The initial success of the modeling using neurally plausible features suggests that the building blocks for constructing complex thoughts are shaped by neural systems rather than by lexicographic considerations. This approach predicts that the neural dimensions of concept representation might be universal across languages, as studies are beginning to suggest [Yang et al., 2017]. In this perspective, the concepts in each language would be underpinned by some subset of a universal set of NPSFs
Not sure if this is actually stating something obvious or not. I mean when I think of "human" I got a ton of associations on what a human is and does, it seems highly plausible that we have a much more similar mental concept than the actual word we use for it. After all with the thousands of different languages we have it seems pretty clear that words are quite arbitrary as long as we agree on what they mean. I would think we're more divided by the way we think about them, that a 1D list, 2D map, 3D sculpture, hierarchies, timelines etc. go different places. And that we have "indexes" into it like tools by usage, foods by taste and so on. I think it would be more odd if the language we learn directed the way we store concepts. Particularly since I think a lot of these building blocks are made before we learn to talk.
It's the time sequence that is important in proving a legal theory of this sort. The customer has been warned before the act of distribution that their business would be damaged as a consequence of distribution. If they just coincidentally fired a customer without warning them first, it would be much harder to make a case.
What theory? It doesn't matter if they tell you why up front, after the fact or not at all. Tortuous interference with business is when a third party sabotages a business relationship, a company's own choice to stop doing business with you is not damage under any theory of liability I've heard of. You might have expected future business and its absence may cause all kinds of problems, but basic freedom of association says they don't have to if they don't want to. That they're specifically not doing business with you because you exercised your rights under the GPL is to me a bit like using your free speech. It might be legal, but it's not free from consequences and I really doubt any court will try to prescribe that it should be.
To me this smells like a blurb written to create a PR stink even though it has no legal substance. Nobody has the right to future business, I can say stuff like "If you start selling real fur products I'll boycott your store" and it would be "tantamount to the addition of a term" for our business relationship but legally it doesn't exist. You're not obliged to listen, I'm not obliged to come back. That loss of business might be seen as a "penalty" but it's the flip side of voting with my wallet. I don't see that it's any different for suppliers, vendors and subcontractors - they don't have to do any more business than what's already agreed on. Any other interpretation would require Grsecurity to be forced to serve customers they don't want to, which is to read waaaaaay too much into the GPL.
After all, it typically does have the overall effect of permanently removing compensation from a legitimate rightsholder for the benefit of the infringer, and you can only dress it up as "they might not have bought it anyway" or "the rightsholder didn't actually lose anything" if you're willing to completely ignore economics while discussing a concept that exists precisely to apply something like the economic incentives of physical works to creative works as well.
Except most of us have first-hand knowledge that the RIAA/MPAA/BSA line of reasoning that a copy is the same as a lost sale is blatantly false. I remember swapping MP3 collections with friends and on LAN parties and whatnot, many thousands of imaginary dollars changing hands. I had a full copy of AutoCAD that cost many thousands of dollars alone just to play around with. Even if I had dedicated 100% of my allowance towards paying for bits and bytes it would be fractions of a cent on the dollar. We didn't have any internal economy, I copied from you and you copied from me and it was always for free so just grab whatever you got disk space for and delete what you don't need later. A lot of it you just checked out once or not at all like listening to a few songs from an artist before you deleted it all.
Which is not to say it didn't have some value. Today I subscribe to Spotify, I imagine if it had existed back then I'd probably nag my parents into giving me a subscription as part of my allowance. But $10/month is something else entirely that the imaginary sums thrown around, we were not super-villains causing billions and trillions of dollars in losses. Those sums never existed anywhere but on back-of-a-napkin calculations from the music industry, trying to create an outrage that was so far off the deep end people actually started waving the pirate flag in defense of TPB. It was like if you want the death penalty for jaywalking or speeding we'd rather abolish those laws than let you go nuts on teens with bootleg music.
Fortunately saner heads found a middle road with streaming, I know many users still aren't happy with that. The music industry is still not happy. The artists are also not particularly happy. But if everyone is somewhat unhappy you've probably found a good middle ground. Oh and about DRM on streaming, that stuff is still available on YouTube/torrents so if it works now I'd say it'd work tomorrow too without DRM because the DRM is actually not working very well. Much like when iTunes lost their FairPlay DRM the effects were mostly imaginary, the world didn't collapse when it went away. Neither would the TV/Movie market.
I can scarcely imagine something more awkward and frustrating than trying to convince an elderly person that they are incapable of doing something... They will get insulted to say the least.
Try beginning dementia, that's worse. When they're too far gone it's like a stuck record, but while they're falling apart part creating chaos and part remembering the chaos is agony. About driving it's mostly that they don't see any alternative, they've driven for 50+ years and being elderly they don't have the same ability to walk/use a bicycle/take public transport as young people so everything revolves around going places by car. It's back to being dependent on others, either friends and family or taxis/home delivery services and I think a lot of upper middle class elderly would easily drop $100-250k on an autonomous car that let them keep their independence. I just hope it's ready for my retirement in a few decades.
Very often it's tied in to the other big life change that is moving, like you could live out here when you were 25 or 50 but now that you're 75 you need an apartment somewhere central. Less house and garden to maintain, less stairs, preferably a grocery store and other basic amenities in rollator distance. It doesn't have to be a nursing home or anything like that, just the easy life. Of course you also have those where being out and about is what keeps them running, the moment they get their apartment they sit in a chair and waste away. But you have to do it in moderation, some elderly refuse to recognize that they're getting older and want too much which can lead to them to some form of injury or breakdown. Sometime you just have to let the old find those limits themselves, though.
And you are among the exception. Actually I would argue that you were never permenately addicted to begin with. While yes you did develop a short term chemical dependacy you never developed or at least changed the nerve dependacy that makes change harder to impossible to quit.
My dad and two of my uncles quit all after smoking 20+ years. In fact that older people quit is quite easily shown with statistics, it's in Norwegian but daily smokers by age group, since the statistics goes over more than 10 years you can easily compare:
16-24 in 2003: 25% -> 25-34 in 2013: 12%* 25-34 in 2003: 26% -> 35-44 in 2013: 15% 35-44 in 2003: 31% -> 45-54 in 2013: 19% 45-54 in 2003: 32% -> 55-64 in 2013: 20% 55-64 in 2003: 25% -> 65-74 in 2013: 14%
* Should have been 15-24 to fit the pattern.
So slightly over half quit young, but there's all sorts of reasons why 16-24 is the hardest party age with the most experimentation. In every other age group though, smoking also went down with ~40%. There's not enough data here to see over 20 years, but the trend is pretty clear. It's very much culture and attitude, once your friends quit smoking and it's very unlikely you'll be the lone wolf still smoking. And if you do, you'll do it outside not in the house, not in the car, not near your kids or grandkids... basically it's become your personal vice, but don't bother us with it. That's been enough to make most people quit.
Selective editing of one sided videos is a real threat to cops and anyone not protected by their own videos. The ghetto lottery has become a regular cottage industry about this kind of abuse. I have no problem with holding cops responsible for mistakes and wrong doing, but many edited video payoff demands have been clearly shown to withhold crucial information too.
Well at least with regards to cops I feel they have perfectly legitimate reasons to record everything they do, even though access should obviously be restricted to protect confidential information, witnesses, privacy when they search private property and so on. So if only their body cams would stop "malfunctioning" when there's an incident they could show their side of the story. In any other circumstances yes it's always a concern who was filming the situation and why, do they have a form of agenda. But then I'm kinda torn on whether that's a bad thing or not, journalists have used hidden cameras to reveal many things. A lot of civil rights activists have intentionally provoked trouble with the cameras rolling to show the injustice. Not everything is a trap.
Not that long ago "sequencing the DNA" would have been a prohibitingly expensive step. Show that this works for broad classes of cancer patients and we'll find cheaper ways than guessing with lab rats. Lab work can also often be automated to a fraction of the cost in volume. For cancer in young people $500k is not bad if it keeps them cancer free, we spend huge amounts on medicines that only prolong the inevitable.
Which is why I'd be sceptical about this product. They obsess about quality and reliability which is exactly what you want in a 10k+ rig, which is their low end for a kitted Raven. And that's okay because you're competing with Canon EOS, Panasonic Varicam, Sony FS7 and up, Blackmagic's high end etc. that are also in the same ballpark. They don't have to care that they don't compete with the $2000 Panasonic GH5 or an iPhone camera.
On the consumption side, it's all about reach. How many people will buy a $1000+ phone? What kind of 3D/VR/AR content will cater to such a limited market? Occulus Rift/Vive etc. struggle enough after years of hype, in this space RED is a nobody. So I expect a technically excellent product with hardly any customers or content.
Is this what you do now? Keep repeating a Windows 95/98 bug against the Linux Kernel?
It's like intentionally mixing up Star Trek and Star Wars to see the reaction. In every forum there's someone there just for the lulz, simply ignore them and maybe they'll go back to 4chan.
You wrote a lot, but not much I could see that makes sense. The primary cost driver is $/kg, no matter if you send it in one or ten batches. Man-rating a rocket is expensive and so is the safety gear per launch, but the remaining lift capability costs roughly the same. Maybe you could get a discount on launching fuel using a refurbished rocket instead of a new one, but not dramatically cheaper. Other than that, Apollo used an orbiter and a lander so the only thing you've improved is a reusable ship in Earth orbit instead of a splashdown capsule. But you'd still need a form of lander back to Earth, so basically on the next flight you'd save the CSM (dry mass) without the heat shield, 11900kg - 1360kg = ~10500 kg you don't have to bring to LEO. And that's not including the rest of the return capsule apart from the heat shield, which should also be subtracted. That saves you half a Falcon 9 (22,800kg to LEO) per round trip to the moon if you don't consider any more shielding, bigger batteries etc. to stay in orbit for an extended time, the docking system to reconnect or anything like that. Wohoo?
Let's say they release some source code. Who could prove that the executable that customers use, was compiled from that source code, without modification?
Reproducible builds is a pretty big thing for open source too, for example Debian. As long as you have information about the build environment (compiler name and version, build flags, source path), the vast majority of packages will now give the exact same binary. If not there are typically small differences due to various system parameters that can be diff'ed and deciphered. How easy it would be for Kaspersky's code only they know, but with the US government's resources it should be no problem to verify the result.
Just one example of the latter: "free" is not "paying other states to take it". Which is it? I'm not going to bother to look, but what crappy writing and editing.
"You can have all the junk in my yard for free, I'll give you twenty bucks to clear it for me." Me think you no understand English good.
It's not good for anyone else. Fast, simple, cheap improvements that means my computer today is absurdly much faster than the C64 I had 30 years ago. And my dad can tell how much faster they are than vacuum tubes 60 years ago. A friend of mine has two classic cars, ~30 and ~50 years ago. Maybe they're not quite as reliable or safe as modern cars, but they go fast enough to mingle well with other cars. I think it'd be pretty sad if in 2047 base performance is pretty much the same and we just do it "smarter" through more cores and better algorithms.
Javascript is actually probably going to be one of the first languages to die... and quickly.
Hahahaha no. Javascript is to the web what Java is to the enterprise, there's tons and tons of code and libraries written for it that needs to be maintained and improved, full rewrites rarely happen, rarely succeed and take forever. Other languages that compile down to Javascript won't be a threat any more than Rust and Go replacing C. Even if WebAssembly takes off it's 20 years late to become the standard exchange format, as long as you must have Javascript fallbacks for everything why would you bother unless your site is performance sensitive? You could support just JS or JS+WebAssembly, seems like an easy choice for me. Java applets, Flash, plug-ins in general - Javascript has been slaying all the competition. Even if WebAssembly takes off, is there any reason to think it'll be more than inline ASM for performance critical parts? I think it's just a niche for performance optimization, not a general replacement.
It never went away. The Germans have always prioritized conformity over liberty. But they pay a price for that. There is a bit of a startup-culture in Berlin, but Germany has produced few tech companies. The biggest is SAP, which actually has a rather authoritarian culture. If you were planning to start a tech company today, would you do it in Germany? $57 million says that you wouldn't.
Yes, and oddly enough it seems to work both ways. Most people seem to want rules and processes for everything and then make an effort to comply with those rules and processes, right down to a friend of mine was trimming the hedge because if it blocked the sidewalk in his tiny little 20 mph one-way, no through traffic residential street where there was barely a car to be seen he could be fined. A non-German friend of mine worked there, instead of managing a team he felt more like an officer taking orders not because he wanted to have that management style, but the employees expected private-level rules and directions. He'd get very little help or feedback on how things should be done if he asked, it was way more like when in power you lead, when the boss leads you follow. It makes for a helluva industrial nation but creativity, improvisation and individualism would not be the first words to come to mind.
It could also be that you're doing your week wrong, and you have no energy left to do anything sensible in your spare time. Are you working to live, or living to work?
I'd say many people don't have the energy, but they do it anyway exactly because it's the weekend they live for. If the weekend was only rest and relaxation to recoup Monday would be so much easier but life would be work, rest, work, rest, work, rest. Quite often when I feel more exhausted Monday morning than Friday afternoon that was part of the plan. Much like a hangover I might not like it very much then and there, but there's a reason I was drinking the night before.
One thing that "experts" like doctors and lawyers hate about the age of "free" information is that the common rabble now knows stuff, actual stuff. In the old days you asked a doctor to treat a condition, he tried the best he could and you had to be content with that.
It was hardly that uncommon to get a second opinion in serious matters. And though it might chafe them a bit to realize the patient knows more about their particular condition than they do, I think most recognize the genuine self-interest people have in their own health and if smart patients effectively do a micro-study of medicine to understand it better they're cool with that. At least the doctors I've talked too haven't been hostile or defensive, then again I've inquired about treatment options not gathering evidence on a botched procedure. I still think they're far more concerned with the self-diagnosing, self-medicating, homeopathic anti-vaxxer alternative medicine crowd who reject tested and mostly working procedures and medications because they watched a bunch of YouTube videos and read blogs.
You could think that with so much good information available, that's what most people would find. But people's confirmation bias is stronger than their objectivity, on the Internet there's so much BS you can pick the reality you want. For example, on one forum I frequent about 80-90% vote for a party that has 10-15% nationally and there's always those who believe the polls and elections are rigged because "everybody" they know agrees with them. They just refuse to accept that there are vast numbers of people who think completely differently than them. There are so many ways to get lost where you only travel in circles from bad data to more bad data, I think the human mind is designed for tribes where if 200 people say something it's a lot. But not if it's 200 loons out of 5 million.
Let's see you set up a corporate network with active directory domains using an all-Microsoft environment, complete with patch management, group policy, and the like. Then replicate that in linux.
This here is the problem. When substituting a work flow with another, free or propitiatory, one simply can't build a bijection with the fundamentally different domains. Some things have to go, some change and some done in a completely different way than before. What lies below the line and what comes out of the system at the end is what matters. This building of the solution is the only way you can even determine the actual operational risk to an organization within relevant timescales.
I'll just quote another reply too and answer both in one post:
If the enterprise needs things on Linux, nothing is stopping them from scratching their itch and sharing it. Enterprise technology is only relevant in big business. Libre software developers owe nothing to business to make any software for them. In fact, a good portion of libre software developers detest commercial software and have little interest in what businesses use. Enterprise only takes, anyway. Who cares if your use cases aren't being met? Build it or deal with the broken dumpster fire that is Windows.
I can understand that people feel the Linux community is a bit like Mr. Jekyll and Dr. Hide, because it's got cheerleaders and grumps rolled into one.
Linux cheerleader: Bah Windows sucks, why don't you use Linux on the desktop? Enterprises: It lacks central management features equivalent to AD with group policies, SCCM etc. Linux grump: We don't owe you nothing. It's your job to deal with all the trouble of switching. Enterprises: Who said we wanted Linux? We just told you why we don't want Linux... * five minutes later * Linux cheerleader: Bah Windows sucks, why don't you use Linux on the desktop?
Linux cheerleader: Try Linux, it's free and so much better than Windows. Fresh Linux user: Uhm so this is all strange and I have some possibly stupid questions/problems/errors. Linux grump: RTFM n00b, we're not your support and nobody cares. Learn to code/debug and fix it yourself. Fresh Linux user: Ooooooooookay, I'll just go back to Windows now. * five minutes later * Linux cheerleader: Try Linux, it's free and so much better than Windows.
Sometimes I actually feel there's more community spirit in Windows forums, there people first agree that Microsoft sucks then try to help each other work around that. On Linux it's almost like attacking someone's baby, [open source package] is great so if you have a problem with [open source package] you must be an idiot or what you're doing is wrong and/or stupid. Of course personal interest and pride is also why many OSS developers spend their leisure time writing a software package, but it has both up- and downsides.
Why wouldn't Uber drivers be willing to drive random strangers around?
People with wheelchair accessible cars aren't likely to be Uber drivers because:
a) They're already helping someone in a wheelchair b) It's a terrible taxi except when you're in a wheelchair c) They don't get paid any extra for the car or lift time
Even entire fleets of taxis usually only have one on stand-by for when they need it, it's dysfunctional the rest of the time. It's a dead loss they eat to comply with accessibility laws, not anything anyone would do voluntarily.
The point is not whether this ban threatens free speech, it's if one country can demand a global ban. If Google complies with this, what's to stop say Saudia-Arabia for demanding gay porn be delisted from Google world-wide? If Canada can force Google to delist sites from Google Saudi-Arabia, then Saudi-Arabia can force Google to delist sites from Google Canada. How can they not see that this sword cuts both ways?
I'm not saying that systemd is the answer, but... the old init system worked great if all you ever needed was an init system. That is to say your machine got everything plugged in on boot, always on a wired network and always on AC. The only thing you need the init system for was to get you from cold hardware to a running state, then it could declare "my work here is done" and go into retirement until it was time for shutdown. For some people that's all they need, good for you. Anything dynamic has been a mess. Suspend/resume/hibernate, hot-plugging/unplugging, wired/wireless, connected/not connected to network, AC/battery, power management, docked/undocked, switchable graphics, the list goes on and on.
The track record is not much better when it comes to shared resources like window managers, composited desktops, sound cards etc. that need some kind of mediator like a compositor or sound server. You can of course say that every application should solve this on their own, but the truth is that we know they don't and there's a huge patchwork of solutions that try to make applications play nice, often competing so this application will only work with that system-level service. I can understand that you don't want to support two init systems (SysV, systemd), four sound servers (PulseAudio, ALSA, Jack, OSS), two window managers (X11, Wayland) and so on.
For this you want a modern POSIX, call it an "application execution environment" if you will. A running mediator between the applications and their surroundings, not just at boot but as long as the machine has power. Maybe this could be solved by a hundred small services of various kinds or at least that's its a better solution than one gigantic mess. But to pretend it's all working great is something of an exaggeration, to say the least.
While all of that may be true, we have plenty experience making vitamin supplements and vegans/vegetarians make it without meat so they can't be all that essential. Hell, I hear some people live on Soylent. And then you have all the bacteria you don't want in there and the antibiotics they put in the feed. If they can grow pure meat in sterile lab conditions that tastes well at a reasonable price, I'm sure we can get the rest some other way. Like here you have refined sugar, almost pure carbs. Here you have refined meat, almost pure proteins. I doubt there's such a thing as too pure, unbalanced and incomplete diets yeah but that's s different problem.
If all the graphics card used by the miners were put to use for folding@home or SETI, we would have cured cancer, Parkinsons, and Alzheimers by now...... AND we would have found aliens. But oh no.... gotta waste the world's resources on make believe instead for personal greed. Humanity sucks.
Let's for the sake of argument say that all the 21 million Bitcoins was mined at no profit at $3000/BTC in electricity for $63 billion, a ridiculous exaggeration but whatever. It's still only about 1/10th of the US military budget for one year. If you want to count money wasted on make believe I'd start with religion, including the money spent because other nutcases are religious like the IS. More greed, less god has made the world a more peaceful place because money is color blind. It takes humans to hate.
Slashdot Mirror
The initial success of the modeling using neurally plausible features suggests that the building blocks for constructing complex thoughts are shaped by neural systems rather than by lexicographic considerations. This approach predicts that the neural dimensions of concept representation might be universal across languages, as studies are beginning to suggest [Yang et al., 2017]. In this perspective, the concepts in each language would be underpinned by some subset of a universal set of NPSFs
Not sure if this is actually stating something obvious or not. I mean when I think of "human" I got a ton of associations on what a human is and does, it seems highly plausible that we have a much more similar mental concept than the actual word we use for it. After all with the thousands of different languages we have it seems pretty clear that words are quite arbitrary as long as we agree on what they mean. I would think we're more divided by the way we think about them, that a 1D list, 2D map, 3D sculpture, hierarchies, timelines etc. go different places. And that we have "indexes" into it like tools by usage, foods by taste and so on. I think it would be more odd if the language we learn directed the way we store concepts. Particularly since I think a lot of these building blocks are made before we learn to talk.
It's the time sequence that is important in proving a legal theory of this sort. The customer has been warned before the act of distribution that their business would be damaged as a consequence of distribution. If they just coincidentally fired a customer without warning them first, it would be much harder to make a case.
What theory? It doesn't matter if they tell you why up front, after the fact or not at all. Tortuous interference with business is when a third party sabotages a business relationship, a company's own choice to stop doing business with you is not damage under any theory of liability I've heard of. You might have expected future business and its absence may cause all kinds of problems, but basic freedom of association says they don't have to if they don't want to. That they're specifically not doing business with you because you exercised your rights under the GPL is to me a bit like using your free speech. It might be legal, but it's not free from consequences and I really doubt any court will try to prescribe that it should be.
To me this smells like a blurb written to create a PR stink even though it has no legal substance. Nobody has the right to future business, I can say stuff like "If you start selling real fur products I'll boycott your store" and it would be "tantamount to the addition of a term" for our business relationship but legally it doesn't exist. You're not obliged to listen, I'm not obliged to come back. That loss of business might be seen as a "penalty" but it's the flip side of voting with my wallet. I don't see that it's any different for suppliers, vendors and subcontractors - they don't have to do any more business than what's already agreed on. Any other interpretation would require Grsecurity to be forced to serve customers they don't want to, which is to read waaaaaay too much into the GPL.
After all, it typically does have the overall effect of permanently removing compensation from a legitimate rightsholder for the benefit of the infringer, and you can only dress it up as "they might not have bought it anyway" or "the rightsholder didn't actually lose anything" if you're willing to completely ignore economics while discussing a concept that exists precisely to apply something like the economic incentives of physical works to creative works as well.
Except most of us have first-hand knowledge that the RIAA/MPAA/BSA line of reasoning that a copy is the same as a lost sale is blatantly false. I remember swapping MP3 collections with friends and on LAN parties and whatnot, many thousands of imaginary dollars changing hands. I had a full copy of AutoCAD that cost many thousands of dollars alone just to play around with. Even if I had dedicated 100% of my allowance towards paying for bits and bytes it would be fractions of a cent on the dollar. We didn't have any internal economy, I copied from you and you copied from me and it was always for free so just grab whatever you got disk space for and delete what you don't need later. A lot of it you just checked out once or not at all like listening to a few songs from an artist before you deleted it all.
Which is not to say it didn't have some value. Today I subscribe to Spotify, I imagine if it had existed back then I'd probably nag my parents into giving me a subscription as part of my allowance. But $10/month is something else entirely that the imaginary sums thrown around, we were not super-villains causing billions and trillions of dollars in losses. Those sums never existed anywhere but on back-of-a-napkin calculations from the music industry, trying to create an outrage that was so far off the deep end people actually started waving the pirate flag in defense of TPB. It was like if you want the death penalty for jaywalking or speeding we'd rather abolish those laws than let you go nuts on teens with bootleg music.
Fortunately saner heads found a middle road with streaming, I know many users still aren't happy with that. The music industry is still not happy. The artists are also not particularly happy. But if everyone is somewhat unhappy you've probably found a good middle ground. Oh and about DRM on streaming, that stuff is still available on YouTube/torrents so if it works now I'd say it'd work tomorrow too without DRM because the DRM is actually not working very well. Much like when iTunes lost their FairPlay DRM the effects were mostly imaginary, the world didn't collapse when it went away. Neither would the TV/Movie market.
I can scarcely imagine something more awkward and frustrating than trying to convince an elderly person that they are incapable of doing something... They will get insulted to say the least.
Try beginning dementia, that's worse. When they're too far gone it's like a stuck record, but while they're falling apart part creating chaos and part remembering the chaos is agony. About driving it's mostly that they don't see any alternative, they've driven for 50+ years and being elderly they don't have the same ability to walk/use a bicycle/take public transport as young people so everything revolves around going places by car. It's back to being dependent on others, either friends and family or taxis/home delivery services and I think a lot of upper middle class elderly would easily drop $100-250k on an autonomous car that let them keep their independence. I just hope it's ready for my retirement in a few decades.
Very often it's tied in to the other big life change that is moving, like you could live out here when you were 25 or 50 but now that you're 75 you need an apartment somewhere central. Less house and garden to maintain, less stairs, preferably a grocery store and other basic amenities in rollator distance. It doesn't have to be a nursing home or anything like that, just the easy life. Of course you also have those where being out and about is what keeps them running, the moment they get their apartment they sit in a chair and waste away. But you have to do it in moderation, some elderly refuse to recognize that they're getting older and want too much which can lead to them to some form of injury or breakdown. Sometime you just have to let the old find those limits themselves, though.
And you are among the exception. Actually I would argue that you were never permenately addicted to begin with. While yes you did develop a short term chemical dependacy you never developed or at least changed the nerve dependacy that makes change harder to impossible to quit.
My dad and two of my uncles quit all after smoking 20+ years. In fact that older people quit is quite easily shown with statistics, it's in Norwegian but daily smokers by age group, since the statistics goes over more than 10 years you can easily compare:
16-24 in 2003: 25% -> 25-34 in 2013: 12%*
25-34 in 2003: 26% -> 35-44 in 2013: 15%
35-44 in 2003: 31% -> 45-54 in 2013: 19%
45-54 in 2003: 32% -> 55-64 in 2013: 20%
55-64 in 2003: 25% -> 65-74 in 2013: 14%
* Should have been 15-24 to fit the pattern.
So slightly over half quit young, but there's all sorts of reasons why 16-24 is the hardest party age with the most experimentation. In every other age group though, smoking also went down with ~40%. There's not enough data here to see over 20 years, but the trend is pretty clear. It's very much culture and attitude, once your friends quit smoking and it's very unlikely you'll be the lone wolf still smoking. And if you do, you'll do it outside not in the house, not in the car, not near your kids or grandkids... basically it's become your personal vice, but don't bother us with it. That's been enough to make most people quit.
Selective editing of one sided videos is a real threat to cops and anyone not protected by their own videos. The ghetto lottery has become a regular cottage industry about this kind of abuse. I have no problem with holding cops responsible for mistakes and wrong doing, but many edited video payoff demands have been clearly shown to withhold crucial information too.
Well at least with regards to cops I feel they have perfectly legitimate reasons to record everything they do, even though access should obviously be restricted to protect confidential information, witnesses, privacy when they search private property and so on. So if only their body cams would stop "malfunctioning" when there's an incident they could show their side of the story. In any other circumstances yes it's always a concern who was filming the situation and why, do they have a form of agenda. But then I'm kinda torn on whether that's a bad thing or not, journalists have used hidden cameras to reveal many things. A lot of civil rights activists have intentionally provoked trouble with the cameras rolling to show the injustice. Not everything is a trap.
Not that long ago "sequencing the DNA" would have been a prohibitingly expensive step. Show that this works for broad classes of cancer patients and we'll find cheaper ways than guessing with lab rats. Lab work can also often be automated to a fraction of the cost in volume. For cancer in young people $500k is not bad if it keeps them cancer free, we spend huge amounts on medicines that only prolong the inevitable.
Which is why I'd be sceptical about this product. They obsess about quality and reliability which is exactly what you want in a 10k+ rig, which is their low end for a kitted Raven. And that's okay because you're competing with Canon EOS, Panasonic Varicam, Sony FS7 and up, Blackmagic's high end etc. that are also in the same ballpark. They don't have to care that they don't compete with the $2000 Panasonic GH5 or an iPhone camera.
On the consumption side, it's all about reach. How many people will buy a $1000+ phone? What kind of 3D/VR/AR content will cater to such a limited market? Occulus Rift/Vive etc. struggle enough after years of hype, in this space RED is a nobody. So I expect a technically excellent product with hardly any customers or content.
Is this what you do now? Keep repeating a Windows 95/98 bug against the Linux Kernel?
It's like intentionally mixing up Star Trek and Star Wars to see the reaction. In every forum there's someone there just for the lulz, simply ignore them and maybe they'll go back to 4chan.
You wrote a lot, but not much I could see that makes sense. The primary cost driver is $/kg, no matter if you send it in one or ten batches. Man-rating a rocket is expensive and so is the safety gear per launch, but the remaining lift capability costs roughly the same. Maybe you could get a discount on launching fuel using a refurbished rocket instead of a new one, but not dramatically cheaper. Other than that, Apollo used an orbiter and a lander so the only thing you've improved is a reusable ship in Earth orbit instead of a splashdown capsule. But you'd still need a form of lander back to Earth, so basically on the next flight you'd save the CSM (dry mass) without the heat shield, 11900kg - 1360kg = ~10500 kg you don't have to bring to LEO. And that's not including the rest of the return capsule apart from the heat shield, which should also be subtracted. That saves you half a Falcon 9 (22,800kg to LEO) per round trip to the moon if you don't consider any more shielding, bigger batteries etc. to stay in orbit for an extended time, the docking system to reconnect or anything like that. Wohoo?
Let's say they release some source code. Who could prove that the executable that customers use, was compiled from that source code, without modification?
Reproducible builds is a pretty big thing for open source too, for example Debian. As long as you have information about the build environment (compiler name and version, build flags, source path), the vast majority of packages will now give the exact same binary. If not there are typically small differences due to various system parameters that can be diff'ed and deciphered. How easy it would be for Kaspersky's code only they know, but with the US government's resources it should be no problem to verify the result.
Just one example of the latter: "free" is not "paying other states to take it". Which is it? I'm not going to bother to look, but what crappy writing and editing.
"You can have all the junk in my yard for free, I'll give you twenty bucks to clear it for me." Me think you no understand English good.
It's not good for anyone else. Fast, simple, cheap improvements that means my computer today is absurdly much faster than the C64 I had 30 years ago. And my dad can tell how much faster they are than vacuum tubes 60 years ago. A friend of mine has two classic cars, ~30 and ~50 years ago. Maybe they're not quite as reliable or safe as modern cars, but they go fast enough to mingle well with other cars. I think it'd be pretty sad if in 2047 base performance is pretty much the same and we just do it "smarter" through more cores and better algorithms.
Javascript is actually probably going to be one of the first languages to die... and quickly.
Hahahaha no. Javascript is to the web what Java is to the enterprise, there's tons and tons of code and libraries written for it that needs to be maintained and improved, full rewrites rarely happen, rarely succeed and take forever. Other languages that compile down to Javascript won't be a threat any more than Rust and Go replacing C. Even if WebAssembly takes off it's 20 years late to become the standard exchange format, as long as you must have Javascript fallbacks for everything why would you bother unless your site is performance sensitive? You could support just JS or JS+WebAssembly, seems like an easy choice for me. Java applets, Flash, plug-ins in general - Javascript has been slaying all the competition. Even if WebAssembly takes off, is there any reason to think it'll be more than inline ASM for performance critical parts? I think it's just a niche for performance optimization, not a general replacement.
It never went away. The Germans have always prioritized conformity over liberty. But they pay a price for that. There is a bit of a startup-culture in Berlin, but Germany has produced few tech companies. The biggest is SAP, which actually has a rather authoritarian culture. If you were planning to start a tech company today, would you do it in Germany? $57 million says that you wouldn't.
Yes, and oddly enough it seems to work both ways. Most people seem to want rules and processes for everything and then make an effort to comply with those rules and processes, right down to a friend of mine was trimming the hedge because if it blocked the sidewalk in his tiny little 20 mph one-way, no through traffic residential street where there was barely a car to be seen he could be fined. A non-German friend of mine worked there, instead of managing a team he felt more like an officer taking orders not because he wanted to have that management style, but the employees expected private-level rules and directions. He'd get very little help or feedback on how things should be done if he asked, it was way more like when in power you lead, when the boss leads you follow. It makes for a helluva industrial nation but creativity, improvisation and individualism would not be the first words to come to mind.
It could also be that you're doing your week wrong, and you have no energy left to do anything sensible in your spare time. Are you working to live, or living to work?
I'd say many people don't have the energy, but they do it anyway exactly because it's the weekend they live for. If the weekend was only rest and relaxation to recoup Monday would be so much easier but life would be work, rest, work, rest, work, rest. Quite often when I feel more exhausted Monday morning than Friday afternoon that was part of the plan. Much like a hangover I might not like it very much then and there, but there's a reason I was drinking the night before.
One thing that "experts" like doctors and lawyers hate about the age of "free" information is that the common rabble now knows stuff, actual stuff. In the old days you asked a doctor to treat a condition, he tried the best he could and you had to be content with that.
It was hardly that uncommon to get a second opinion in serious matters. And though it might chafe them a bit to realize the patient knows more about their particular condition than they do, I think most recognize the genuine self-interest people have in their own health and if smart patients effectively do a micro-study of medicine to understand it better they're cool with that. At least the doctors I've talked too haven't been hostile or defensive, then again I've inquired about treatment options not gathering evidence on a botched procedure. I still think they're far more concerned with the self-diagnosing, self-medicating, homeopathic anti-vaxxer alternative medicine crowd who reject tested and mostly working procedures and medications because they watched a bunch of YouTube videos and read blogs.
You could think that with so much good information available, that's what most people would find. But people's confirmation bias is stronger than their objectivity, on the Internet there's so much BS you can pick the reality you want. For example, on one forum I frequent about 80-90% vote for a party that has 10-15% nationally and there's always those who believe the polls and elections are rigged because "everybody" they know agrees with them. They just refuse to accept that there are vast numbers of people who think completely differently than them. There are so many ways to get lost where you only travel in circles from bad data to more bad data, I think the human mind is designed for tribes where if 200 people say something it's a lot. But not if it's 200 loons out of 5 million.
Let's see you set up a corporate network with active directory domains using an all-Microsoft environment, complete with patch management, group policy, and the like. Then replicate that in linux.
This here is the problem. When substituting a work flow with another, free or propitiatory, one simply can't build a bijection with the fundamentally different domains. Some things have to go, some change and some done in a completely different way than before. What lies below the line and what comes out of the system at the end is what matters. This building of the solution is the only way you can even determine the actual operational risk to an organization within relevant timescales.
I'll just quote another reply too and answer both in one post:
If the enterprise needs things on Linux, nothing is stopping them from scratching their itch and sharing it. Enterprise technology is only relevant in big business. Libre software developers owe nothing to business to make any software for them. In fact, a good portion of libre software developers detest commercial software and have little interest in what businesses use. Enterprise only takes, anyway. Who cares if your use cases aren't being met? Build it or deal with the broken dumpster fire that is Windows.
I can understand that people feel the Linux community is a bit like Mr. Jekyll and Dr. Hide, because it's got cheerleaders and grumps rolled into one.
Linux cheerleader: Bah Windows sucks, why don't you use Linux on the desktop?
Enterprises: It lacks central management features equivalent to AD with group policies, SCCM etc.
Linux grump: We don't owe you nothing. It's your job to deal with all the trouble of switching.
Enterprises: Who said we wanted Linux? We just told you why we don't want Linux...
* five minutes later *
Linux cheerleader: Bah Windows sucks, why don't you use Linux on the desktop?
Linux cheerleader: Try Linux, it's free and so much better than Windows.
Fresh Linux user: Uhm so this is all strange and I have some possibly stupid questions/problems/errors.
Linux grump: RTFM n00b, we're not your support and nobody cares. Learn to code/debug and fix it yourself.
Fresh Linux user: Ooooooooookay, I'll just go back to Windows now.
* five minutes later *
Linux cheerleader: Try Linux, it's free and so much better than Windows.
Sometimes I actually feel there's more community spirit in Windows forums, there people first agree that Microsoft sucks then try to help each other work around that. On Linux it's almost like attacking someone's baby, [open source package] is great so if you have a problem with [open source package] you must be an idiot or what you're doing is wrong and/or stupid. Of course personal interest and pride is also why many OSS developers spend their leisure time writing a software package, but it has both up- and downsides.
Why wouldn't Uber drivers be willing to drive random strangers around?
People with wheelchair accessible cars aren't likely to be Uber drivers because:
a) They're already helping someone in a wheelchair
b) It's a terrible taxi except when you're in a wheelchair
c) They don't get paid any extra for the car or lift time
Even entire fleets of taxis usually only have one on stand-by for when they need it, it's dysfunctional the rest of the time. It's a dead loss they eat to comply with accessibility laws, not anything anyone would do voluntarily.
The point is not whether this ban threatens free speech, it's if one country can demand a global ban. If Google complies with this, what's to stop say Saudia-Arabia for demanding gay porn be delisted from Google world-wide? If Canada can force Google to delist sites from Google Saudi-Arabia, then Saudi-Arabia can force Google to delist sites from Google Canada. How can they not see that this sword cuts both ways?
I'm not saying that systemd is the answer, but... the old init system worked great if all you ever needed was an init system. That is to say your machine got everything plugged in on boot, always on a wired network and always on AC. The only thing you need the init system for was to get you from cold hardware to a running state, then it could declare "my work here is done" and go into retirement until it was time for shutdown. For some people that's all they need, good for you. Anything dynamic has been a mess. Suspend/resume/hibernate, hot-plugging/unplugging, wired/wireless, connected/not connected to network, AC/battery, power management, docked/undocked, switchable graphics, the list goes on and on.
The track record is not much better when it comes to shared resources like window managers, composited desktops, sound cards etc. that need some kind of mediator like a compositor or sound server. You can of course say that every application should solve this on their own, but the truth is that we know they don't and there's a huge patchwork of solutions that try to make applications play nice, often competing so this application will only work with that system-level service. I can understand that you don't want to support two init systems (SysV, systemd), four sound servers (PulseAudio, ALSA, Jack, OSS), two window managers (X11, Wayland) and so on.
For this you want a modern POSIX, call it an "application execution environment" if you will. A running mediator between the applications and their surroundings, not just at boot but as long as the machine has power. Maybe this could be solved by a hundred small services of various kinds or at least that's its a better solution than one gigantic mess. But to pretend it's all working great is something of an exaggeration, to say the least.
While all of that may be true, we have plenty experience making vitamin supplements and vegans/vegetarians make it without meat so they can't be all that essential. Hell, I hear some people live on Soylent. And then you have all the bacteria you don't want in there and the antibiotics they put in the feed. If they can grow pure meat in sterile lab conditions that tastes well at a reasonable price, I'm sure we can get the rest some other way. Like here you have refined sugar, almost pure carbs. Here you have refined meat, almost pure proteins. I doubt there's such a thing as too pure, unbalanced and incomplete diets yeah but that's s different problem.
"I know, let's summon a car with a giant pink mustache!".
If you're a Lyft driver, fine. I'd be slightly more concerned about the other guy...
So [Georgia Sheriff Barry Babb] and three officers got into his car, which happened to be identical to the Lyft driver's
If all the graphics card used by the miners were put to use for folding@home or SETI, we would have cured cancer, Parkinsons, and Alzheimers by now.. .... AND we would have found aliens. But oh no.... gotta waste the world's resources on make believe instead for personal greed. Humanity sucks.
Let's for the sake of argument say that all the 21 million Bitcoins was mined at no profit at $3000/BTC in electricity for $63 billion, a ridiculous exaggeration but whatever. It's still only about 1/10th of the US military budget for one year. If you want to count money wasted on make believe I'd start with religion, including the money spent because other nutcases are religious like the IS. More greed, less god has made the world a more peaceful place because money is color blind. It takes humans to hate.