How about adding 4 block to every left turn? That sounds like a metric shitton of pollution.
It actually saves gas. UPS does this on their routes - right turns only. Actually cuts down on fuel, shortens travel time (less time at lights) and reduces accidents. It sounds counter intuitive but apparently it actually works.
When my parents come over to visit the US they always comment on the comedy of trying to cross a street.
And I'm sure there is nothing peculiar at all about traffic in the UK. (yes that is sarcasm) We have what we call "ugly americans" who when they travel think that everything should be just like it is here in the US and say so loudly. Apparently folks across the pond have their own version of it and they think everything should be just like in the UK. I think your parents need to get over it.
In England we're always taught that an intersection is *the most dangerous place* to attempt to cross a street, even with signals. In America that's the only way to cross a street.
It is most assuredly NOT the only way to cross a street in the US. The only place you are generally prohibited from crossing is IN the intersection itself which is an obviously stupid thing to do anyway. Most corners in big cities have crosswalks with crossing signals and they are commonplace even in small towns. You can cross the streets anywhere along them generally. Technically you have the right of way as a pedestrian but since in a car-pedestrian collision the pedestrian will lose only an idiot or a child would cross without being careful. People cross at crosswalks in big cities mostly because there are buildings in the way except on the outside of the city block. Also pedestrians are expected at crosswalks so there is some amount of safety in doing what is expected and routine.
Since I created the data by driving, and it is unique to my driving, can I assert copyright over it?
Good question but I think the case law and copyright law on this is probably a little ambiguous right now. As a general principle I think you should be the default owner of it but it might not actually end up working that way.
I generate this data. I own this car. This is my data, not the company who made my car. If it's a rental, sure, go ahead and do what you want with that. But if I own the car, that data is MINE to choose whom I give it to, or don't give it to, and use as I see fit.
That depends entirely upon the terms of the purchase agreement you made when you bought the car.
I own my computer, The manufacturers that made it don't own the data that's created by using it.
That doesn't mean you own the software that is on it necessarily unless you were the one that wrote it. You might have a license to use it but you don't own it. You might own the data or you might not. Depends on the license agreement and the applicable laws. Right or wrong it isn't so simple as you make it out to be. I don't disagree with your sentiments but I'm just pointing out that the reality of it isn't necessarily what we expect it should be.
My next vehicle negotiation will involve bringing a Ziploc bag and saying, "please have the folks in the shop place *all* cellular and GPS connectivity equipment in this bag. My purchase of this vehicle is wholly contingent upon this bag being full, and visual confirmation that my in-car infotainment system shows error messages before I pull out of the lot."
Good luck with that. I would be astonished if you could find any car dealer who would agree to such a request. Even if they knew how to do it that would involve substantial unnecessary work which they are unlikely to agree to. Furthermore they would be accepting liability risk of you coming back to them having sold them a non-functioning product.
I look forward to the funny faces I get from the salesmen at the dealership, but this is the world we live in today, and it is sad that such a notion is even necessary.
It's not necessary. You might prefer it that way which I guess is fine but it isn't even remotely necessary. Personally I like all the cellular and GPS stuff and no I'm not paranoid about it. If they screw with me I can afford a decent lawyer.
Medicine is all about treating the symptoms, hiding the symptoms, masking the symptoms, naming the disease after the symptoms.
Hogwash. That is only true when we do not understand the underlying condition. There are plenty of conditions we understand quite well and can treat the underlying cause. For those that we don't yet understand we comfort the patient as best we can until we can figure out what causes the disease. Finding out may take longer than the life of the patient sometimes.
The doctors don't know what is wrong with you.
Sometimes they do and sometimes they do not. We know a lot about a lot of diseases but we do not know everything about every disease. If you think doctors never know what is wrong with you then you don't really understand what you are talking about.
They tell you you have "Red spots on arms and upset stomach" disease, but that is not a disease, those are just symptoms, and they won't cure you of the disease because they don't know what is wrong with you. Instead, they will put you on medicine, that will hide those symptoms...until you stop taking your medicine, and then the symptoms are right back again.
That only happens when the underlying cause is unknown. Sometimes treating the symptoms is the best we can do. Frequently we can do much better. My wife happens to be a pathologist specializing in skin. She sees "red spots on arms" all the time. Sometimes the cause is known with 100% certainty. Sometimes the best she can do is to give a differential diagnosis.
My grandmother was having seizures, so they put her on anti-seizure medication. Do they know what was causing the seizures? No.
Ahh, so because doctors don't know about the root cause of that specific condition for that specific patient, you generalize that to say that they know nothing in general? That simply isn't true or fair.
Do they care? No.
If you think the doctors don't care then you don't actually know any. They care very much. It's why most of them went into the profession. They don't know how to cure everything but that doesn't mean they don't care.
Treating symptoms should only ever be a short term comfort solution while Medical Science looks for a cure.
Which is the point you seem to be missing. Sometimes finding a cure takes a long time. The human body is absurdly complicated and disease pathology even more so and there is a lot we still don't know. A cure may take several lifetimes to find. That doesn't mean we understand nothing and it doesn't mean nobody cares.
You're confusing the study of beliefs with the beliefs themselves.
I'm afraid I'm not confused in the slightest. Theology is by definition "the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world ". Since god(s) existence and relation to the world (if any) are by definition not known or falsifiable, any "study of their nature" is in essence a study of a work of fiction and most definitely not science. You can study other sciences as they relate to the effects of theology (including beliefs) but theology is not a science itself.
You have a deep misunderstanding of the subject, which is probably why your reaction here is visceral and not rational.
I described what a science is and what it isn't and how theology does not fit the definition of a science. If that isn't rational I'm afraid you do not understand the meaning of the word. If you understand the topic then by all means show me how theology fits the definition of a science. Show me what predictive value it has in describing the world. Show me testable and repeatable hypothesis theology has ever made that have been shown to be true by objective evidence.
Could someone explain for the non-Americans why it is possible to have cars turning left at a green light, at the same time as pedestrians crossing the road have a green light?
First, because there is nothing to physically prevent pedestrians from crossing the road at any time, even when it is inadvisable to do so or when signs even directly instruct the pedestrians not to cross.
Second, the general rule in most parts of the US is that pedestrians cross in the same direction as the traffic flow. That's how the cross-walk signals are programmed. Not all cross walks have crossing signals either though they are rather common. The vehicle traffic is always moving because stopping it for pedestrian traffic would seriously slow down traffic flow. In a city like NYC I cannot imagine the gridlock that would happen if they stopped the cars completely. If you argue that there is a better solution out there I might not disagree with you but that's how it is done for better or worse.
And why is the solution not just to stop this happening?
You can't stop it completely. You can mitigate it potentially but the only way to stop it completely is to prevent pedestrians from ever crossing the road ever.
How about just adding some "No Left Turn" signs on streets where the city is concerned about the problem? I don't see why this should be Google's problem and I doubt they'll see a lot of voluntary usage even if it were available.
If you're operating a large truck you should be using truck optimized commercial software, not freaking Google Maps.
Operating a large truck != Working for a large company. Plenty of trucks are small or solo operations with very small budgets. Google Maps is about as sophisticated as these operations are going to get. Many trucks that deliver to us don't have a GPS or navigation aid of any description.
This is a university. Not a career training institute.
In practical terms that is a distinction without a difference in today's world. I went to college to get a diploma that allows me to be considered for specific jobs. I happened to learn a lot of information relevant to those jobs along the way. Virtually all people who go to college today do so to enhance their employment prospects. All other considerations are secondary. Once upon a time college may have been for a more general education but that is no longer the case and hasn't been for some time now.
Theology, when taught from a neutral viewpoint, is a real science.
No it is not. The neutrality of one's viewpoint is irrelevant to whether it is a science or not. It concerns studying concepts that are by definition not falsifiable. Therefore it cannot be science. Theology is basically the earnest study of a work of fiction as if it were real. You can have a scientific study of the psychology of theology. You can study anthropology, history, sociology, etc as it relates to religion. But theology itself is not and cannot be a science. It makes no predictions about the natural world that can be tested and reproduced.
It's entirely reasonable to expect employees to take short brain breaks during the working day. It's entirely reasonable for those brain breaks to be spent on random web pages.
Then they can do it on their own devices separate from the corporate network. This is not a reasonable argument in favor of reducing security. If they want to play on facebook during their break time they can do it on their own iPad. Corporate networks are for corporate business ONLY.
All this comes down to is simply trusting your employees.
Has nothing to do with trusting employees or not. Even trustworthy employees can be fooled into infecting a network. If they want to do something not permitted by the company policy (presuming company policy is sane) then they can do it on a network outside of the company.
Congress was gridlocked from 2008 through 2014 because Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid refused to compromise.
Horseshit. The only people who actually believe that are republicans who have drunk the cool-aid from Fox news. While I won't pretend Pelosi and Reid were paragons of bipartisanship (they haven't been), the right (esp tea party) has been by far the least willing to compromise in our legislature in the last 10 years or so. There is a difference between being unwilling to compromise and being unwilling to utterly capitulate. When the other side refuses to negotiate in good faith then it really doesn't leave many options. Neither side is pure here but blaming Pelosi and Reid without pointing the finger across the aisle as well is just ridiculous.
After the Republicans took over the House, Reid stonewalled everything in the Senate;
And since pretty much the only thing the house actually did was vote to repeal the ACA OVER 30 TIMES (with no serious alternative legislation proposed either), exactly what was he supposed to do? Go along with their lunacy? Very little legislation that came out of the house was even remotely bipartisan in nature and the republicans (esp tea party) have been utterly uninterested in compromise. The ones that do get voted out of office during their next election for being insufficiently ideologically pure in their gerrymandered district.
While giving President Obama everything he asks for. You are right, that isn't compromise, it's fellatio.
They have given him almost nothing he has asked for. In fact they routinely and almost universally oppose all things he proposes even when they are actually republican ideas in origin. They refuse reasonable compromise legislation constantly even when it has significant features that should appeal to the right. Give Obama "everything he asks for"? What planet are you living on that you think that has happened?
No, that's what the career politicians tell themselves to validate their own hypocrisy.
I'm guessing you've never been involved in any elected office where voting was part of the job description. The post you were replying to is right and it isn't a self justification on the part of the politicians. No elected official in a democracy can get their way all the time. What's important to them is usually not important to others. The only (legal) currency they have to trade with other legislators is their votes on issues. So if they have an issue that is really important to them they necessarily will have to trade their vote on other issues they consider less important in order to get something done. If they are unwilling to compromise like this then very little legislation will get passed. This is EXACTLY what is happening in our current legislature. The thing you aren't considering is why those people got elected in the first place. In particular you aren't considering the effects of gerrymandering.
Tea Partiers not knowing how the "cooperation currency" works, just sitting on their "currency" and making no use of it, and thus raising it's value - it would be prime time to both cash in AND to make big deals for the future.
You're not considering the whole equation. The ENTIRE reason these tea party folks got into office was because they were the most ideologically pure candidate in a gerrymandered district. If they compromise and do something actually useful that involves compromise they get voted out of office during the next election cycle by another Tea Partier who promises to never compromise. This happens even if the legislation is objectively in the best interest of the country. This in spite of the fact that it is almost literally impossible to do anything useful in a legislature without trading votes unless you have a one party supermajority. This happens on the left too in many places - it's not just one side or the other. (though the tea party provides probably the clearest example it isn't the only one)
lets blame the voter for the person they voted for not doing the things that he was voted in for
So you think that legislators should have no room to compromise whatsoever when making legislation? You've just explained why our current congress is unable to get anything done. You've also explained the reason we continue to see more fringe tea-party candidates who would rather shut the government down rather than pass necessary legislation even though it isn't their ideal version of a bill.
You cannot have an effective legislature AND have members who cannot compromise unless you live in a one party dictatorship.
Your link states 41 mi/s which is equal to 147600 mi/h. And since it was never measured exactly, it couldn't set a record.
Typo. Forgot the 1 in front. And yes it CAN set a record because we can very clearly set a lower bound for its speed. Since it was only in the screen for one frame and we know how much distance it had to cover at minimum in the time between frames we know the lower bound of the speed with good certainty. Might be faster but it can still set a record because nothing has gone faster than its lower bound.
New Horizons was launched on January 19, 2006, from Cape Canaveral, directly into an Earth-and-solar-escape trajectory with an Earth-relative speed of about 16.26 kilometers per second (58,536 km/h; 36,373 mph); it set the record for the highest launch speed of a human-made object from Earth.
Still probably not correct. I refer you to the manhole cover over the Pascal-B nuclear test. Basically we unintentionally (maybe?) made a nuclear powered potato canon. (which is AWESOME) The manhole cover was estimated to have been launched at 41,000mph - possibly being vaporized in the process.
No it is not. Not even close to the fastest object we've ever launched. That honor goes to the Helios-A and Helios-B probes which traveled about 70km/s. Much faster than the 16km/s of New Horizons.
more than a decade later states are waking up to empty highways.
"Empty highways"? Even allowing that your statement includes hyperbole it doesn't fit with the fact that the US population is growing. Personally outside of some of the most rural parts of the US I've NEVER seen "empty highways". Most in fact seem to need more lanes than they have.
The US, in general, is a declining superpower and its starting to show.
Spare me. People have been spouting this nonsense as a political meme for most of my life. Every out of power politician declares that "we need to make america great again", thereby implying that somehow the country isn't great. They then follow it up by declaring the US to be "the greatest country in the world". So which is it? The US has the largest economy, the largest military, leads the world in scientific research, and does so with just 5% of the world's population. Declining? I've been around for a half century and can't say I see the evidence. Things are better in the US than when I was born. Just because some other countries have been doing well (China etc) doesn't mean things are going in the shitter here.
our skin-and-bones transportation budget, crumbling bridges, and pothole ridden highways are so common as to be a feature.
Any shortfalls can be solved overnight by simply reallocating some of the ludicrous amount of money we spend on our military to domestic infrastructure. More money could be saved by going to a single payer health care system like most of the rest of the civilized world. We have the money but our leaders have chosen to spend it poorly. We like to pretend we need to spend more on our military than the next 17 largest countries combined. We like to pretend that socialized medicine is somehow evil when in fact avoiding it is the unethical thing to do. Not to mention that we already have it (Medicare) and are in denial about it.
Millenials like myself hate driving.
Better get over that. Not being snarky, it's just a reality of living in most parts of the US. Most of the country is simply not accessible without a car and that isn't going to change anytime soon. You don't have to love to drive but it's going to be a part of your life most likely whether you like it or not.
we're crippled by inexorable college debt and newfound levels of unaffordable housing. regular maintenance and gas, insurance and most importantly our general penchant for unemployment after the housing decline means we arent really interested in a car.
That sounds like a lot of excuses to me. Adjusted for inflation gas is cheaper now than it was when I was a child. You can avoid a lot of college debt by not going to expensive private colleges you cannot afford. Spend a year or two at a community college and finish up at your state college. You can get a great education and not be in the poor house. Insurance? You can be covered by your parents until you are 26. If you can't get a job by then with unemployment at 5% then you probably are doing something wrong.
Other generations have had it harder than you. Would you have preferred to grow up during the Great Depression or WWII? How about as a minority 50 or even 25 years ago? I assure you things were harder then.
One difficulty I run into constantly with OpenOffice and Libre Office is that you can't just drag an image or another file and have it embedded in a document
I do that all the time. I have standardized our (small) company on LibreOffice and we use it for our manufacturing work instructions. We put pictures into these all the time and typically do it with drag and drop. Not sure what you are doing differently that would cause it to malfunction but the functionality is there and does work.
It is a huge shortcoming IMHO, as it is used all the time by people I work with that use MS Word. Is that just a shortcoming of the particular application I am using on the particular OS or is that shortcoming inherent in the XML format?
Isn't this discussion in regards to *technical* certifications? Bringing up an accounting certification seems like it's beside the point.
Not that I can tell (certainly not the summary) and even if it was I can assure you that an accounting certification is in part a technical certification. Believe it or not, not everyone here on slashdot is a programmer by trade.
I actually give -2 for certification. That's right, certification will, in my book, nullify the positive impact of an engineering degree *and* one relevant job. Why? Because it is, more often than not, a means of hiding shortcomings behind the veneer of something that seems official.
That's a load of crap. I have a graduate degrees in both business and engineering plus I hold an accounting certification. You would discount my entire education because I hold an accounting certification? NOBODY would even interview me for an accounting job if I didn't have that certification.
Certificates are sometimes a helpful way to signal that the person has some talent. Taking the accounting certification didn't mean I knew more accounting than before the test but it did give me a way to provide evidence to potential clients/employers that I do actually know what I am doing.
I am mostly a startup guy, but I have also worked at Google. Google actually conducted a large survey of all their applicants' resumes and cross-referenced the words they contain with how "successful" those people were at the company (I do not know how they defined that). There were no sure-fire words indicating success. But there was one that predicted the opposite: that's right, "certification."
What works at Google is not necessarily applicable in the rest of the world. Perhaps people with certifications tend not to succeed at Google. That does not mean that they don't succeed elsewhere. It only means they didn't succeed at Google - nothing more. In fact there are many professions where you won't even get considered for an interview without a certification.
Slashdot Mirror
How about adding 4 block to every left turn? That sounds like a metric shitton of pollution.
It actually saves gas. UPS does this on their routes - right turns only. Actually cuts down on fuel, shortens travel time (less time at lights) and reduces accidents. It sounds counter intuitive but apparently it actually works.
When my parents come over to visit the US they always comment on the comedy of trying to cross a street.
And I'm sure there is nothing peculiar at all about traffic in the UK. (yes that is sarcasm) We have what we call "ugly americans" who when they travel think that everything should be just like it is here in the US and say so loudly. Apparently folks across the pond have their own version of it and they think everything should be just like in the UK. I think your parents need to get over it.
In England we're always taught that an intersection is *the most dangerous place* to attempt to cross a street, even with signals. In America that's the only way to cross a street.
It is most assuredly NOT the only way to cross a street in the US. The only place you are generally prohibited from crossing is IN the intersection itself which is an obviously stupid thing to do anyway. Most corners in big cities have crosswalks with crossing signals and they are commonplace even in small towns. You can cross the streets anywhere along them generally. Technically you have the right of way as a pedestrian but since in a car-pedestrian collision the pedestrian will lose only an idiot or a child would cross without being careful. People cross at crosswalks in big cities mostly because there are buildings in the way except on the outside of the city block. Also pedestrians are expected at crosswalks so there is some amount of safety in doing what is expected and routine.
Since I created the data by driving, and it is unique to my driving, can I assert copyright over it?
Good question but I think the case law and copyright law on this is probably a little ambiguous right now. As a general principle I think you should be the default owner of it but it might not actually end up working that way.
I generate this data. I own this car. This is my data, not the company who made my car. If it's a rental, sure, go ahead and do what you want with that. But if I own the car, that data is MINE to choose whom I give it to, or don't give it to, and use as I see fit.
That depends entirely upon the terms of the purchase agreement you made when you bought the car.
I own my computer, The manufacturers that made it don't own the data that's created by using it.
That doesn't mean you own the software that is on it necessarily unless you were the one that wrote it. You might have a license to use it but you don't own it. You might own the data or you might not. Depends on the license agreement and the applicable laws. Right or wrong it isn't so simple as you make it out to be. I don't disagree with your sentiments but I'm just pointing out that the reality of it isn't necessarily what we expect it should be.
My next vehicle negotiation will involve bringing a Ziploc bag and saying, "please have the folks in the shop place *all* cellular and GPS connectivity equipment in this bag. My purchase of this vehicle is wholly contingent upon this bag being full, and visual confirmation that my in-car infotainment system shows error messages before I pull out of the lot."
Good luck with that. I would be astonished if you could find any car dealer who would agree to such a request. Even if they knew how to do it that would involve substantial unnecessary work which they are unlikely to agree to. Furthermore they would be accepting liability risk of you coming back to them having sold them a non-functioning product.
I look forward to the funny faces I get from the salesmen at the dealership, but this is the world we live in today, and it is sad that such a notion is even necessary.
It's not necessary. You might prefer it that way which I guess is fine but it isn't even remotely necessary. Personally I like all the cellular and GPS stuff and no I'm not paranoid about it. If they screw with me I can afford a decent lawyer.
Medicine is all about treating the symptoms, hiding the symptoms, masking the symptoms, naming the disease after the symptoms.
Hogwash. That is only true when we do not understand the underlying condition. There are plenty of conditions we understand quite well and can treat the underlying cause. For those that we don't yet understand we comfort the patient as best we can until we can figure out what causes the disease. Finding out may take longer than the life of the patient sometimes.
The doctors don't know what is wrong with you.
Sometimes they do and sometimes they do not. We know a lot about a lot of diseases but we do not know everything about every disease. If you think doctors never know what is wrong with you then you don't really understand what you are talking about.
They tell you you have "Red spots on arms and upset stomach" disease, but that is not a disease, those are just symptoms, and they won't cure you of the disease because they don't know what is wrong with you. Instead, they will put you on medicine, that will hide those symptoms...until you stop taking your medicine, and then the symptoms are right back again.
That only happens when the underlying cause is unknown. Sometimes treating the symptoms is the best we can do. Frequently we can do much better. My wife happens to be a pathologist specializing in skin. She sees "red spots on arms" all the time. Sometimes the cause is known with 100% certainty. Sometimes the best she can do is to give a differential diagnosis.
My grandmother was having seizures, so they put her on anti-seizure medication. Do they know what was causing the seizures? No.
Ahh, so because doctors don't know about the root cause of that specific condition for that specific patient, you generalize that to say that they know nothing in general? That simply isn't true or fair.
Do they care? No.
If you think the doctors don't care then you don't actually know any. They care very much. It's why most of them went into the profession. They don't know how to cure everything but that doesn't mean they don't care.
Treating symptoms should only ever be a short term comfort solution while Medical Science looks for a cure.
Which is the point you seem to be missing. Sometimes finding a cure takes a long time. The human body is absurdly complicated and disease pathology even more so and there is a lot we still don't know. A cure may take several lifetimes to find. That doesn't mean we understand nothing and it doesn't mean nobody cares.
You're confusing the study of beliefs with the beliefs themselves.
I'm afraid I'm not confused in the slightest. Theology is by definition "the study of religious faith, practice, and experience; especially : the study of God and of God's relation to the world ". Since god(s) existence and relation to the world (if any) are by definition not known or falsifiable, any "study of their nature" is in essence a study of a work of fiction and most definitely not science. You can study other sciences as they relate to the effects of theology (including beliefs) but theology is not a science itself.
You have a deep misunderstanding of the subject, which is probably why your reaction here is visceral and not rational.
I described what a science is and what it isn't and how theology does not fit the definition of a science. If that isn't rational I'm afraid you do not understand the meaning of the word. If you understand the topic then by all means show me how theology fits the definition of a science. Show me what predictive value it has in describing the world. Show me testable and repeatable hypothesis theology has ever made that have been shown to be true by objective evidence.
Could someone explain for the non-Americans why it is possible to have cars turning left at a green light, at the same time as pedestrians crossing the road have a green light?
First, because there is nothing to physically prevent pedestrians from crossing the road at any time, even when it is inadvisable to do so or when signs even directly instruct the pedestrians not to cross.
Second, the general rule in most parts of the US is that pedestrians cross in the same direction as the traffic flow. That's how the cross-walk signals are programmed. Not all cross walks have crossing signals either though they are rather common. The vehicle traffic is always moving because stopping it for pedestrian traffic would seriously slow down traffic flow. In a city like NYC I cannot imagine the gridlock that would happen if they stopped the cars completely. If you argue that there is a better solution out there I might not disagree with you but that's how it is done for better or worse.
And why is the solution not just to stop this happening?
You can't stop it completely. You can mitigate it potentially but the only way to stop it completely is to prevent pedestrians from ever crossing the road ever.
How about just adding some "No Left Turn" signs on streets where the city is concerned about the problem? I don't see why this should be Google's problem and I doubt they'll see a lot of voluntary usage even if it were available.
If you're operating a large truck you should be using truck optimized commercial software, not freaking Google Maps.
Operating a large truck != Working for a large company. Plenty of trucks are small or solo operations with very small budgets. Google Maps is about as sophisticated as these operations are going to get. Many trucks that deliver to us don't have a GPS or navigation aid of any description.
This is a university. Not a career training institute.
In practical terms that is a distinction without a difference in today's world. I went to college to get a diploma that allows me to be considered for specific jobs. I happened to learn a lot of information relevant to those jobs along the way. Virtually all people who go to college today do so to enhance their employment prospects. All other considerations are secondary. Once upon a time college may have been for a more general education but that is no longer the case and hasn't been for some time now.
Theology, when taught from a neutral viewpoint, is a real science.
No it is not. The neutrality of one's viewpoint is irrelevant to whether it is a science or not. It concerns studying concepts that are by definition not falsifiable. Therefore it cannot be science. Theology is basically the earnest study of a work of fiction as if it were real. You can have a scientific study of the psychology of theology. You can study anthropology, history, sociology, etc as it relates to religion. But theology itself is not and cannot be a science. It makes no predictions about the natural world that can be tested and reproduced.
It's entirely reasonable to expect employees to take short brain breaks during the working day. It's entirely reasonable for those brain breaks to be spent on random web pages.
Then they can do it on their own devices separate from the corporate network. This is not a reasonable argument in favor of reducing security. If they want to play on facebook during their break time they can do it on their own iPad. Corporate networks are for corporate business ONLY.
All this comes down to is simply trusting your employees.
Has nothing to do with trusting employees or not. Even trustworthy employees can be fooled into infecting a network. If they want to do something not permitted by the company policy (presuming company policy is sane) then they can do it on a network outside of the company.
Congress was gridlocked from 2008 through 2014 because Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid refused to compromise.
Horseshit. The only people who actually believe that are republicans who have drunk the cool-aid from Fox news. While I won't pretend Pelosi and Reid were paragons of bipartisanship (they haven't been), the right (esp tea party) has been by far the least willing to compromise in our legislature in the last 10 years or so. There is a difference between being unwilling to compromise and being unwilling to utterly capitulate. When the other side refuses to negotiate in good faith then it really doesn't leave many options. Neither side is pure here but blaming Pelosi and Reid without pointing the finger across the aisle as well is just ridiculous.
After the Republicans took over the House, Reid stonewalled everything in the Senate;
And since pretty much the only thing the house actually did was vote to repeal the ACA OVER 30 TIMES (with no serious alternative legislation proposed either), exactly what was he supposed to do? Go along with their lunacy? Very little legislation that came out of the house was even remotely bipartisan in nature and the republicans (esp tea party) have been utterly uninterested in compromise. The ones that do get voted out of office during their next election for being insufficiently ideologically pure in their gerrymandered district.
While giving President Obama everything he asks for. You are right, that isn't compromise, it's fellatio.
They have given him almost nothing he has asked for. In fact they routinely and almost universally oppose all things he proposes even when they are actually republican ideas in origin. They refuse reasonable compromise legislation constantly even when it has significant features that should appeal to the right. Give Obama "everything he asks for"? What planet are you living on that you think that has happened?
No, that's what the career politicians tell themselves to validate their own hypocrisy.
I'm guessing you've never been involved in any elected office where voting was part of the job description. The post you were replying to is right and it isn't a self justification on the part of the politicians. No elected official in a democracy can get their way all the time. What's important to them is usually not important to others. The only (legal) currency they have to trade with other legislators is their votes on issues. So if they have an issue that is really important to them they necessarily will have to trade their vote on other issues they consider less important in order to get something done. If they are unwilling to compromise like this then very little legislation will get passed. This is EXACTLY what is happening in our current legislature. The thing you aren't considering is why those people got elected in the first place. In particular you aren't considering the effects of gerrymandering.
Tea Partiers not knowing how the "cooperation currency" works, just sitting on their "currency" and making no use of it, and thus raising it's value - it would be prime time to both cash in AND to make big deals for the future.
You're not considering the whole equation. The ENTIRE reason these tea party folks got into office was because they were the most ideologically pure candidate in a gerrymandered district. If they compromise and do something actually useful that involves compromise they get voted out of office during the next election cycle by another Tea Partier who promises to never compromise. This happens even if the legislation is objectively in the best interest of the country. This in spite of the fact that it is almost literally impossible to do anything useful in a legislature without trading votes unless you have a one party supermajority. This happens on the left too in many places - it's not just one side or the other. (though the tea party provides probably the clearest example it isn't the only one)
lets blame the voter for the person they voted for not doing the things that he was voted in for
So you think that legislators should have no room to compromise whatsoever when making legislation? You've just explained why our current congress is unable to get anything done. You've also explained the reason we continue to see more fringe tea-party candidates who would rather shut the government down rather than pass necessary legislation even though it isn't their ideal version of a bill.
You cannot have an effective legislature AND have members who cannot compromise unless you live in a one party dictatorship.
The unassailable world speed champion is another US spacecraft, the Galileo Atmosphere Probe. It plunged into Jupiter's atmosphere at 47km/s.
That's still slower than the manhole cover (66km/s) and the Helios probes (70km/s)
Your link states 41 mi/s which is equal to 147600 mi/h. And since it was never measured exactly, it couldn't set a record.
Typo. Forgot the 1 in front. And yes it CAN set a record because we can very clearly set a lower bound for its speed. Since it was only in the screen for one frame and we know how much distance it had to cover at minimum in the time between frames we know the lower bound of the speed with good certainty. Might be faster but it can still set a record because nothing has gone faster than its lower bound.
New Horizons was launched on January 19, 2006, from Cape Canaveral, directly into an Earth-and-solar-escape trajectory with an Earth-relative speed of about 16.26 kilometers per second (58,536 km/h; 36,373 mph); it set the record for the highest launch speed of a human-made object from Earth.
Still probably not correct. I refer you to the manhole cover over the Pascal-B nuclear test. Basically we unintentionally (maybe?) made a nuclear powered potato canon. (which is AWESOME) The manhole cover was estimated to have been launched at 41,000mph - possibly being vaporized in the process.
New Horizons is the fastest object ever launched.
No it is not. Not even close to the fastest object we've ever launched. That honor goes to the Helios-A and Helios-B probes which traveled about 70km/s. Much faster than the 16km/s of New Horizons.
more than a decade later states are waking up to empty highways.
"Empty highways"? Even allowing that your statement includes hyperbole it doesn't fit with the fact that the US population is growing. Personally outside of some of the most rural parts of the US I've NEVER seen "empty highways". Most in fact seem to need more lanes than they have.
The US, in general, is a declining superpower and its starting to show.
Spare me. People have been spouting this nonsense as a political meme for most of my life. Every out of power politician declares that "we need to make america great again", thereby implying that somehow the country isn't great. They then follow it up by declaring the US to be "the greatest country in the world". So which is it? The US has the largest economy, the largest military, leads the world in scientific research, and does so with just 5% of the world's population. Declining? I've been around for a half century and can't say I see the evidence. Things are better in the US than when I was born. Just because some other countries have been doing well (China etc) doesn't mean things are going in the shitter here.
our skin-and-bones transportation budget, crumbling bridges, and pothole ridden highways are so common as to be a feature.
Any shortfalls can be solved overnight by simply reallocating some of the ludicrous amount of money we spend on our military to domestic infrastructure. More money could be saved by going to a single payer health care system like most of the rest of the civilized world. We have the money but our leaders have chosen to spend it poorly. We like to pretend we need to spend more on our military than the next 17 largest countries combined. We like to pretend that socialized medicine is somehow evil when in fact avoiding it is the unethical thing to do. Not to mention that we already have it (Medicare) and are in denial about it.
Millenials like myself hate driving.
Better get over that. Not being snarky, it's just a reality of living in most parts of the US. Most of the country is simply not accessible without a car and that isn't going to change anytime soon. You don't have to love to drive but it's going to be a part of your life most likely whether you like it or not.
we're crippled by inexorable college debt and newfound levels of unaffordable housing. regular maintenance and gas, insurance and most importantly our general penchant for unemployment after the housing decline means we arent really interested in a car.
That sounds like a lot of excuses to me. Adjusted for inflation gas is cheaper now than it was when I was a child. You can avoid a lot of college debt by not going to expensive private colleges you cannot afford. Spend a year or two at a community college and finish up at your state college. You can get a great education and not be in the poor house. Insurance? You can be covered by your parents until you are 26. If you can't get a job by then with unemployment at 5% then you probably are doing something wrong.
Other generations have had it harder than you. Would you have preferred to grow up during the Great Depression or WWII? How about as a minority 50 or even 25 years ago? I assure you things were harder then.
One difficulty I run into constantly with OpenOffice and Libre Office is that you can't just drag an image or another file and have it embedded in a document
I do that all the time. I have standardized our (small) company on LibreOffice and we use it for our manufacturing work instructions. We put pictures into these all the time and typically do it with drag and drop. Not sure what you are doing differently that would cause it to malfunction but the functionality is there and does work.
It is a huge shortcoming IMHO, as it is used all the time by people I work with that use MS Word. Is that just a shortcoming of the particular application I am using on the particular OS or is that shortcoming inherent in the XML format?
Hasn't got anything to do with the file format.
Isn't this discussion in regards to *technical* certifications? Bringing up an accounting certification seems like it's beside the point.
Not that I can tell (certainly not the summary) and even if it was I can assure you that an accounting certification is in part a technical certification. Believe it or not, not everyone here on slashdot is a programmer by trade.
I actually give -2 for certification. That's right, certification will, in my book, nullify the positive impact of an engineering degree *and* one relevant job. Why? Because it is, more often than not, a means of hiding shortcomings behind the veneer of something that seems official.
That's a load of crap. I have a graduate degrees in both business and engineering plus I hold an accounting certification. You would discount my entire education because I hold an accounting certification? NOBODY would even interview me for an accounting job if I didn't have that certification.
Certificates are sometimes a helpful way to signal that the person has some talent. Taking the accounting certification didn't mean I knew more accounting than before the test but it did give me a way to provide evidence to potential clients/employers that I do actually know what I am doing.
I am mostly a startup guy, but I have also worked at Google. Google actually conducted a large survey of all their applicants' resumes and cross-referenced the words they contain with how "successful" those people were at the company (I do not know how they defined that). There were no sure-fire words indicating success. But there was one that predicted the opposite: that's right, "certification."
What works at Google is not necessarily applicable in the rest of the world. Perhaps people with certifications tend not to succeed at Google. That does not mean that they don't succeed elsewhere. It only means they didn't succeed at Google - nothing more. In fact there are many professions where you won't even get considered for an interview without a certification.