I hate to break it to you, but the ancient term "America" refers to the whole continent, Canada included.
Nope - that would be "North America."
Hey, if you're going to be a pedant...
Ok, since we're being pedantic: technically, "America" refers to the entire landmass (made up of the continents of North and South America and associated islands). Still includes Canada, though.
I've never heard anyone refer to the American Continents as a singular; it's always been "the Americas."
Aw, geez, did I really get drawn back into this? You sneaky bastards.
I assume her limited acting engagements got even smaller when film studios realized how badly most people didn't like her because of her anti-vaccine views,
When IMDB lists your "Known for" as a visit on The View in 1997, two Playboy videos, and Scary Movie 3, I wouldn't characterize it as "limited acting engagements". I'd say non-existent acting engagements.
Really? No Baseketball reference?
I thought that was her best role ever. By a longshot.
Looking around, there are plenty of zealots on all sides of this issue.
Yes, and by "zealots" you mean people who understand basic science.
No, I'm pretty sure the use of zealots here refers to those who are so fanatically devoted to their position that they'll inevitably drive people away from the truth, due to their overbearing assholishness.
FWIW, it is possible to be right without being a dick about it.
You don't have to have professional medical experience to accept what medical professionals say...
No, you just need to be gullible.
Doctors have been taking kick-backs for prescribing drugs for years. They have a long historical record of gettings things wrong. Previously using the wrong drugs and killing a bunch of people was not too serious, a number were probably going to die anyway. However something you are giving to an entire generation of healthy children you had better be pretty damn sure there aren't going to be side-effects down the line.
so I avoid sales jobs like the plague, even though I'd be really, really good at them.
Anyone working as a coal miner is so far past the "I'm willing to do jobs that suck" threshold that it has vanished over the horizon.
I never said I wasn't willing to do jobs that suck - I've cleaned my fair share of toilets, toted my fair share of bails. Besides, sales jobs don't really suck if they're commission based and you're good at sales.
But I still wouldn't take one unless it was a choice between 'sell stuff or starve to death.' At which point, it becomes a matter of survival rather than preference.
People complaining about outsourcing "because jobs" seem to be remarkably selfish in my book, unless theyre living in conditions as bad as the person in China who got their job.
It's tribalism and self-preservation - every job that goes to their tribe is a job that our tribe doesn't get, and if our tribe doesn't get that job, it harms us.
Perfectly natural, instinctual human behavior - one that won't go away until we, as a species, obsolete the concept of petty things like nations, borders, competition, etc.
Which I don't see happening in my lifetime... or, you know, ever.
I'm the same way - give me a task and leave me to it, it'll be done quickly, efficiently, and on occasion, brilliantly.
My current job does not allow such focus on a single task, as I'm constantly being bounced from doing one thing to another... probably explains why I spend so much time on Slashdot...
The problem is that we have many millions of people with NO marketable skills.
FTFY. Skills can be useful but not marketable - the ability to create fire with nothing more than a couple sticks and some tinder, for example, is an incredibly useful skill, but you'd be hard pressed to do it for a living.
The really sad part is all the economists and politicians who can't seem to understand that a 50 year old coal miner probably can't afford to be out of work AND paying for school for 4 years and probably doesn't have enough working years left to pay off a student loan. They act as if re-training means swallowing a free magic pill and POOF!
This is why we really, really need to work hard to break the masses of their habit of voting for rich elitists who have absolutely zero clue how the average person lives.
Met many taxi drivers? Painters? Plumbers? Electricians? A/C repair guys? The guy you talk to to arrange and schedule the work needs to be somewhat personable. The guy who does the work, not so much.
Taxi drivers are going away thanks to driverless cars. Probably painters too. The other ones are skilled workers; they're not the people we're talking about here. This conversation is about semi-skilled or unskilled people, who pretty soon aren't going to have any (or much) work available. Yes, unpersonable guys who are smart enough can become HVAC technicians, (driverless-)car repair technicians, etc. What about the guys who didn't make the cut for trade school? What are they going to do for work?
And a world where all the assholes starve to death? Not the worst possible world.
Sounds like a world without very many men.
Just because an individual is "personable" doesn't mean they're cut out for or interested in a particular job title; for example, I'm the type of personality that could sell a case of ketchup Popsicle to a lady in white gloves - but I fucking hate sales, so I avoid sales jobs like the plague, even though I'd be really, really good at them.
Oh, and BTW, as much as some people want to fantasize that driverless automobiles are going to obsolete professional drivers in the next year or so, it ain't happening, for more reasons than I have time to consider. Maybe if there's some amazing technological breakthrough in the next 18 months (like, I dunno, someone figures out a form of terrestrial propulsion that doesn't in one way or another, suck), but realistically you're talking 10-20 years out.
You told your fellows here to look at a Google image search where there were both murals painted as a result of some community-authorized project and others painted without permission.
My fault, I suppose, for forgetting about all the pedants out there. Sorry for presuming the whole of my audience was not petty, and intelligent enough to understand the point I was making without requiring me to break out the whiteboard and markers and draw it out point-by-point.
For you to now claim that you were advocating for authorized artworks is disingenuous.
I've claimed no such thing, and in fact have implied the opposite - when you said that you believed, "'cool' is not the word for [unauthorized art installations]," I specifically disagreed with that statement.
So it's more accurate to say that some coal miners may be able to learn to code: Watch out for those blanket generalizations, they bite back.
If you actually RTFA, you'll see that Bloomburg didn't actually make the blanket generalization he's accused of, he was referring to exactly what you said here: Not all coal miners are fit to be programmers, so to say "just teach them to code and they'll all become programmers" smacks of elitism and a lack of understanding about how the non-tech world works.
To that end, Zuckerburg's quote sounds like it could have come straight from the mouth of Marie Antoinette.
graffiti artists are the people responsible for those really cool murals; [google.com]
You know what's really cool? Getting the permission of the owner of a property (or local government) before practicing one's art.
Whoever said that never happens?
Of course, part of the problem with government permission is that the people running the local government are often morons (at least, that's my experience), so they ignore the requests from good artists, and instead award the contracts to buddies of buddies.
The painting can be as whizbang as one can imagine, but without that authorization from whoever owns or manages the wall, "cool" is not the word for it.
That's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. I disagree.
Re:Great, just what we need
on
The Graffiti Drone
·
· Score: 3, Informative
More graffitis in cities...
I wish those so-called "artists" practised their art on canvas at home or something, instead of ruining cityscapes and costing taxpayers millions for cleanup.
Methinks you are conflating "professional graffiti artist" with "idiot taggers."
graffiti artists are the people responsible for those really cool murals; taggers are those wastes of flesh with nothing better to do than hose a wall with random lines and shapes, then claim it's some sort of "signature."
Civil courts award money for loss of livelihood all the time.
I don't care what courts do, or what judges say. I reject copyright entirely, as well as the idea that making money off of some data that someone else assembled is anything like theft in the sense that most people understand it. Maybe, legally, it is described using those terms sometimes, but I disagree with that.
You are more than welcome to hold that opinion, but keep in mind that if you act on it, and get caught, a court is not likely to agree with your premise, and very much can punish you by depriving you of fiscal security and/or your freedom.
The fact that they can do both of those things is why I very much do care what courts do and judges say.
You missed the point - Survival after a 100mph crash isn't really unusual(though a lot of people die in them). It's the ability to walk away after the crash with no serious injuries that's unusual.
Yea, fair enough.
Oh, and going by the results of the crush test(broke the test machine), it doesn't need the additional protection a roll cage would provide.
That was pretty awesome... of course, if auto manufacturers had actually listened to me at some point over the last 2 decades, it wouldn't have been all that amazing, since every car would already have a cage and be capable of withstanding that kind of pressure.
A photo that a photographer has copyrighted is intellectual property; to claim that other person's work as your own is fraud, which is defined as "theft by deception." thus, IP theft.
Pure copyright infringement ('pure' as in, "without intent to defraud") is what happens when you download a movie or such without permission, and is a completely different legal grey area beyond the base argument.
What theft? Money they never had and was never theirs cannot be stolen. Potential profit is not the same as owning the money yourself.
If you're taking money and credit for work someone else did, that they expect to be paid for, you're committing fraud, which is defined as "theft by deception."
Civil courts award money for loss of livelihood all the time. Ever read the briefs from a wrongful termination suit where the plaintiff won?
Your bad analogy led to your incorrect conclusion (though I wouldn't be surprised if you had already made up your mind in that regard).
Your personal feelings about the matter do not affect the accuracy of my analogy, nor does your little act of parenthetical transference. Fraud is defined as "stealing by deception," and if you're taking someone else's work, claiming it as your own, and attempting to profit from it, you're committing fraud.
Feel free to challenge this by copying something the government owns, claiming it as your own, and selling it. Were I a betting man, I'd put my money down on the judge disagreeing with your premise that you did not, in fact, steal anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on the wind; we've been getting 30-40 Mph gusts the last few days, which could have some effect at 20 meters. 'Specially with grouse rounds.
At least TFA mentions the load they used: "cartridges composed of 3 dram equivalent of powder and 32 grams of #8 lead pellets"
I hate to break it to you, but the ancient term "America" refers to the whole continent, Canada included.
Nope - that would be "North America."
Hey, if you're going to be a pedant...
Ok, since we're being pedantic: technically, "America" refers to the entire landmass (made up of the continents of North and South America and associated islands). Still includes Canada, though.
I've never heard anyone refer to the American Continents as a singular; it's always been "the Americas."
Aw, geez, did I really get drawn back into this? You sneaky bastards.
Glad I'm not the only one whose first question involved the choke.
BTW, you forgot "windage" in your variable list.
I hate to break it to you, but the ancient term "America" refers to the whole continent, Canada included.
Nope - that would be "North America."
Hey, if you're going to be a pedant...
When IMDB lists your "Known for" as a visit on The View in 1997, two Playboy videos, and Scary Movie 3, I wouldn't characterize it as "limited acting engagements". I'd say non-existent acting engagements.
Really? No Baseketball reference?
I thought that was her best role ever. By a longshot.
Yes, and by "zealots" you mean people who understand basic science.
No, I'm pretty sure the use of zealots here refers to those who are so fanatically devoted to their position that they'll inevitably drive people away from the truth, due to their overbearing assholishness.
FWIW, it is possible to be right without being a dick about it.
You don't have to have professional medical experience to accept what medical professionals say...
No, you just need to be gullible.
Doctors have been taking kick-backs for prescribing drugs for years. They have a long historical record of gettings things wrong. Previously using the wrong drugs and killing a bunch of people was not too serious, a number were probably going to die anyway. However something you are giving to an entire generation of healthy children you had better be pretty damn sure there aren't going to be side-effects down the line.
As much as I hate to admit it - you're right.
Food for thought: "preventable medical harm" kills or incapacitates more Americans every year (210,000 to 400,000) than homicides (11,000 - 16,000) and auto accidents (30,000 - 35,000) combined.
That makes medical errors one of the top 3 causes of death in America.
Definitely something to keep in mind the next time a medical "professional" starts talking down to you because you questioned their "wisdom."
so I avoid sales jobs like the plague, even though I'd be really, really good at them.
Anyone working as a coal miner is so far past the "I'm willing to do jobs that suck" threshold that it has vanished over the horizon.
I never said I wasn't willing to do jobs that suck - I've cleaned my fair share of toilets, toted my fair share of bails. Besides, sales jobs don't really suck if they're commission based and you're good at sales.
But I still wouldn't take one unless it was a choice between 'sell stuff or starve to death.' At which point, it becomes a matter of survival rather than preference.
People complaining about outsourcing "because jobs" seem to be remarkably selfish in my book, unless theyre living in conditions as bad as the person in China who got their job.
It's tribalism and self-preservation - every job that goes to their tribe is a job that our tribe doesn't get, and if our tribe doesn't get that job, it harms us.
Perfectly natural, instinctual human behavior - one that won't go away until we, as a species, obsolete the concept of petty things like nations, borders, competition, etc.
Which I don't see happening in my lifetime... or, you know, ever.
I'm the same way - give me a task and leave me to it, it'll be done quickly, efficiently, and on occasion, brilliantly.
My current job does not allow such focus on a single task, as I'm constantly being bounced from doing one thing to another... probably explains why I spend so much time on Slashdot...
The problem is that we have many millions of people with NO marketable skills.
FTFY. Skills can be useful but not marketable - the ability to create fire with nothing more than a couple sticks and some tinder, for example, is an incredibly useful skill, but you'd be hard pressed to do it for a living.
The really sad part is all the economists and politicians who can't seem to understand that a 50 year old coal miner probably can't afford to be out of work AND paying for school for 4 years and probably doesn't have enough working years left to pay off a student loan. They act as if re-training means swallowing a free magic pill and POOF!
This is why we really, really need to work hard to break the masses of their habit of voting for rich elitists who have absolutely zero clue how the average person lives.
Met many taxi drivers? Painters? Plumbers? Electricians? A/C repair guys? The guy you talk to to arrange and schedule the work needs to be somewhat personable. The guy who does the work, not so much.
Taxi drivers are going away thanks to driverless cars. Probably painters too. The other ones are skilled workers; they're not the people we're talking about here. This conversation is about semi-skilled or unskilled people, who pretty soon aren't going to have any (or much) work available. Yes, unpersonable guys who are smart enough can become HVAC technicians, (driverless-)car repair technicians, etc. What about the guys who didn't make the cut for trade school? What are they going to do for work?
And a world where all the assholes starve to death? Not the worst possible world.
Sounds like a world without very many men.
Just because an individual is "personable" doesn't mean they're cut out for or interested in a particular job title; for example, I'm the type of personality that could sell a case of ketchup Popsicle to a lady in white gloves - but I fucking hate sales, so I avoid sales jobs like the plague, even though I'd be really, really good at them.
Oh, and BTW, as much as some people want to fantasize that driverless automobiles are going to obsolete professional drivers in the next year or so, it ain't happening, for more reasons than I have time to consider. Maybe if there's some amazing technological breakthrough in the next 18 months (like, I dunno, someone figures out a form of terrestrial propulsion that doesn't in one way or another, suck), but realistically you're talking 10-20 years out.
You told your fellows here to look at a Google image search where there were both murals painted as a result of some community-authorized project and others painted without permission.
My fault, I suppose, for forgetting about all the pedants out there. Sorry for presuming the whole of my audience was not petty, and intelligent enough to understand the point I was making without requiring me to break out the whiteboard and markers and draw it out point-by-point.
For you to now claim that you were advocating for authorized artworks is disingenuous.
I've claimed no such thing, and in fact have implied the opposite - when you said that you believed, "'cool' is not the word for [unauthorized art installations]," I specifically disagreed with that statement.
Your outrage is misplaced.
Let them eat code.
Better - let them code cake!
Bloomberg as always is full of it. Coal miners aren't dumb people, they are far from it.
Good thing he didn't actually say that, then. Seriously, dude, RTFA.
Of course, on the other end of the scale, coders aren't necessarily smart people, either. They have a certain skill, no more, no less.
Kinda like coal miners.
So it's more accurate to say that some coal miners may be able to learn to code: Watch out for those blanket generalizations, they bite back.
If you actually RTFA, you'll see that Bloomburg didn't actually make the blanket generalization he's accused of, he was referring to exactly what you said here: Not all coal miners are fit to be programmers, so to say "just teach them to code and they'll all become programmers" smacks of elitism and a lack of understanding about how the non-tech world works.
To that end, Zuckerburg's quote sounds like it could have come straight from the mouth of Marie Antoinette.
You know what's really cool? Getting the permission of the owner of a property (or local government) before practicing one's art.
Whoever said that never happens?
Of course, part of the problem with government permission is that the people running the local government are often morons (at least, that's my experience), so they ignore the requests from good artists, and instead award the contracts to buddies of buddies.
The painting can be as whizbang as one can imagine, but without that authorization from whoever owns or manages the wall, "cool" is not the word for it.
That's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. I disagree.
More graffitis in cities...
I wish those so-called "artists" practised their art on canvas at home or something, instead of ruining cityscapes and costing taxpayers millions for cleanup.
Methinks you are conflating "professional graffiti artist" with "idiot taggers."
graffiti artists are the people responsible for those really cool murals; taggers are those wastes of flesh with nothing better to do than hose a wall with random lines and shapes, then claim it's some sort of "signature."
Regarding this KATSU person, it appears from a Google image search that he's of the latter group.
"People like this"
Artists? Technological tinkerers?
"People I don't like"
Civil courts award money for loss of livelihood all the time.
I don't care what courts do, or what judges say. I reject copyright entirely, as well as the idea that making money off of some data that someone else assembled is anything like theft in the sense that most people understand it. Maybe, legally, it is described using those terms sometimes, but I disagree with that.
You are more than welcome to hold that opinion, but keep in mind that if you act on it, and get caught, a court is not likely to agree with your premise, and very much can punish you by depriving you of fiscal security and/or your freedom.
The fact that they can do both of those things is why I very much do care what courts do and judges say.
You missed the point - Survival after a 100mph crash isn't really unusual(though a lot of people die in them). It's the ability to walk away after the crash with no serious injuries that's unusual.
Yea, fair enough.
Oh, and going by the results of the crush test(broke the test machine), it doesn't need the additional protection a roll cage would provide.
That was pretty awesome... of course, if auto manufacturers had actually listened to me at some point over the last 2 decades, it wouldn't have been all that amazing, since every car would already have a cage and be capable of withstanding that kind of pressure.
>And IP theft.
I think you mean copyright infringement.
I sure don't.
A photo that a photographer has copyrighted is intellectual property; to claim that other person's work as your own is fraud, which is defined as "theft by deception." thus, IP theft.
Pure copyright infringement ('pure' as in, "without intent to defraud") is what happens when you download a movie or such without permission, and is a completely different legal grey area beyond the base argument.
namely, the theft of livelihood from Person A.
What theft? Money they never had and was never theirs cannot be stolen. Potential profit is not the same as owning the money yourself.
If you're taking money and credit for work someone else did, that they expect to be paid for, you're committing fraud, which is defined as "theft by deception."
Civil courts award money for loss of livelihood all the time. Ever read the briefs from a wrongful termination suit where the plaintiff won?
Your bad analogy led to your incorrect conclusion (though I wouldn't be surprised if you had already made up your mind in that regard).
Your personal feelings about the matter do not affect the accuracy of my analogy, nor does your little act of parenthetical transference. Fraud is defined as "stealing by deception," and if you're taking someone else's work, claiming it as your own, and attempting to profit from it, you're committing fraud.
Feel free to challenge this by copying something the government owns, claiming it as your own, and selling it. Were I a betting man, I'd put my money down on the judge disagreeing with your premise that you did not, in fact, steal anything.