When the alternate was a warmonger and rape apologist Hillary Clinton?
You say this like it means something, but it does not. Warmongering is typical of American presidents. We're a warlike nation, we've generally been at war (declared or not) throughout our history. And Trump is both a rapist and a rape apologist, and hires rapists and attempted rapists. Drone strikes have increased during his presidency, and he rescinded an order that provided us information about them so we no longer know by how much. Donald Trump is everything you claim to hate about Hillary Clinton, and then some. Come up with a better argument, because yours is not only wrong, but boring.
We've spent so much time and energy in this industry catering to the residents of, and solving problems that basically only exist in, the Bay Area.
That's really nonsense. The big problems faced by the expensive parts of California are high cost of living, and high numbers of homeless people. Every place with a high cost of living has a homelessness problem, because the high cost of living causes people to become homeless. There are multiple strategies for solving it, including shipping people out to other places. That's how a lot of the homeless people in California got to be homeless people in California. They either came here of their own accord, or were literally sent here because they were homeless. I also hear a lot of complaints about fecal matter, but from what I've heard from people who have done more world travel than I have, that's also a problem in much of Europe. A FOAF was so struck by this that she did a photo series of turds in famous places, with landmarks in the background. You know, turd and The Louvre, turd and the Eiffel Tower, that kind of thing.
The problem with inadequate housing for workers exists everywhere that's expensive. San Francisco has a particularly serious problem because of mismanagement of its light rail system, which should have something like twice as many trains on it in order to gracefully handle demand. It's there, and it's capable of doing the job (in spite of having an odd design, it's not a bad one) if only it were used correctly. The bus system is also fairly deplorable; when I lived there it took as long to walk from Bernal Heights (where I lived) to Potrero Hill (where I worked) as to get there via MUNI, in the best case.
The homelessness problem has to be addressed at the national level, it cannot simply be pushed off on California. We can pay our bills, but we can't pay everyone else's as well. If Trump is going to take away our rail funding, we can't really afford to be sending so much money to the federal government, either. We need that HSR. The whole country does, in fact. It would go a long way to solving the worker housing problem.
The annoying thing about cities, for those who dislike them, is that they can be amazingly efficient if done correctly. With good public transportation that people want to use, the roads can be free to transport goods in and out of them, and the population density provides improved efficiency. High density housing in particular can reduce resource consumption from construction, heating and cooling, and transportation. Obviously, San Francisco has some way to go in these regards, but most other large cities have problems with these issues as well. Traffic and homelessness are problems in New York, Chicago, Houston, Seattle... You name a major city in the USA, and it's either decaying or choking, or it's choking on decay.
In the absence of equivalent to the Halloween documents leak, I would more likely presume the second options.
Presume, assume, whatever kind of ume you like, but if you're going to make assumptions then it's rarely wise to assume an extreme. The truth usually lies in between things. The typical competitive attitude is "those guys are dumbshits and we're geniuses" and if you let it get out of hand, then you can justify literally any kind of behavior with that kind of thinking.
the dragons themselves must be magic because there is no way they could fly with the geometry they have, and they would need to consume so many calories they would be extremely difficult just to keep from starvation in any kind of captivity/pet scenario.
Didn't we see the "dragons eat rancher's cattle" trope in one episode of GoT? My memory is hazy, and I have not yet begun to binge.
Weren't you just complaining about how dragons can't reasonably fly already? They surely can't carry enough armor to be useful against a ballista projectile.
Does the White Walker dragon eat in order to make this substance? It doesn't just appear out of nowhere. And why is it blue instead of red? Blue is a hotter flame than red.
It's because the living dragons have a hydrogen flame, and the white walker dragon has a methane flame, obviously.
Heck, here in the US even a convicted abusive monopoly like Microsoft can get away with it. Grease the right palms and nobody will make an issue of it - or at worst "punish" you with a fine far smaller than the excess profits your anti-competitive behavior is generating so that it's just a cost of doing business.
Which brings us to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Microsoft was found by the USDoJ to have abused its effective monopoly position in the marketplace in essentially every way possible. Then Ashcroft (under Bush) declared that penalizing Microsoft would not be in the best interests of the nation. Then Bill put his money into his so-called charitable trust, where it can't be taxed, and it's much harder to take away. And there are a variety of ways to get the money back out as needed; there's more in there than he can spend, anyway.
So my question is, what deals did Billy G cut with TPTB behind the scenes? I have no suggestions as to what they might have been at this time, but I've been wondering about it ever since it happened. Was it simple palm-greasing, or are there greater plans afoot? I don't spend a lot of time speculating about it, I don't have a manifesto or anything, but the subject comes up frequently enough that I think it might be kind of important.
At the time, folks around Slashdot were all like, "haw, haw, haw, karma's a bitch, eh there Billy?" Which is, of course, the easy and fun thing to say because of a predisposed hatred of Microsoft.
That's one way to put it. Another way is that it's because of our personal experiences with a long history of abuse by Microsoft. Mozilla may be squandering millions of dollars in donations on things users don't want (e.g. Pocket) but lacking a dominant position in the marketplace, they're at least not spending the money making computing worse for other players, if only because they can't. Microsoft and Google both appear to be doing things which are harming Firefox, if not due to actual malice, then at least through negligence.
Microsoft was found in federal court to have abused its dominant market position (and effective monopoly) in basically every way possible, setting computing back possibly as much as ten years in the process. You can't simply dismiss that as "predisposed hatred", however technically accurate that phrase might be. Microsoft earned it.
Now we see that Google has persistently been sabotaging Firefox as well. So maybe the problem wasn't Edge, after all.....
It's not now, there have been signs all along. And Edge (And Aieeee! before it) can be part of the problem, and Chrome can be another part.
Hard to justify putting a lot of engineering effort into ~15% of the market, most of whom probably also have another browser installed anyway.
Yes, it's hard to justify futureproofing. But any company which isn't insolvent should have a vested interest in doing it, because it will reduce costs in the future.
Small cars are dangerous on the highway where there is weather.
Snort. Large vehicles are far more dangerous in weather.
Skinny tires and light frames get pulled around in the snow and wind.
Cars don't even have frames any more, they have unit bodies. Even some full-sized SUVs now use unibody designs. Large vehicles like trucks and buses are still built on frames, though. They have flat sides and lots of surface area, so they tend to be highly affected by wind. When's the last time you heard about the wind blowing a car over? It happens to big rigs all the time. And in the snow? They have less contact patch per pound than a smaller vehicle, even when they have more wheels, and once they get going they're vastly harder to stop. Just the snow building up under your vehicle will stop a car from sliding, eventually. Heavy vehicles tend to have much more trouble stopping. And if they slide into you, they do much more damage.
This is why cars should stay on the road in a pileup, and let the heavy vehicles go off of it.
Very simple to work around this problem: Don't even look at items with obviously Chinese or made-up non-sensical names like QUONGWHY or FEEMII or WTFOMGBBQ.
Here's the problem with that. Some of the stupid-name stuff is actually a good value, like Sunnysky or Epever for example in solar equipment. And you find out which are good by reading the reviews in detail. Most positive reviews are worthless. So are most negative reviews, to be fair, but a larger percentage of them are useful. Some of those reviews actually include teardown images, either from failures, or from dissections to see if they are built well enough to risk someplace where a bad one might cause a fire.
You have grossly misrepresented the handling capabilities of the worlds leading shippers. I've seen packages so bad that they'd make a hammer defective upon arrival.
It's not a secret that the shippers abuse packages. If you don't take that into account when designing/selecting packaging, you fail. You can't get packages to their destination undamaged through pretense or imagination.
often things break in shipping and are no fault of the manufacturer.
Packing things to survive shipping is the responsibility of the seller. If they can't manage that, they deserve a negative review for wasting your time.
Maybe free software already won the "software wars", now I think there should be a fight against the "close source cloud".
Free software has won the software wars in academia, and in servers. Everywhere else is still dominated by proprietary software. (Handhelds are a mixed bag, because most of them run Android, and there is AOSP, but many of them can't run it. Etc.)
What it's going to take for FOSS to take over the rest is the same thing it always was going to take. It's going to require that some people sit down and apply that last 50% of effort on the last 10% of the software, and polish it up. It's going to take some adequate kiddie-level documentation. It's not the hot, new and sexy. It's the practical and necessary.
Unless you mean that you're still thinking of Perl as a glorified sed/awk? It hasn't been that for over 25 years.
Personally, I think of perl as glue. It's good at tying things together. There are modules for many things. In fact, that's one of the many things that annoys me about Python. We had perl already, and its massive library of modules, and then Python came along and had to start all over. What a waste of effort. Perl was perfectly fine for all the things being done with Python now.
Sure, no place is completely safe. But there are countries where Joe the Plumber isn't allowed to open carry a bump stock modified AK47 just because he has a small penis.
Bump stocks are for dipshits. If you want to modify an AK47 for full auto, you can google "ak47 full auto mod" and find out how to do it. Do it from a McDonalds or something if you actually plan to do it, I don't own any AKs (or even ARs) so I just went ahead and did it from my browser:p
In those countries, people are allowed to carry flammable materials, and drive cars. You could kill a whole building full of people with a car, some wood, and some matches. Just block one exit with a car, and one exit with a fire.
The odds of being killed by a mass shooter are minuscule. I still think we should take steps to reduce mass shootings, but banning bump stocks was masturbatory.
I just don't think it matters for most content. For every somber, low-contrast film like Aliens there's ten garish, high-contract flicks like Legally Blonde. Video quality only really matters when there's a lot of detail, or a lot of shades of black (perhaps from blackish, to none more black.) And unless you're in an ideal situation, you might not be able to see the difference either; it might be less significant than dust or reflections on the display. The same is true of audio quality, too. There are certain things MP3 doesn't do well, but unless you have high-end audio gear, you aren't going to be able to tell the difference in most cases — and those cases are few and far between to start with, so you won't even encounter them very often.
I'm thinking that he is starting to slip mentally. I'm not referring to his policies, like or dislike them as you may, I mean some of the stuff he focuses on saying, it seems like his mind is faltering.
Starting to? What makes me worry is when he can't pronounce some common word, multiple times in a row. That looks strokey AF. Oringins indeed.
So - the car still COSTS Tesla the same amount of money to make, they will just sell it to you for cheaper if you let them set a few bits in the firmware - thereby cutting their own margins.
If they make another variant of the battery pack, then they have to do another series of crash tests in order to be able to sell cars with it in. They don't that many vehicles with the lower allotment will be sold, and/or they expect that many of those vehicles will be upgraded later. In the mean time, they're reducing warranty claims by selling an overprovisioned pack, which will last longer because it will not be discharged as far. This is really not as complicated as it would have to be to justify your incredulity.
We have hundreds of iPhones returned by former employees that are unusable because of this. Apple refuses to unlock them even though they belong to the company. I'm surprised they are allowed to get away with this in a corporate environment but I guess the RDF is still strong enough because they keep buying them.
I'm surprised they are allowed to get away with this in your corporate environment, but whoever's making the purchasing decisions is obviously either corrupt or stupid (there's no third option.)
Slashdot Mirror
When the alternate was a warmonger and rape apologist Hillary Clinton?
You say this like it means something, but it does not. Warmongering is typical of American presidents. We're a warlike nation, we've generally been at war (declared or not) throughout our history. And Trump is both a rapist and a rape apologist, and hires rapists and attempted rapists. Drone strikes have increased during his presidency, and he rescinded an order that provided us information about them so we no longer know by how much. Donald Trump is everything you claim to hate about Hillary Clinton, and then some. Come up with a better argument, because yours is not only wrong, but boring.
We've spent so much time and energy in this industry catering to the residents of, and solving problems that basically only exist in, the Bay Area.
That's really nonsense. The big problems faced by the expensive parts of California are high cost of living, and high numbers of homeless people. Every place with a high cost of living has a homelessness problem, because the high cost of living causes people to become homeless. There are multiple strategies for solving it, including shipping people out to other places. That's how a lot of the homeless people in California got to be homeless people in California. They either came here of their own accord, or were literally sent here because they were homeless. I also hear a lot of complaints about fecal matter, but from what I've heard from people who have done more world travel than I have, that's also a problem in much of Europe. A FOAF was so struck by this that she did a photo series of turds in famous places, with landmarks in the background. You know, turd and The Louvre, turd and the Eiffel Tower, that kind of thing.
The problem with inadequate housing for workers exists everywhere that's expensive. San Francisco has a particularly serious problem because of mismanagement of its light rail system, which should have something like twice as many trains on it in order to gracefully handle demand. It's there, and it's capable of doing the job (in spite of having an odd design, it's not a bad one) if only it were used correctly. The bus system is also fairly deplorable; when I lived there it took as long to walk from Bernal Heights (where I lived) to Potrero Hill (where I worked) as to get there via MUNI, in the best case.
The homelessness problem has to be addressed at the national level, it cannot simply be pushed off on California. We can pay our bills, but we can't pay everyone else's as well. If Trump is going to take away our rail funding, we can't really afford to be sending so much money to the federal government, either. We need that HSR. The whole country does, in fact. It would go a long way to solving the worker housing problem.
The annoying thing about cities, for those who dislike them, is that they can be amazingly efficient if done correctly. With good public transportation that people want to use, the roads can be free to transport goods in and out of them, and the population density provides improved efficiency. High density housing in particular can reduce resource consumption from construction, heating and cooling, and transportation. Obviously, San Francisco has some way to go in these regards, but most other large cities have problems with these issues as well. Traffic and homelessness are problems in New York, Chicago, Houston, Seattle... You name a major city in the USA, and it's either decaying or choking, or it's choking on decay.
In the absence of equivalent to the Halloween documents leak, I would more likely presume the second options.
Presume, assume, whatever kind of ume you like, but if you're going to make assumptions then it's rarely wise to assume an extreme. The truth usually lies in between things. The typical competitive attitude is "those guys are dumbshits and we're geniuses" and if you let it get out of hand, then you can justify literally any kind of behavior with that kind of thinking.
This prudish shit, coming from the land of tentacle porn and bukkake.
Most of which is censored, if it actually comes from Japan anyway.
the dragons themselves must be magic because there is no way they could fly with the geometry they have, and they would need to consume so many calories they would be extremely difficult just to keep from starvation in any kind of captivity/pet scenario.
Didn't we see the "dragons eat rancher's cattle" trope in one episode of GoT? My memory is hazy, and I have not yet begun to binge.
Also why isn't dragon armour a thing?
Weren't you just complaining about how dragons can't reasonably fly already? They surely can't carry enough armor to be useful against a ballista projectile.
Does the White Walker dragon eat in order to make this substance? It doesn't just appear out of nowhere. And why is it blue instead of red? Blue is a hotter flame than red.
It's because the living dragons have a hydrogen flame, and the white walker dragon has a methane flame, obviously.
Heck, here in the US even a convicted abusive monopoly like Microsoft can get away with it. Grease the right palms and nobody will make an issue of it - or at worst "punish" you with a fine far smaller than the excess profits your anti-competitive behavior is generating so that it's just a cost of doing business.
Which brings us to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Microsoft was found by the USDoJ to have abused its effective monopoly position in the marketplace in essentially every way possible. Then Ashcroft (under Bush) declared that penalizing Microsoft would not be in the best interests of the nation. Then Bill put his money into his so-called charitable trust, where it can't be taxed, and it's much harder to take away. And there are a variety of ways to get the money back out as needed; there's more in there than he can spend, anyway.
So my question is, what deals did Billy G cut with TPTB behind the scenes? I have no suggestions as to what they might have been at this time, but I've been wondering about it ever since it happened. Was it simple palm-greasing, or are there greater plans afoot? I don't spend a lot of time speculating about it, I don't have a manifesto or anything, but the subject comes up frequently enough that I think it might be kind of important.
At the time, folks around Slashdot were all like, "haw, haw, haw, karma's a bitch, eh there Billy?" Which is, of course, the easy and fun thing to say because of a predisposed hatred of Microsoft.
That's one way to put it. Another way is that it's because of our personal experiences with a long history of abuse by Microsoft. Mozilla may be squandering millions of dollars in donations on things users don't want (e.g. Pocket) but lacking a dominant position in the marketplace, they're at least not spending the money making computing worse for other players, if only because they can't. Microsoft and Google both appear to be doing things which are harming Firefox, if not due to actual malice, then at least through negligence.
Microsoft was found in federal court to have abused its dominant market position (and effective monopoly) in basically every way possible, setting computing back possibly as much as ten years in the process. You can't simply dismiss that as "predisposed hatred", however technically accurate that phrase might be. Microsoft earned it.
Now we see that Google has persistently been sabotaging Firefox as well. So maybe the problem wasn't Edge, after all.....
It's not now, there have been signs all along. And Edge (And Aieeee! before it) can be part of the problem, and Chrome can be another part.
Hard to justify putting a lot of engineering effort into ~15% of the market, most of whom probably also have another browser installed anyway.
Yes, it's hard to justify futureproofing. But any company which isn't insolvent should have a vested interest in doing it, because it will reduce costs in the future.
Small cars are dangerous on the highway where there is weather.
Snort. Large vehicles are far more dangerous in weather.
Skinny tires and light frames get pulled around in the snow and wind.
Cars don't even have frames any more, they have unit bodies. Even some full-sized SUVs now use unibody designs. Large vehicles like trucks and buses are still built on frames, though. They have flat sides and lots of surface area, so they tend to be highly affected by wind. When's the last time you heard about the wind blowing a car over? It happens to big rigs all the time. And in the snow? They have less contact patch per pound than a smaller vehicle, even when they have more wheels, and once they get going they're vastly harder to stop. Just the snow building up under your vehicle will stop a car from sliding, eventually. Heavy vehicles tend to have much more trouble stopping. And if they slide into you, they do much more damage.
This is why cars should stay on the road in a pileup, and let the heavy vehicles go off of it.
Very simple to work around this problem: Don't even look at items with obviously Chinese or made-up non-sensical names like QUONGWHY or FEEMII or WTFOMGBBQ.
Here's the problem with that. Some of the stupid-name stuff is actually a good value, like Sunnysky or Epever for example in solar equipment. And you find out which are good by reading the reviews in detail. Most positive reviews are worthless. So are most negative reviews, to be fair, but a larger percentage of them are useful. Some of those reviews actually include teardown images, either from failures, or from dissections to see if they are built well enough to risk someplace where a bad one might cause a fire.
You have grossly misrepresented the handling capabilities of the worlds leading shippers. I've seen packages so bad that they'd make a hammer defective upon arrival.
It's not a secret that the shippers abuse packages. If you don't take that into account when designing/selecting packaging, you fail. You can't get packages to their destination undamaged through pretense or imagination.
God you fat fuck. You have been posting every day of your life for 20 years!!! Get a life!
Who needs a life more, the fat fuck who's been posting for twenty years, or the dumb fuck who trolls him?
The negative reviews are useful. Most of the positive reviews aren't.
I buy things in stores. I talk to the salespeople. It's much simpler that way.
I can't remember the last time the salesdroid knew what they were selling.
often things break in shipping and are no fault of the manufacturer.
Packing things to survive shipping is the responsibility of the seller. If they can't manage that, they deserve a negative review for wasting your time.
Enterprise NCC1701-D's Food Replicator comes to mind. I bet you could tell it to generate the software you need to deliver tomorrow.
The food replicators could only make stuff that was programmed in.
Maybe free software already won the "software wars", now I think there should be a fight against the "close source cloud".
Free software has won the software wars in academia, and in servers. Everywhere else is still dominated by proprietary software. (Handhelds are a mixed bag, because most of them run Android, and there is AOSP, but many of them can't run it. Etc.)
What it's going to take for FOSS to take over the rest is the same thing it always was going to take. It's going to require that some people sit down and apply that last 50% of effort on the last 10% of the software, and polish it up. It's going to take some adequate kiddie-level documentation. It's not the hot, new and sexy. It's the practical and necessary.
Unless you mean that you're still thinking of Perl as a glorified sed/awk? It hasn't been that for over 25 years.
Personally, I think of perl as glue. It's good at tying things together. There are modules for many things. In fact, that's one of the many things that annoys me about Python. We had perl already, and its massive library of modules, and then Python came along and had to start all over. What a waste of effort. Perl was perfectly fine for all the things being done with Python now.
Sure, no place is completely safe.
But there are countries where Joe the Plumber isn't allowed to open carry a bump stock modified AK47 just because he has a small penis.
Bump stocks are for dipshits. If you want to modify an AK47 for full auto, you can google "ak47 full auto mod" and find out how to do it. Do it from a McDonalds or something if you actually plan to do it, I don't own any AKs (or even ARs) so I just went ahead and did it from my browser :p
In those countries, people are allowed to carry flammable materials, and drive cars. You could kill a whole building full of people with a car, some wood, and some matches. Just block one exit with a car, and one exit with a fire.
The odds of being killed by a mass shooter are minuscule. I still think we should take steps to reduce mass shootings, but banning bump stocks was masturbatory.
I just don't think it matters for most content. For every somber, low-contrast film like Aliens there's ten garish, high-contract flicks like Legally Blonde. Video quality only really matters when there's a lot of detail, or a lot of shades of black (perhaps from blackish, to none more black.) And unless you're in an ideal situation, you might not be able to see the difference either; it might be less significant than dust or reflections on the display. The same is true of audio quality, too. There are certain things MP3 doesn't do well, but unless you have high-end audio gear, you aren't going to be able to tell the difference in most cases — and those cases are few and far between to start with, so you won't even encounter them very often.
I'm thinking that he is starting to slip mentally. I'm not referring to his policies, like or dislike them as you may, I mean some of the stuff he focuses on saying, it seems like his mind is faltering.
Starting to? What makes me worry is when he can't pronounce some common word, multiple times in a row. That looks strokey AF. Oringins indeed.
So - the car still COSTS Tesla the same amount of money to make, they will just sell it to you for cheaper if you let them set a few bits in the firmware - thereby cutting their own margins.
If they make another variant of the battery pack, then they have to do another series of crash tests in order to be able to sell cars with it in. They don't that many vehicles with the lower allotment will be sold, and/or they expect that many of those vehicles will be upgraded later. In the mean time, they're reducing warranty claims by selling an overprovisioned pack, which will last longer because it will not be discharged as far. This is really not as complicated as it would have to be to justify your incredulity.
We have hundreds of iPhones returned by former employees that are unusable because of this. Apple refuses to unlock them even though they belong to the company. I'm surprised they are allowed to get away with this in a corporate environment but I guess the RDF is still strong enough because they keep buying them.
I'm surprised they are allowed to get away with this in your corporate environment, but whoever's making the purchasing decisions is obviously either corrupt or stupid (there's no third option.)