Planned movie series get canned all the time when the early installments flop. Unless this movie has a lot more attraction than most of us are guessing it will, it will almost certainly flop, and it's unlikely that they'll be able to come up with another $80 million to try again.
So, can Parsey McParseface make sense of what manishs posts? Because I generally can't. I assume that the example sentence from the summary probably came from the article, but for some reason the "editor" didn't think to read his summary to make sure that it actually made sense out of context.
If it were anyone but the Left's best hope for the Presidency, she'd be in jail.
The left's best hope? Hillary is probably the only possible candidate who could actually lose to Donald Trump. If the Democrats nominated somebody else (and Republicans actually stick with Trump), the Democrats would be essentially guaranteed with the presidency.
Not saying that Hillary is definitely going to lose, but a Clinton/Trump race is going to be a whole lot closer than it would otherwise be.
Right. A robot can't do it because of... nuance. In other words, you believe in magic. Oh, and the supercilious attitude of "well, your food is crap, but everything I eat is absolutely amazing." Apparently you not only believe in magic, you only eat at restaurants staffed by wizards.
A food processor isn't designed to cut things up the same way you do with your knife. Duh. But the notion that we can't make a machine to cut up vegetables however you need is beyond ridiculous.
But for those of us who like our food to not be some mass-prepared crap, that's far from the case.
If your food is to easy to automate, it's probably not really worth eating.
Oh, good grief. Do you do any cooking of your own? Most tasks associated with cooking -- whether it's at home or in the kitchen of an expensive restaurant -- are relatively simple mechanical skills, and there's zero reason why machinery could not be designed to duplicate the majority of dishes served at your favorite restaurant with very little human intervention. If labor costs get high enough, it will become profitable to develop that machinery.
Although the summary is simply quotes from the article, the way they presented them makes it nonsensical. (The US Netflix library is shrinking because it's hard to secure international streaming rights?) The actual article at least has a couple real reasons -- competition from Hulu and getting rid of obscure titles.
Most likely you don't even have a web-server running on port 80 and the connection attempt will be refused. Since there is no extension taking CPU cycles pattern matching ads this way is actually faster...
How do you think that the connection attempt gets made and refused, magic non-CPU woo-woo?
It may be true that if the extension is much less efficiently written than the browser and underlying OS services to look up the domain and do the connection attempt, that it will be slower, but all things being equal -- which is the point of this feature -- it should be faster, since you pretty much get to do a single if() rather than going through the entire rigmarole of a connection attempt.
Well, they pay me a decent wage and are located where I want to live.
If (realistically, when) they get around to cutting my job, I'll find something else. But I could lose my job anywhere I go. Why should I lose sleep over it?
Well, so you're not willing to go the legal route for getting the code released. You said you don't want to release the code that you don't own, so that cuts off the illegal route. And you also don't want to forget about it. So I guess you took the only thing you have left: post on Slashdot, but don't do anything about it.
A "lie of omission" is when you try to mislead someone by omitting a fact. Nobody is trying to mislead anyone here. It is well-known that, unless labeled otherwise, any sort of food product may contain GM ingredients.
In 25 years, there've probably been 25 managers who have walked away with fat bonuses for keeping this department under budget. The current one will get a slap on the wrist. They're just playing the odds to get the best outcome for themselves.
...it can easily be done by using a Wi-Fi $15 dongle bought off Amazon, a Raspberry Pi board, and an amplifier that will broaden the range of the attack to some 120 meters.
In other news, I can build myself a car with a $3 roll of duct tape bought off Amazon, as long as I happen to have all the other pieces sitting in my garage. Astounding!
I have had the privilege to block slashdot ads for ages.
We all have, all you have to do is install adblock plus. (Or, now, one of the better adblock plugins). A bonus using external ad blockers: it can block the ads that slashdot's "disable advertising" checkbox doesn't affect.
And most people don't go to gyms, so this is an irrelevant point.
People who are not active are going to be very unlikely to start biking rather than driving.
You're the one who was whining about people making assumptions without appropriate data. Unless you have data to demonstrate that most of the calories consumed by people switching to biking are going to be added consumption, you can't pretend that it's an irrelevant point.
Your analysis is missing a very fundamental point. The only calories that it makes sense to count are the extra calories that someone consumes as a direct result of cycling. There's no guarantee that it will be 100% of the calories used, and it could easily be zero. An obvious case -- if you bike to work instead of going to the gym, you could save a car trip with no net increase in calorie intake.
Slashdot Mirror
But the new defaults really _is_ best practice. Denying that is like denying that ssh is better than telnet.
Asserting that over and over doesn't make it true. Your argument seems to be that "With this change, people can at least ensure that their user run service doesn't DoS the server unintentionally." Which this change doesn't even do.
If I have to know that a particular system is using systemd in order to invoke "screen" correctly, somebody's design is totally broken.
Planned movie series get canned all the time when the early installments flop. Unless this movie has a lot more attraction than most of us are guessing it will, it will almost certainly flop, and it's unlikely that they'll be able to come up with another $80 million to try again.
So, can Parsey McParseface make sense of what manishs posts? Because I generally can't. I assume that the example sentence from the summary probably came from the article, but for some reason the "editor" didn't think to read his summary to make sure that it actually made sense out of context.
They should also stick ten minutes of commercials telling you to turn off your cell phone to the beginning of every movie you watch.
If they're not going to retaliate anyway, what's the point?
If it were anyone but the Left's best hope for the Presidency, she'd be in jail.
The left's best hope? Hillary is probably the only possible candidate who could actually lose to Donald Trump. If the Democrats nominated somebody else (and Republicans actually stick with Trump), the Democrats would be essentially guaranteed with the presidency.
Not saying that Hillary is definitely going to lose, but a Clinton/Trump race is going to be a whole lot closer than it would otherwise be.
For Netflix, your CPU/GPU/OS may not be enough. $150 Windows purchase, a $300 monitor, and an $800 PC purchase not included.
If you can't figure out how to use Netflix without a $1250 computer, you probably don't belong on Slashdot.
Right. A robot can't do it because of ... nuance. In other words, you believe in magic. Oh, and the supercilious attitude of "well, your food is crap, but everything I eat is absolutely amazing." Apparently you not only believe in magic, you only eat at restaurants staffed by wizards.
A food processor isn't designed to cut things up the same way you do with your knife. Duh. But the notion that we can't make a machine to cut up vegetables however you need is beyond ridiculous.
But for those of us who like our food to not be some mass-prepared crap, that's far from the case.
If your food is to easy to automate, it's probably not really worth eating.
Oh, good grief. Do you do any cooking of your own? Most tasks associated with cooking -- whether it's at home or in the kitchen of an expensive restaurant -- are relatively simple mechanical skills, and there's zero reason why machinery could not be designed to duplicate the majority of dishes served at your favorite restaurant with very little human intervention. If labor costs get high enough, it will become profitable to develop that machinery.
Maybe (sounds a bit crazy I know so ignore me if I'm talking shit) the submitter should quickly read the summary once before posting..?
Or maybe the editor should do it before posting the story to the front page?
Just kidding! That would buck almost twenty years of Slashdot precedent.
Although the summary is simply quotes from the article, the way they presented them makes it nonsensical. (The US Netflix library is shrinking because it's hard to secure international streaming rights?) The actual article at least has a couple real reasons -- competition from Hulu and getting rid of obscure titles.
You do realize that a 65x65 room is a rather different thing than a 65 square foot room, right? Just checking.
Most likely you don't even have a web-server running on port 80 and the connection attempt will be refused. Since there is no extension taking CPU cycles pattern matching ads this way is actually faster...
How do you think that the connection attempt gets made and refused, magic non-CPU woo-woo?
It may be true that if the extension is much less efficiently written than the browser and underlying OS services to look up the domain and do the connection attempt, that it will be slower, but all things being equal -- which is the point of this feature -- it should be faster, since you pretty much get to do a single if() rather than going through the entire rigmarole of a connection attempt.
Why do your friends stay at IBM?
Well, they pay me a decent wage and are located where I want to live.
If (realistically, when) they get around to cutting my job, I'll find something else. But I could lose my job anywhere I go. Why should I lose sleep over it?
Well, so you're not willing to go the legal route for getting the code released. You said you don't want to release the code that you don't own, so that cuts off the illegal route. And you also don't want to forget about it. So I guess you took the only thing you have left: post on Slashdot, but don't do anything about it.
A lie of omission is still a lie.
A "lie of omission" is when you try to mislead someone by omitting a fact. Nobody is trying to mislead anyone here. It is well-known that, unless labeled otherwise, any sort of food product may contain GM ingredients.
Doesn't matter. If you have to lie to them, you are in the wrong.
Nobody's lying to them. The label says salmon, and the package contains salmon. There's no lie there.
A lie would be if they labeled it as "GMO free" when it was not.
In 25 years, there've probably been 25 managers who have walked away with fat bonuses for keeping this department under budget. The current one will get a slap on the wrist. They're just playing the odds to get the best outcome for themselves.
...it can easily be done by using a Wi-Fi $15 dongle bought off Amazon, a Raspberry Pi board, and an amplifier that will broaden the range of the attack to some 120 meters.
In other news, I can build myself a car with a $3 roll of duct tape bought off Amazon, as long as I happen to have all the other pieces sitting in my garage. Astounding!
I have had the privilege to block slashdot ads for ages.
We all have, all you have to do is install adblock plus. (Or, now, one of the better adblock plugins). A bonus using external ad blockers: it can block the ads that slashdot's "disable advertising" checkbox doesn't affect.
Better your child is hot than burned, right?
I'd bet that more people die from heat stroke than from sunburn.
Just saying...
And most people don't go to gyms, so this is an irrelevant point.
People who are not active are going to be very unlikely to start biking rather than driving.
You're the one who was whining about people making assumptions without appropriate data. Unless you have data to demonstrate that most of the calories consumed by people switching to biking are going to be added consumption, you can't pretend that it's an irrelevant point.
Your analysis is missing a very fundamental point. The only calories that it makes sense to count are the extra calories that someone consumes as a direct result of cycling. There's no guarantee that it will be 100% of the calories used, and it could easily be zero. An obvious case -- if you bike to work instead of going to the gym, you could save a car trip with no net increase in calorie intake.
It's also idiotic to assume that the jury consisted of idiots.
Aardvark's Law: In any group of people, the majority are idiots.