I learned programming at university using the FORTRAN language, picked up Basic on my own later when one of the engineering profs bought a Data General Nova on his own dime so we'd get some "minicomputer" experience. But my first job required assembly programming on a military Univac 1218. I loved that thing (then), because it was so computery: every register was displayed on the front panel and you could set/clear the bits by pushing the light button, and when it ran, they all flashed. Very very cool. Programmed the thing with punched cards. The assembler was multipass, dumping the cards off to 9-inch reels of mag tape (also very computery) and making the passes through that. So the whole experience was this blinking, tape spinning, card reading, huge printer printing experience and DEAR GOD IT WAS BEAUTIFUL. It was like I had stepped into a '50s era scifi movie and it was all in my control, mwaaaaahahahaha. So, you know, just your average day in paradise for an engineering newbie.
The capitalist class are exploiting open source more than ever. Capitalists can't resist the promise of free labor, and the best part is the capitalists don't have to employ any of the young naive laborers. Open source means the work is publicly available and ripe for the taking. Capitalists just take everything and give nothing in return. Open source developers don't get paid anything, and developers live in poverty while capitalists make billions.
Explain how the "capitalist class" is going to make undeserved money from a resource made freely available at no cost to all. Sure, Red Hat et al earn money from Linux, but it's for the value-added they furnish. If you don't want to give them money, you can still download the product without paying, you'll just have to be your own support.
Textbooks probably wouldn't be viewed as a luxury if the U.S universities and colleges didn't work out how the absolute maximum they could squeeze out of students and their families in tuition and fees and then charge them that.
What incentive do they have to do that? My old school took the profits from bookstore sales and funded all the student center stuff from it, so they'd never have cut their prices If this open textbook idea catches on, both the schools and publishers will have to reduce prices or they'll lose a ton of business, if not all of it.
I built my first computer by populating an S100 board with an 8080 and discrete logic and wirewrapping it myself. Had a pair of 8-inch floppies for storage, and a kit-built Heathkit H19 for a terminal. Ran CP/M on it. I don't miss that thing one bit. I love what I'm able to build these days with much more integrated components, and I love the enormous functionality I can buy off-the-shelf for, effectively, peanuts if I don't feel like building it. Particularly via AliExpress (just got a sweet component tester that can give transistor or diode parameters, or the values of passives. Twenty bucks. Could never have had anything like it back in the day.) Not to mention what the internet has wrought in terms of instantly-available information. No nostalgia here.
We'd build more capacity. Which in California now is about as likely as building more housing, building more water storage capacity, NOT building a stupid waste of money called High Speed [sic] Rail...
If I recall correctly, you're obligated to let them search your phone (i.e. had it over), but you can't be compelled to give them the password. I guess they could delay you while they try to browbeat it out of you, and they presumably could confiscate the phone itself because they can't see what's on it, so it might be a high-cost stance to take.
I could set up a Model 26 or 29 keypunch to skip certain fields, and shift into numeric mode for others. Huge savings in productivity. I also knew how to use a collator so that a dropped deck could be put back in sequence. Then there was knowing how to splice a paper tape when it tore, which it frequently did unless you had the budget and foresight to use mylar tape.
It's quite remarkable nowadays to realize how dependent we used to be on physical media to handle information.
Embedded, Space Welders, The Ezra Klein Show, Federalist Radio Hour, Internet of Things Podcast, The Amp Hour Electronics Podcast, O' Reilly [Bots | Data | Design | Hardware | Radar] Podcast, Mad Dogs and Englishmen, Vox's The Weeds.
The why is because they're interesting and introduce me to developments and topics that I haven't previously encountered.
Given that solar accounts for 0.5% of US energy consumed, if the cited employment figures are true then each solar employee is much much less productive than his/her fossil counterpart. We could get a lot more employment in construction if we required all excavation to be done with hand tools, but would that be desirable? Likewise, saying "It employs a lot of people and is therefore good" regarding solar uses the wrong metric for its desirability.
What exactly did you want to say?
Taking down "Fake News" from your web site is... hm, wrong?
Being forced to do it by law is... wrong?
Is something wrong with your mind?
The problem here is that, similarly to DMCA takedowns, the default action is going to be to take it down as soon as a complaint is filed, not perform some sort of investigation to make sure the complaint is legit. So if you're a party bent on suppressing unfavorable or inconvenient news, it'll be in your interest to gin up complaints to get it removed. The only thing that would act to ameliorate this would be fines for illegitimate complaints, and what are the chances of that happening?
Not the seller, the courier. Leaving a package on a doorstep is no less negligent than leaving it on the side of the road and telling someone to go get it before it's stolen. This should be covered under existing law.
The consumer has the power to fix this already: when ordering, request a "signature required" delivery. If the seller doesn't offer that, order elsewhere. Whatever you decide, it isn't the carrier's problem if you elect to assume the risk.
The letter sent on Monday by the Internet Association, a trade group whose 40 members also include Alphabet's Google, Uber and Twitter, represents an early effort to repair the relationship between the technology sector and Trump
.
We loathe you with every fiber of our being. Here's a list of what we want.
No more mining jobs means less voters having a stake in the mining industry, much of which is the mining of coal. Less mining jobs also means less rural mining boom towns which inevitably turn into ghost towns.
That implies the people who get their power from coal-based plants can't make the connection between coal and inexpensive electricity. People rather quickly notice when their monthly bills rise to unaffordable levels.
Isn't it universally acknowledged that mining is dirty, dangerous, difficult, and a threat to worker's health? I'd think eliminating as many mining jobs as possible would be seen as a good thing. Same for all the other industries where the work itself is said to be bad for workers: fishing (dangerous), truck driving (dangerous, deleterious to health), fast food (poorly compensated, demeaning, dead end), etc.
The acid test for transcription for me is if the transcriptionist gets the word "defuse" right, as in "He defused the tense situation." Every, and I mean EVERY, closed caption I've seen transcribes it as, "He diffused the tense situation." It seems to be the universal mistake.
"Society said it did not matter if you could pay for electricity; we wanted everyone to have it. Society said we would not limit dial tone to those who could pay the most, we gave it to all," said telecommunications lawyer Gerard Lederer of Best Best and Krieger LCC in Washington, D.C., in an e-mail.
I didn't realize that I could have electricity and phone service even if I don't pay for them. Like an idiot, I've been paying those bills each month. Tell me more.
require all new compounds produced in modified organisms to undergo extensive independent safety testing at least on par with what the FDA (supposedly) requires for new drugs.
Given how much cost that would add, that would pretty much close the door on any new developments.
Of course environmentalists hate carbon sequestration. They have an agenda that includes telling you how to live and carbon sequestration defeats it. If you can mitigate the damage, real or imagined, without resort to their remedies of deprivation, mandate, and punishment, you slip from their control, and they cannot abide that.
Even if they managed to shut down every last YT->MP3 service, it's still a simple matter to just record the audio using freeware like Audacity and save MP3s from it. .
If IMDB is going to post ages of people for whom age is a crucial factor in their career, they better be absolutely damn sure they are getting it right.
The fix for that is to allow the actor to demand a correction if the information is wrong, not ban the display of age entirely.
Bad law bring it to the Supreme Court and get it overturned. IMDB probably has mega money from all that advertising they run on their site. They have plenty of money for a lawsuit
There's something wrong when you need "plenty of money" in order to assure your rights aren't violated. We need to modify the system where, if you challenge a bad law and prevail, you get your legal costs reimbursed.
Slashdot Mirror
So Amazon leaves this on a public-facing server after having already been "burned" by an "accidental" leak in the same way? Uh huh.
I learned programming at university using the FORTRAN language, picked up Basic on my own later when one of the engineering profs bought a Data General Nova on his own dime so we'd get some "minicomputer" experience. But my first job required assembly programming on a military Univac 1218. I loved that thing (then), because it was so computery: every register was displayed on the front panel and you could set/clear the bits by pushing the light button, and when it ran, they all flashed. Very very cool. Programmed the thing with punched cards. The assembler was multipass, dumping the cards off to 9-inch reels of mag tape (also very computery) and making the passes through that. So the whole experience was this blinking, tape spinning, card reading, huge printer printing experience and DEAR GOD IT WAS BEAUTIFUL. It was like I had stepped into a '50s era scifi movie and it was all in my control, mwaaaaahahahaha. So, you know, just your average day in paradise for an engineering newbie.
The capitalist class are exploiting open source more than ever. Capitalists can't resist the promise of free labor, and the best part is the capitalists don't have to employ any of the young naive laborers. Open source means the work is publicly available and ripe for the taking. Capitalists just take everything and give nothing in return. Open source developers don't get paid anything, and developers live in poverty while capitalists make billions.
Explain how the "capitalist class" is going to make undeserved money from a resource made freely available at no cost to all. Sure, Red Hat et al earn money from Linux, but it's for the value-added they furnish. If you don't want to give them money, you can still download the product without paying, you'll just have to be your own support.
Textbooks probably wouldn't be viewed as a luxury if the U.S universities and colleges didn't work out how the absolute maximum they could squeeze out of students and their families in tuition and fees and then charge them that.
What incentive do they have to do that? My old school took the profits from bookstore sales and funded all the student center stuff from it, so they'd never have cut their prices If this open textbook idea catches on, both the schools and publishers will have to reduce prices or they'll lose a ton of business, if not all of it.
I built my first computer by populating an S100 board with an 8080 and discrete logic and wirewrapping it myself. Had a pair of 8-inch floppies for storage, and a kit-built Heathkit H19 for a terminal. Ran CP/M on it. I don't miss that thing one bit. I love what I'm able to build these days with much more integrated components, and I love the enormous functionality I can buy off-the-shelf for, effectively, peanuts if I don't feel like building it. Particularly via AliExpress (just got a sweet component tester that can give transistor or diode parameters, or the values of passives. Twenty bucks. Could never have had anything like it back in the day.) Not to mention what the internet has wrought in terms of instantly-available information. No nostalgia here.
Even if I wanted to read my cheap, crappy phone while walking, sunlight obliterates the screen.
We'd build more capacity. Which in California now is about as likely as building more housing, building more water storage capacity, NOT building a stupid waste of money called High Speed [sic] Rail ...
If I recall correctly, you're obligated to let them search your phone (i.e. had it over), but you can't be compelled to give them the password. I guess they could delay you while they try to browbeat it out of you, and they presumably could confiscate the phone itself because they can't see what's on it, so it might be a high-cost stance to take.
I could set up a Model 26 or 29 keypunch to skip certain fields, and shift into numeric mode for others. Huge savings in productivity. I also knew how to use a collator so that a dropped deck could be put back in sequence. Then there was knowing how to splice a paper tape when it tore, which it frequently did unless you had the budget and foresight to use mylar tape. It's quite remarkable nowadays to realize how dependent we used to be on physical media to handle information.
Embedded, Space Welders, The Ezra Klein Show, Federalist Radio Hour, Internet of Things Podcast, The Amp Hour Electronics Podcast, O' Reilly [Bots | Data | Design | Hardware | Radar] Podcast, Mad Dogs and Englishmen, Vox's The Weeds. The why is because they're interesting and introduce me to developments and topics that I haven't previously encountered.
Given that solar accounts for 0.5% of US energy consumed, if the cited employment figures are true then each solar employee is much much less productive than his/her fossil counterpart. We could get a lot more employment in construction if we required all excavation to be done with hand tools, but would that be desirable? Likewise, saying "It employs a lot of people and is therefore good" regarding solar uses the wrong metric for its desirability.
What exactly did you want to say? Taking down "Fake News" from your web site is ... hm, wrong?
Being forced to do it by law is ... wrong?
Is something wrong with your mind?
The problem here is that, similarly to DMCA takedowns, the default action is going to be to take it down as soon as a complaint is filed, not perform some sort of investigation to make sure the complaint is legit. So if you're a party bent on suppressing unfavorable or inconvenient news, it'll be in your interest to gin up complaints to get it removed. The only thing that would act to ameliorate this would be fines for illegitimate complaints, and what are the chances of that happening?
Facebook and other affected social networks would have to create "in-country offices focused on responding to takedown demands," the report says.
Orwell only got the timeframe wrong, and the fact that it'll be a public-private partnership instead of purely governmental.
Whether life is coming to resemble Buck Rogers ...
If there's a big championship game down below, Amazon AFC's above could be loaded with snacks and souvenirs sports fans crave.
or Snow Crash
Amazon also recently patented a system to defend its drones against hackers, jammers and bows and arrows
Not the seller, the courier. Leaving a package on a doorstep is no less negligent than leaving it on the side of the road and telling someone to go get it before it's stolen. This should be covered under existing law.
The consumer has the power to fix this already: when ordering, request a "signature required" delivery. If the seller doesn't offer that, order elsewhere. Whatever you decide, it isn't the carrier's problem if you elect to assume the risk.
.
We loathe you with every fiber of our being. Here's a list of what we want.
No more mining jobs means less voters having a stake in the mining industry, much of which is the mining of coal. Less mining jobs also means less rural mining boom towns which inevitably turn into ghost towns.
That implies the people who get their power from coal-based plants can't make the connection between coal and inexpensive electricity. People rather quickly notice when their monthly bills rise to unaffordable levels.
Isn't it universally acknowledged that mining is dirty, dangerous, difficult, and a threat to worker's health? I'd think eliminating as many mining jobs as possible would be seen as a good thing. Same for all the other industries where the work itself is said to be bad for workers: fishing (dangerous), truck driving (dangerous, deleterious to health), fast food (poorly compensated, demeaning, dead end), etc.
The acid test for transcription for me is if the transcriptionist gets the word "defuse" right, as in "He defused the tense situation." Every, and I mean EVERY, closed caption I've seen transcribes it as, "He diffused the tense situation." It seems to be the universal mistake.
"Society said it did not matter if you could pay for electricity; we wanted everyone to have it. Society said we would not limit dial tone to those who could pay the most, we gave it to all," said telecommunications lawyer Gerard Lederer of Best Best and Krieger LCC in Washington, D.C., in an e-mail.
I didn't realize that I could have electricity and phone service even if I don't pay for them. Like an idiot, I've been paying those bills each month. Tell me more.
require all new compounds produced in modified organisms to undergo extensive independent safety testing at least on par with what the FDA (supposedly) requires for new drugs.
Given how much cost that would add, that would pretty much close the door on any new developments.
Of course environmentalists hate carbon sequestration. They have an agenda that includes telling you how to live and carbon sequestration defeats it. If you can mitigate the damage, real or imagined, without resort to their remedies of deprivation, mandate, and punishment, you slip from their control, and they cannot abide that.
Even if they managed to shut down every last YT->MP3 service, it's still a simple matter to just record the audio using freeware like Audacity and save MP3s from it. .
If IMDB is going to post ages of people for whom age is a crucial factor in their career, they better be absolutely damn sure they are getting it right.
The fix for that is to allow the actor to demand a correction if the information is wrong, not ban the display of age entirely.
Bad law bring it to the Supreme Court and get it overturned. IMDB probably has mega money from all that advertising they run on their site. They have plenty of money for a lawsuit
There's something wrong when you need "plenty of money" in order to assure your rights aren't violated. We need to modify the system where, if you challenge a bad law and prevail, you get your legal costs reimbursed.