“Every year, in late winter or early spring, some 3,000 trucks drive across the United States carrying around 40 billion bees to California’s Central Valley, which houses more than 60 million almond trees... Californian growers now spend $250 million a year on bees”.
"Farmageddon", Philip Lymbery with Isabel Oakeshott, p 63.
Californian growers do not spend that money for fun. They do it because otherwise they will have no crop. Good luck producing 40 billion tiny artificial bees. (Although if the idea goes forward I would buy shares in the manufacturer - just as you will notice that there has never been a massive government IT project that Oracle didn't love).
A simpler and more practical idea would be to stop killing off the bees, which do a great job entirely free of charge.
The word "free" (as in "Land of the Free") is dangerously undefined. Free from what? Free to do what? Not free to do what? The answers to the second and third questions would run to thousands of pages.
To assert that one country is "free" while another is "not free" is ridiculous. It doesn't even make much sense to say that one country is "freer" than another. So in Country A you are allowed to do X but forbidden to do Y; whereas in Country B it is the other way round. Presumably which country you prefer is a function of whether you prefer X to Y.
Some of us aren't in America and don't want to go there. (Offers in excess of $1 million might be seriously considered - or they might not). Some of us also don't have social media accounts, so we have time to do more important and interesting things.
The GRU is Russia's Military Intelligence organization. It would obviously have absolutely no interest in American elections, let alone in trying to interfere with them.
As soon as you start thinking in terms of "winners" and "losers", you are passively accepting the picture of the Internet as a commercial marketplace in which corporations compete for profit. There are already far too many aspects of modern life of which this is true.
Regardless of its commercial excrescences (which we are free to ignore if we wish) the Internet continues to be of huge value as a common medium of communication. It's all too easy to overlook the enormous amount of learning and discussion that goes on every day, without anyone paying much notice becuase there is little or no money involved.
Rather like FOSS, in fact, the true extent of whose adoption is very hard to establish because there is little or no money involved. (How big is the "market" for Linux distributions? N times zero equals zero for all values of N).
As a general principle, anything that tends to disable large amounts of good working software is a bad idea. Even if a particular mechanism must be retired, surely it isn't beyond Mozilla's ingenuity to find some way of letting existing plugins go on working somehow. A shim layer of some kind?
Well, my comment started an interesting thread discussing the pros and cons of uncertainty in science. I think being moderated "Troll" is a pretty poor reward for that. Maybe I should avoid irony on Slashdot, as many people don't seem able to understand it.
Or else perhaps avoid posting at all on anything connected with global warming, since it seems to be a topic that repels rational discussion.
'"Certain topics are so complicated like climate change that to really get a broad understanding is a bit difficult and particularly when people take that complexity and create uncertainty about it," Gates said'.
Because when a topic is really, really complicated the most important thing is not to be uncertain about it.
Grains are only somewhat harmful. It's sugar that will really do you in.
Of course, the thoughtful food manufacturers have kindly combined the two in every conceivable manner, often also folding in some toxic fats for good measure.
Stick to food that a hunter-gatherer could find, and you won't go far wrong. (Clue: that includes no sugar - except for a little honey occasionally - and no grains. If we had evolved to eat grains we would have four stomachs).
Is Non-Consensual Windows Updates like Non-Consensual sex?
Unfortunately no, because you will find you have signed a contract consenting to more or less anything the vendor chooses to do to you. Not only can it have normal vanilla sex with you whenever it wants - it can practice any perversions that take its fancy. And you are legally obliged to cooperate fully.
Behind all the details, surely there is an important question of principle here. Does your computer belong to (a) you; or (b) the manufacturer who sold it to you; or (c) the manufacturer of the software you are using?
Every day, all day, I do nothing but dodge the sophisticated attempts by countless software and hardware vendors to harass me in every way imaginable. Using a computer has become such a privacy, security and usability nightmare that I no longer feel the slightest joy in doing so. And nobody cares. At least nobody that matters in the least.
Wouldn't it be better to use open-source software instead of proprietary? Then you would have more complete control over your computer's behaviour. I don't ever recollect Linux forcing updates on me at an inconvenient time. I have it set up to it just quietly informs me what updates are available, and I can choose whether and when to install them.
Another point: as mentioned in https://it.slashdot.org/story/..., a Stratus server has been running since 1993 without any forced shutdowns. I noticed the following statement in TFA:
'This system runs an older version Stratus proprietary VOS operating system, which Hogan believes hasn't been updated since the early 2000s. "It's been extremely stable,' he said'.
Eh? What's that?? Not updated for something like 15 years??? How can that be?
Obviously, it isn't connected to the Internet. Given that, security problems become much, much more manageable - indeed, most of them simply vanish. So you need to ask yourself whether your urgent need to tweet, receive tweets, update and follow Facebook, etc. outweighs your need to run a stable system without being hacked or shut out for updates.
Wel, I'm 68 and only discovered Myers-Briggs three or four years ago. I tested myself and came out a well-defined INTP, and as soon as I had read the standard descriptions of the type I felt a vast wave of relief. All along, it hadn't just been me fouling up, being weird and deliberately perverse - that was who I was! It was the story of the Ugly Duckling brought home to me. And the memories go right back to my very earliest days - five or six years old. Every single time I felt somehow bad because I really wanted to stay home and read a book rather than "go out and have fun".
And there you have it! That is the key difference - socializing tends to energize extraverts, and drain introverts. I completely agree with you that it's not so much a matter of social skills.
I don't think that extraversion is usually defined as "how enthusiastic a person is". On the contrary, Wikipedia defines it thus:
"Extraversion is the state of primarily obtaining gratification from outside oneself.[4] Extraverts tend to enjoy human interactions and to be enthusiastic, talkative, assertive, and gregarious. Extraverts are energized and thrive off being around other people. They take pleasure in activities that involve large social gatherings, such as parties, community activities, public demonstrations, and business or political groups. They also tend to work well in groups.[5] An extraverted person is likely to enjoy time spent with people and find less reward in time spent alone. They tend to be energized when around other people, and they are more prone to boredom when they are by themselves". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I imagine that Slashdotters, on average, have a much higher tendency to be introverted. It's not that extraverts can't be good at technical work - one could cite many examples to the contrary - just that it's easier to put a lot of time and effort into thinking if you don't have a lot of social commitments as well. But surely no one could claim that introverts necessarily lack enthusiasm. It just manifests in different ways.
Slashdot Mirror
For a start, bees require more skills and greater intelligence. And there is a lot less room to pack it into.
“Every year, in late winter or early spring, some 3,000 trucks drive across the United States carrying around 40 billion bees to California’s Central Valley, which houses more than 60 million almond trees... Californian growers now spend $250 million a year on bees”.
"Farmageddon", Philip Lymbery with Isabel Oakeshott, p 63.
Californian growers do not spend that money for fun. They do it because otherwise they will have no crop. Good luck producing 40 billion tiny artificial bees. (Although if the idea goes forward I would buy shares in the manufacturer - just as you will notice that there has never been a massive government IT project that Oracle didn't love).
A simpler and more practical idea would be to stop killing off the bees, which do a great job entirely free of charge.
And you believe the NYT or WaPo even tries?
Yes.Yes, I do believe they try.
But *what* do they try? That is the question.
Exactically.
And cat videos. Don't forget the cat videos.
If you think Slashdot is social, what do you think is antisocial?
That objection did occur to me. But isn't it ridiculous to use "Slashdot" and "social" in the same sentence? I think it is.
The word "free" (as in "Land of the Free") is dangerously undefined. Free from what? Free to do what? Not free to do what? The answers to the second and third questions would run to thousands of pages.
To assert that one country is "free" while another is "not free" is ridiculous. It doesn't even make much sense to say that one country is "freer" than another. So in Country A you are allowed to do X but forbidden to do Y; whereas in Country B it is the other way round. Presumably which country you prefer is a function of whether you prefer X to Y.
Some of us aren't in America and don't want to go there. (Offers in excess of $1 million might be seriously considered - or they might not). Some of us also don't have social media accounts, so we have time to do more important and interesting things.
The GRU is Russia's Military Intelligence organization. It would obviously have absolutely no interest in American elections, let alone in trying to interfere with them.
As soon as you start thinking in terms of "winners" and "losers", you are passively accepting the picture of the Internet as a commercial marketplace in which corporations compete for profit. There are already far too many aspects of modern life of which this is true.
Regardless of its commercial excrescences (which we are free to ignore if we wish) the Internet continues to be of huge value as a common medium of communication. It's all too easy to overlook the enormous amount of learning and discussion that goes on every day, without anyone paying much notice becuase there is little or no money involved.
Rather like FOSS, in fact, the true extent of whose adoption is very hard to establish because there is little or no money involved. (How big is the "market" for Linux distributions? N times zero equals zero for all values of N).
As a general principle, anything that tends to disable large amounts of good working software is a bad idea. Even if a particular mechanism must be retired, surely it isn't beyond Mozilla's ingenuity to find some way of letting existing plugins go on working somehow. A shim layer of some kind?
Well, my comment started an interesting thread discussing the pros and cons of uncertainty in science. I think being moderated "Troll" is a pretty poor reward for that. Maybe I should avoid irony on Slashdot, as many people don't seem able to understand it.
Or else perhaps avoid posting at all on anything connected with global warming, since it seems to be a topic that repels rational discussion.
Exactly.
'"Certain topics are so complicated like climate change that to really get a broad understanding is a bit difficult and particularly when people take that complexity and create uncertainty about it," Gates said'.
Because when a topic is really, really complicated the most important thing is not to be uncertain about it.
Grains are only somewhat harmful. It's sugar that will really do you in.
Of course, the thoughtful food manufacturers have kindly combined the two in every conceivable manner, often also folding in some toxic fats for good measure.
Stick to food that a hunter-gatherer could find, and you won't go far wrong. (Clue: that includes no sugar - except for a little honey occasionally - and no grains. If we had evolved to eat grains we would have four stomachs).
Exactly. Now sit back and wait for the tidal wave of replies consisting essentially of: "yes, BUT..."
Is Non-Consensual Windows Updates like Non-Consensual sex?
Unfortunately no, because you will find you have signed a contract consenting to more or less anything the vendor chooses to do to you. Not only can it have normal vanilla sex with you whenever it wants - it can practice any perversions that take its fancy. And you are legally obliged to cooperate fully.
Behind all the details, surely there is an important question of principle here. Does your computer belong to (a) you; or (b) the manufacturer who sold it to you; or (c) the manufacturer of the software you are using?
I very much prefer option (a).
If you really must play games on a computer (why?) is there anything stopping you using one computer for games and another for work?
Every day, all day, I do nothing but dodge the sophisticated attempts by countless software and hardware vendors to harass me in every way imaginable. Using a computer has become such a privacy, security and usability nightmare that I no longer feel the slightest joy in doing so. And nobody cares. At least nobody that matters in the least.
Wouldn't it be better to use open-source software instead of proprietary? Then you would have more complete control over your computer's behaviour. I don't ever recollect Linux forcing updates on me at an inconvenient time. I have it set up to it just quietly informs me what updates are available, and I can choose whether and when to install them.
Another point: as mentioned in https://it.slashdot.org/story/..., a Stratus server has been running since 1993 without any forced shutdowns. I noticed the following statement in TFA:
'This system runs an older version Stratus proprietary VOS operating system, which Hogan believes hasn't been updated since the early 2000s. "It's been extremely stable,' he said'.
Eh? What's that?? Not updated for something like 15 years??? How can that be?
Obviously, it isn't connected to the Internet. Given that, security problems become much, much more manageable - indeed, most of them simply vanish. So you need to ask yourself whether your urgent need to tweet, receive tweets, update and follow Facebook, etc. outweighs your need to run a stable system without being hacked or shut out for updates.
It's a question of priorities.
Wel, I'm 68 and only discovered Myers-Briggs three or four years ago. I tested myself and came out a well-defined INTP, and as soon as I had read the standard descriptions of the type I felt a vast wave of relief. All along, it hadn't just been me fouling up, being weird and deliberately perverse - that was who I was! It was the story of the Ugly Duckling brought home to me. And the memories go right back to my very earliest days - five or six years old. Every single time I felt somehow bad because I really wanted to stay home and read a book rather than "go out and have fun".
I'd love to learn how to get those shallow jackasses to see me as a warm and empathetic person... ;-)
I'm rather afraid that would entail stepping over the line into psychopathy. 8-)
A week long vacation with a group of extroverts?
Aaaaargh! For me, that calls to mind Sartre's aphorism, "L'enfer, c'est les autres" ("Hell is other people"). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I will admit, it does make me tired though. :)
And there you have it! That is the key difference - socializing tends to energize extraverts, and drain introverts. I completely agree with you that it's not so much a matter of social skills.
I don't think that extraversion is usually defined as "how enthusiastic a person is". On the contrary, Wikipedia defines it thus:
"Extraversion is the state of primarily obtaining gratification from outside oneself.[4] Extraverts tend to enjoy human interactions and to be enthusiastic, talkative, assertive, and gregarious. Extraverts are energized and thrive off being around other people. They take pleasure in activities that involve large social gatherings, such as parties, community activities, public demonstrations, and business or political groups. They also tend to work well in groups.[5] An extraverted person is likely to enjoy time spent with people and find less reward in time spent alone. They tend to be energized when around other people, and they are more prone to boredom when they are by themselves". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I imagine that Slashdotters, on average, have a much higher tendency to be introverted. It's not that extraverts can't be good at technical work - one could cite many examples to the contrary - just that it's easier to put a lot of time and effort into thinking if you don't have a lot of social commitments as well. But surely no one could claim that introverts necessarily lack enthusiasm. It just manifests in different ways.