Iran to an organization to pontificate on human rights was a good idea. And lets not forget Libya having to get booted out of the Human Rights Council when Kadaffy's body count got so high even the other tyrants were getting embarrased. So oh heck yea, lets turn the Internet over to these thugs, what could possibly go wrong when the Axis of Evil starts writing the RFCs for the Evil Bit and it ain't April Fools.
> Can't think of an equivilent case of utterly using and disposing of people by the left
Karma is already terrible so I can't let this one pass unremarked. How about I mention an even more egregious case of disposing of people by the left?
Might I mention the entire feminist movement? After spending how many years building a national consensus that powerful men shouldn't abuse their position of authority to take advantage of the hired help, that whole movement was promptly thrown under the bus to rewrite the employment rules so a philandering piece of crap with over a decade of track record could be absolved of sexually harrassing the help, random strangers and finally having a lowly intern blow him in the oval office. And how about the example of, oh I dunno, Paula Jones? Long before, as you claim, the Right threw her under the bus, she was one more 'Bimbo Eruption' who was dealth with by the Clinton campaign by having her personal life destroyed.
This article's summary is half true. Lying by omission is almost as bad as by commission though.
What isn't mentioned? Note this: "Peter Gleick, scientist and journalist." Not mentioned are the list of accolades heaped on him (according to his Wikipedia page) for work in Global Warming. In other words he isn't acting as a disinterested scientist or journalist in this affair but as a dedicated partisan to a cause who let winning override ethics. By his own admission.
And "but there is no solid evidence either way" which is true enough on its own. Barring a confession by Gleick we will probably never be 100% certain the memo in question is a forgery. However there is a crapload of circumstantial evidence all pointing that way.
Not saying Heartland doesn't give me heartburn sometimes and I'm firmly in the skeptic camp, with the downmods right here to prove it. But this memo was a setup. It smelt funny from the start and gets riper by the day.
Not saying the idea of 'peak oil' is totally bogus, only that every attempt to predict it has proven wrong. Since the first prediction the peak has been pushed back again and again by offshore drilling, discovering whole new oil fields, the discovery of shale oil, tar sands, fracking and probably a few more before we hit the real peak oil. If I had to make a prediction, admitting mine will probably be as wrong as everyone else's, I'd say we will only identify 'peak oil' in retrospect and not in a forward prediction. We keep doming up with ever more clever ways of getting at the stuff, especially as the price keeps going up. Extraction methods that would have been madness at $5/barrel are very profitable at $100/barrel. At $150 what new tricks will suddenly be commonplace?
I only wish we would get serious while there is plenty of dead dino for plastics and other uses and go all in on moving as much as possible to other things. CNG is something we have out the wazoo here in the US and we don't depend on insane tyrants for any of it. Nuke plants should be a no brainer but the mindless greens hate it and apparently have a veto on our survival.
Yes, eventually dead dinosaur will become so expensive we will shift over to alternatives. But odds we will also figure out ways to either make the basic chemicals we use now at reasonable cost or find practical replacements so no, we won'r suddenly 'do without' synthetic fibers or plastics. Heck, we already have bio derived plastic, it just isn't quite as versatile or inexpensive but give it another decade.
The bigger limit when we run low on dead dinosaur is the big battle of growing food vs growing fuel. If population grows just feeding people on a petro economy will be tough, doing it while growing the fuel just for the agricultural and food distribution needs will be a bitch.
I laugh at these simpletons who think they can run straight line projections into the future and ignore the fact that when we really need something the profit motive usually inspires somebody to figure out a way to get rich. Just looking at the whole peak oil silliness should be enough to convince anyone. 'Hightly respected' experts have been telling is for fifty years we have been about twenty years away from 'peak oil.' It is pretty much the reverse of fusion, where we have been twenty years away from commercial fusion for the last fifty years. The future will be wierder than we can imagine and all predictions over a decade out are usually worthless.
> I just want to know what's going to happen when the Russian Link Farmers figure out that they can sell
> the ability to put any candidate they want, on top of the results.
Don't worry, they can't. Many try, some succeed for a brief moment but all fail. If Google (and the few other remaining search engines) weren't totally on board with Savage's antics his little SEO effort would have been blackholed to the bottom of the results years ago just like anyone else who has tried and failed to place and keep a search result at the top of the rankings that isn't useful to Google's valued eyeballs who drive in the revenue.
Thought experiment. Imagine somebody pulling this stunt with another politician with a fairly unigue name. Say the current POTUS. It wouldn't matter how many link farms they had, how many crowdsourced users got in on the act, that site would go to the bottom of the search rankings just as soon as somebody at Google noticed it and would remain there, just like they do anyone who they deem to be abusing their rankings. And they should, the conspicious exception here is what is striking.
Eh? Headline says "Programming error" while the summary says it was some doofus trying to get away with buying off the shelf instead of paying extra for radiation hardened space rated parts and losing. The only good thing in this story was it was an unmanned probe.
> Because of the lack of Ethernet, the Model A is predicted to be more of a niche board...
It is worse. The Model A only has 128MB of ram. Now go read the datasheet they released today and discover that the GPU must claim at least 32MB and can't deliver 1080p30 video without more. So you have 96MB max ram available for Linux on the Model A and will probably have to split it 64/64 for anything multimedia. Forget mainstream Linux in that environment, you are in embedded territory there. OpenWRT for the win.
Normally I'd be joining the chorus complaining about yet another non-news post anout the Raspberry Pi but the release of half the datasheet is real news. Everybody should give Broadcom half a Huzzah! for it. Half is certainly better than nothing and since zero ARM SoC vendors have released anything about their GPUs it is going to take a sustained effort to solve that problem.
Can we put out a memo that EVERY SINGLE science story doesn't need a green religious hook in it? Please? You guys are worse than the most rabid Pentecostal.
I promise you that if you look at the error bars on the 40,000 in and 95,000 numbers the 160 atributed to global warming is lost in the noise. And that is IF you accept that number in the first place which is pretty bogus sounding. Anyone remember just how much energy is in mass anymore? How one kilogram of mass directly converted to energy is so much fricking energy that it would probably power all of civilization for a year or more? So now burning (hint, just a chemical action) some dead dinosaur is releasing the energy equivilent of 160 TONNES? Eh? The mass of the burned material drops by the amount of the released energy and either escapes to space or ends up captured as mass somewhere on Earth. IF one assumes AGW the mass of heating the crust and atmosphere of the earth a tiny fraction of a degree per year isn't going to give tons either. Math people, try it sometime. It works a lot better than your hokey religion.
Exactly right. We don't worry about India having the bomb and last time I checked they were 'brown people' too. They are not likely to use one, especially in a first strike.
We worry about Iran because they are something new, a nuke possessing country who may not be subject to MAD. In the end the 'godless commies' had one thing going for them in the world peace issues of the Cold War. They wanted to rule the world but they didn't really want to 'win' by being the last survivor in a post apocolypse scenario, the party leaders liked the good life and wanted to keep living it, especially since they didn't much believe in an afterlife to be rewarded in for wiping out the enemy in this one for.
We just don't know if Iran would be so constrained. We pretty much have to take Ajad at his word that he doesn't give a crap if atomic hellfire rains down on him after his rightous jihad of nuking Israel and the US, as we would be fools not to. What we don't know is whether the military structure he commands is equally suicidal. Since guessing wrong, and especially considering the pitiful track record of western intelligence regarding things middle eastern/Islamic, could be a civilization extinction event we probably should err on the side of caution. A country burning off scads of natural gas because they don't consider it valuable enough to capture and use probably doesn't actually need nuke power plants for electricity generation.
As a non-idiot I knew this was possible. I fight Chase regularly on this, they send a new card with the stupid chip, I call and roast em, they mail me a new one without the chip. But they tell me at the time that it is a one time only deal and sure enough they send another later in the year on a different card. Yes, because of mergermania I now have three credit cards but they are all Chase. They simply refuse to allow you to permanently opt out of this madness.
Same with wanting to move me to a debit card instead of an ATM card. The ATM card requires a PIN for all transactions and has other safeguards which work in my favor. The debit cards can be used in all sorts of places without a PIN and since it isn't a credit card (despite the Visa logo) the stolen money is gone from your account and you are getting to pay NSF fees all over the place while you fight over it. So I just keep cutting those cards every time they send a new one out and keep using my ancient ATM card. When it stops working I'm out of there.
Not exactly. If you just had a list of numbers that happened to be CC numbers you might be right. But if you had what is typically a list of stolen CC numbers, i.e. a listing of names, billing addreesses, numbers, ccv numbers, date of birth, etc. then you have personal information on people with no provable right to possess it. With all these new privacy laws springing up you may or may not be committing a crime by mere possession of that information.
And yes we might want to think through the 1st Amendment implications a bit before we go even farther down this road of privacy protection. Everything is a balance and when politicians are pushing a bandwagon it is always a good idea to stop and think through why they REALLY want something.
Perhaps my irony detector is busted but I seriously doubt any banker INTENDED to lose a shedload of money and most probably weren't intendiing to blow up the world. The they did do some sockingly stupid things, especially in retrospect. But if we make stupid a crime I doubt we would have enough space if we used a couple of continents as penal colonies.
> Because you're clearly the bastion of real truth, with all your lies and disinformation about what will happen if gay marriage is legal.
Really? You really don't believe gay marriage is part and parcel of the progressive efforts to mainstream homosexuality? Do you really think that society won't be fundamentally changed thereby? Do you really believe that isn't the whole POINT of the exercise? And considering the progressive's track record it is a pretty safe bet the changes will be for the bad.
> Remember, he was trying to get fired because he was gay, and performing sex acts in front of the children.
Not exactly. He was trying to get fired so he could SUE the school for being intolerant of his being gay. But the school and the whole town were so obsessed with tolerance and fear of being called a bigot that they allowed Garrison to have sex with Mr. Slave in front of the children and STILL wouldn't sack his perverted ass, instead sending their children off to tolerance camp for daring to object. In the end even Garrison couldn't take the 'tolerance' anymore and lead to his epic rant about the difference between tolerance and acceptance; the town, in a mad desire to be politically correct, had went from tolerance to a blind acceptance of pretty much anything.
Of course it is South Park and they exagerate to make a point and to be funny. But their points are more often that not valid ones. For the Truth to be funny it usually has to be a painful Truth.
> At least these supposed death threats you've been a victim of were sent by people who had the sense to keep it private.
Um, nope. They are in this article's permanent record for all the world to see and be instructed thereby. Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
> Why would you think this, unless it is similar in your case?
Ok, THIS argument I'm even more tired of, the "if you disagree with letting militant gays redesign society in their image it must mean you are an in the closet self hating gay yourself." That argument is more retarded than the Chewbacca Defense on South Park. By that 'logic' the average Ron Paul/Stormfront racist nutter is secretly black or a jew? Eh?
No, I resist the militant gays because they are just one front in the wider progressive movement to 'transform America' into fail.