So, what you're saying is that as long as we vote on it, and the majority want it, it is okay? SO you're okay with Gay Marriage being illegal then right? Obama should be impeached for not defending DOMA then, right?
Darfur is a strawman and you know it. And this wonderful western stable state hasn't always been that way. There was this thing called the US Civil war. Perhaps you've heard about it. And Western Democracies have had issues, I can recall WWI and WWII. Heck even Hitler was elected.
Imperial measurements are way more efficient at converting portion sizes, than say metric measuring.
Try this next time you see a 100% metric recipe for 6 people (say 1gram). Convert it, in your head, for 8 people. Or one for 6 and covert it to 14. Most imperial measurements are divisible by 2,3,4, 6 or 8 quite easily. Which makes for measuring without the need for a calculator in the kitchen. Look, I'm a big fan of Metric in a lot of cases, but in the kitchen is a rare exception.
Trust is not a boolean expression of T/F. Trust is a sliding scale of gray between the black and white endpoints. Trust is a key component of faith. I trust some people more than others. I don't trust anyone 100%, including myself.
Now, let me ask you this. How do you feel about a government that requires you to purchase something you may not need, but definitely do not want? Where is the "self determination" in that?
Look, I'm all for self determination and letting people deal with the consequences of their choices, without pity. Too bad the leftwing dingbats are all for self determination until it affects their Utopian ideals, and then they side more with the dictatorial side of things.
You're almost right. We have a fractionalized, group based political hegemony of strange bedfellows pretending to be a democratic republic.
If you want to fix the problem, stop voting for the two party system.
Additionally, we need more representatives in congress, and I like the idea that I recently read. Take the state with the smallest population, and that state's population becomes the standard size of a US Rep district for the country. In this case it would be Wyoming at 565K people. The Total number of US Representatives would currently be 563. California for example would get 66 of those representatives because it is 66 times more populous. This is an increase of about 25%. (roughly).
I'd also make it so that if you are running for office, all your campaign donations came from people inside your district (or state). No outside funding of campaigns. I'd also require only individuals are allowed to fund campaigns and remove restrictions on campaign donations. No corporate, PAC or union donations allowed. Those groups, however, can run their own, independent campaigns for whatever (free speech), but they cannot contribute directly nor coordinate with candidate campaigns.
Lawyers would be barred from running for political office, except for positions where a law degree is required or preferred (i.e.District Attorney), under the idea that as lawyers they already serve under the judicial branch (officer of the court).
You see, there's the problem right there... $50 bucks.
My standard pat answer is... $60/hr w/2hr min. I'm a freaking professional, and I'm very good at my job. I can probably fix it for you in that period of time, or else help you go buy a new computer, and I'll spend two hours moving your data over for you. It isn't worth that to you? Then why is it worth it to me? I'd say I'm sorry, but I'm not. Your other option is to take it to GeekSquad and have them run some cool sounding software you can download off the internet for free and it will cost you... $45 for a "tuneup", and then they'll sell you a Monster USB cable for $40.00 to keep the trojans away (Laugh hysterically). Remember, I've been doing this longer than most of the geeks over there have been alive.
If the two are the same, then it isn't science. It is fanciful thinking and a stab in the dark. It is faith. Which was my original point, which gets lost in the moderation system of "I don't agree" troll mods.
Tell me, why should we trust anything capable of making such a mistake, even once. And yet we do, don't we?
Insults aren't truth. And you don't know anything about me, and what I know. I would dare say, I'm closer to understanding Science than you, because I realize that science can, and often does, lead to wrong conclusions. Science is the search for truth. Science isn't truth. Too many people believe science is truth, and those people are religious nutjobs.
They bought out Gizmo5 a year and half ago, just about the time I was seriously looking at SIP for home use. One day it was there, the next.. nope. I saw this and figured that Google was finally tying Gizmo5 to gVoice. Well, crap. It doesn't seem to be so... at least not yet.
It all depends on your definition of "forever", which is a vague concept that mirrors "eternity" . However to the person who screwed in that lightbulb it did last "for ever" at least for him/her. That person is pining for the fjords and yet the lightbulb remains. It is kind of like "lifetime" warranties;)
So, when science declares something as "true", and it turns out that it isn't even close to being true, that people believe what science says is not science?
I mentioned this above, but science has a long history of frauds being passed as truth because people want to assume the conclusions are true. See Piltdown Man for a fine example of something that took 40 years to prove was not only wrong, but a hoax. And yet for 40 years was passed around as "science". So, excuse me for questioning science's conclusions and being labeled religious for doing it. And people say I'm ignorant of what science really is,
I thought that was exactly what science was supposed to be; question everything.
There is a difference between a measurement error, and being completely wrong. This is not akin to the moon's orbit was miscalculate by 1 cm, but rather that the moon orbited Mars, and not Earth, was twice its size and inhabited by Flying Spaghetti Monsters.
In otherwords, it wasn't even close. But enough people wanted it to be true, so the didn't even bother checking.
You're saying it doesn't happen in science? That misrepresented "facts" are never taught as "truth" in science? Or is it that you hate it when what passes for science is compared to religion... well because it acts a lot like religion?
You want an "intractable belief" that is prevalent in science? Here's one... that science is without bias.
This is a fine case of bias leading to a conclusion that was passed around as true, because science wants it to be true. How else do you explain how far wrong it might be that the planet they said was one thing, couldn't be further from the truth.
However, in science's defense, they correct their mistakes eventually. And no doubt they might actually discover "earth like" planet, around a "sol like" sun, in an "earth like" habitable zone. On the other hand, they might never find such a thing. One thing is for sure, scientists will believe there is one, even if they never find evidence, and someone else will fabricate data to prove it.
Remember, it took 40 years to discover that the Piltdown man was a hoax, and in those 40 years, thousands of people got their masters and doctorates based in part on their thesis using Piltdown man, and not one of those degrees were ever revoked. Science doesn't have the sterling reputation it thinks it has.
My point is, that science is flawed, because people performing it are flawed. It does tend to correct itself over time however, but it cannot nor does it attempt to fix the problems it causes when it is wrong.
This has nothing to do with religion except where science acts like a religion while trying to pretend it never does.
Actually, in the bible, you were married when you had sex, because sex was the "Marriage". How many guys would screw the first girl that put out, if that meant they were married to her for life? How many of you are glad you're not married to the first girl you nailed? (also goes to girls too).
And this is one of the reasons why Government should not decided who can or cannot be married. It is no business between government and the two getting married. If two gay people want to get married, great. But likewise government should not mandate any laws on how (or how not) to treat people who are married compared to individuals.
I just wish our society was consistent with regards to separation of church and state, which would include marriages (IMHO).
All bad science begins with "A scientist says it, therefore I believe it". How many people have heard, and repeated the previous "declaration" as "fact" but will remain unaware of this new information? And how many of the ignorant pseudo scientists will continue to believe, even if you present this evidence.
Much of what passes for science is indistinguishable from religion.
Unless you need IOPS on the order of magnitude of 100 times faster. Then you move to a hybrid model of some of the higher end Drive Array Chassis offer with features like Dynamic Allocation.
I think both your boss and you need a refresher course in technology.
Two years ago, Consumer SSD didn't have proper TRIM features. The drive probably didn't die, just needed a wipe and rewrite. And you were probably using consumer grade OCZ drives, and not the better (and way more expensive) commercial drives, which had the better chips in them (and TRIM).
If you were doing Database transactions on SSDs, you'd realize that there is no way for HDD to compete with SSD in IOPS. If you really wanted and needed IOPS for your Database (doesn't sound like you did, since you're using a laptop), then the cost for the drive would barely register in the decision to buy the drive.
Suffice it to say, your anecdotal evidence means very little to those people who can see the benefit of SSDs. My professional opinion is that most of the SSDs being sold right now are going to Database Server farms, for the IOPS alone, and only the ones that don't make the grade end up on the consumer market.
Let us presume that automated drivers are some ratio better at driving than your average person. Let us measure that ratio at 10x safer on whole, when compared to all drivers in all classifications. Then, without making any changes to insurance rates, a computer based driven car would be able to pay out 10x greater awards for damages (injuries). Instead of $10,000 award, it becomes $100,000.
Also, think of the benefit of being able to drink and still go home in your car without a care about accidents or sobriety check points.
Latency: Hopping through three dozen phones to reach a tower, then hopping off the other tower and hopping another three dozen devices... no latency at all.
Privacy: both the start and endpoints of the call have to have the same protocol. And if you pass credentials at all over the six dozen hops in step one, anyone of them can listen in.
Coverage: Works in high density areas NYC or LA, not so well in Wyoming or Idaho.
Bandwidth: You're assuming that a poor device stuck somewhere between endpoints has enough bandwidth to pass the four dozen calls trying to pass through it, because it is the choke point of the mesh.
Battery power is the least of my worries with Mesh.Mesh power will have multiple points that are plugged into power, be it 110/220 wallwarts or car lighter power or even solar power.
This is about not trusting the government with properly going through the channels to expose speech based crimes (Libel, Slander). If you can't trust your government to know when it is appropriate to search that sort of information, then how the hell do you trust them with much more dangerous such as Nationalized Health Care?
I'm one of those few people who just plain don't trust my government, because I know what it is. It is the worst kind of governance... except for all the others.
Slashdot Mirror
Obligatory XKCD
So, what you're saying is that as long as we vote on it, and the majority want it, it is okay? SO you're okay with Gay Marriage being illegal then right? Obama should be impeached for not defending DOMA then, right?
Darfur is a strawman and you know it. And this wonderful western stable state hasn't always been that way. There was this thing called the US Civil war. Perhaps you've heard about it. And Western Democracies have had issues, I can recall WWI and WWII. Heck even Hitler was elected.
Imperial measurements are way more efficient at converting portion sizes, than say metric measuring.
Try this next time you see a 100% metric recipe for 6 people (say 1gram). Convert it, in your head, for 8 people. Or one for 6 and covert it to 14. Most imperial measurements are divisible by 2,3,4, 6 or 8 quite easily. Which makes for measuring without the need for a calculator in the kitchen. Look, I'm a big fan of Metric in a lot of cases, but in the kitchen is a rare exception.
Trust is not a boolean expression of T/F. Trust is a sliding scale of gray between the black and white endpoints. Trust is a key component of faith. I trust some people more than others. I don't trust anyone 100%, including myself.
Now, let me ask you this. How do you feel about a government that requires you to purchase something you may not need, but definitely do not want? Where is the "self determination" in that?
Look, I'm all for self determination and letting people deal with the consequences of their choices, without pity. Too bad the leftwing dingbats are all for self determination until it affects their Utopian ideals, and then they side more with the dictatorial side of things.
You're almost right. We have a fractionalized, group based political hegemony of strange bedfellows pretending to be a democratic republic.
If you want to fix the problem, stop voting for the two party system.
Additionally, we need more representatives in congress, and I like the idea that I recently read. Take the state with the smallest population, and that state's population becomes the standard size of a US Rep district for the country. In this case it would be Wyoming at 565K people. The Total number of US Representatives would currently be 563. California for example would get 66 of those representatives because it is 66 times more populous. This is an increase of about 25%. (roughly).
I'd also make it so that if you are running for office, all your campaign donations came from people inside your district (or state). No outside funding of campaigns. I'd also require only individuals are allowed to fund campaigns and remove restrictions on campaign donations. No corporate, PAC or union donations allowed. Those groups, however, can run their own, independent campaigns for whatever (free speech), but they cannot contribute directly nor coordinate with candidate campaigns.
Lawyers would be barred from running for political office, except for positions where a law degree is required or preferred (i.e.District Attorney), under the idea that as lawyers they already serve under the judicial branch (officer of the court).
You see, there's the problem right there ... $50 bucks.
My standard pat answer is ... $60/hr w/2hr min. I'm a freaking professional, and I'm very good at my job. I can probably fix it for you in that period of time, or else help you go buy a new computer, and I'll spend two hours moving your data over for you. It isn't worth that to you? Then why is it worth it to me? I'd say I'm sorry, but I'm not. Your other option is to take it to GeekSquad and have them run some cool sounding software you can download off the internet for free and it will cost you ... $45 for a "tuneup", and then they'll sell you a Monster USB cable for $40.00 to keep the trojans away (Laugh hysterically). Remember, I've been doing this longer than most of the geeks over there have been alive.
If the two are the same, then it isn't science. It is fanciful thinking and a stab in the dark. It is faith. Which was my original point, which gets lost in the moderation system of "I don't agree" troll mods.
Tell me, why should we trust anything capable of making such a mistake, even once. And yet we do, don't we?
Insults aren't truth. And you don't know anything about me, and what I know. I would dare say, I'm closer to understanding Science than you, because I realize that science can, and often does, lead to wrong conclusions. Science is the search for truth. Science isn't truth. Too many people believe science is truth, and those people are religious nutjobs.
Crap.
They bought out Gizmo5 a year and half ago, just about the time I was seriously looking at SIP for home use. One day it was there, the next .. nope. I saw this and figured that Google was finally tying Gizmo5 to gVoice. Well, crap. It doesn't seem to be so ... at least not yet.
It all depends on your definition of "forever", which is a vague concept that mirrors "eternity" . However to the person who screwed in that lightbulb it did last "for ever" at least for him/her. That person is pining for the fjords and yet the lightbulb remains. It is kind of like "lifetime" warranties ;)
So, when science declares something as "true", and it turns out that it isn't even close to being true, that people believe what science says is not science?
I mentioned this above, but science has a long history of frauds being passed as truth because people want to assume the conclusions are true. See Piltdown Man for a fine example of something that took 40 years to prove was not only wrong, but a hoax. And yet for 40 years was passed around as "science". So, excuse me for questioning science's conclusions and being labeled religious for doing it. And people say I'm ignorant of what science really is,
I thought that was exactly what science was supposed to be; question everything.
There is a difference between a measurement error, and being completely wrong. This is not akin to the moon's orbit was miscalculate by 1 cm, but rather that the moon orbited Mars, and not Earth, was twice its size and inhabited by Flying Spaghetti Monsters.
In otherwords, it wasn't even close. But enough people wanted it to be true, so the didn't even bother checking.
You're saying it doesn't happen in science? That misrepresented "facts" are never taught as "truth" in science? Or is it that you hate it when what passes for science is compared to religion ... well because it acts a lot like religion?
You want an "intractable belief" that is prevalent in science? Here's one ... that science is without bias.
This is a fine case of bias leading to a conclusion that was passed around as true, because science wants it to be true. How else do you explain how far wrong it might be that the planet they said was one thing, couldn't be further from the truth.
However, in science's defense, they correct their mistakes eventually. And no doubt they might actually discover "earth like" planet, around a "sol like" sun, in an "earth like" habitable zone. On the other hand, they might never find such a thing. One thing is for sure, scientists will believe there is one, even if they never find evidence, and someone else will fabricate data to prove it.
Remember, it took 40 years to discover that the Piltdown man was a hoax, and in those 40 years, thousands of people got their masters and doctorates based in part on their thesis using Piltdown man, and not one of those degrees were ever revoked. Science doesn't have the sterling reputation it thinks it has.
My point is, that science is flawed, because people performing it are flawed. It does tend to correct itself over time however, but it cannot nor does it attempt to fix the problems it causes when it is wrong.
This has nothing to do with religion except where science acts like a religion while trying to pretend it never does.
lol
Actually, in the bible, you were married when you had sex, because sex was the "Marriage". How many guys would screw the first girl that put out, if that meant they were married to her for life? How many of you are glad you're not married to the first girl you nailed? (also goes to girls too).
And this is one of the reasons why Government should not decided who can or cannot be married. It is no business between government and the two getting married. If two gay people want to get married, great. But likewise government should not mandate any laws on how (or how not) to treat people who are married compared to individuals.
I just wish our society was consistent with regards to separation of church and state, which would include marriages (IMHO).
And why men make better coders. /ducks!
All bad science begins with "A scientist says it, therefore I believe it". How many people have heard, and repeated the previous "declaration" as "fact" but will remain unaware of this new information? And how many of the ignorant pseudo scientists will continue to believe, even if you present this evidence.
Much of what passes for science is indistinguishable from religion.
How about one that is approaching 110 years and counting ?
http://www.centennialbulb.org/
Unless you need IOPS on the order of magnitude of 100 times faster. Then you move to a hybrid model of some of the higher end Drive Array Chassis offer with features like Dynamic Allocation.
I think both your boss and you need a refresher course in technology.
Two years ago, Consumer SSD didn't have proper TRIM features. The drive probably didn't die, just needed a wipe and rewrite. And you were probably using consumer grade OCZ drives, and not the better (and way more expensive) commercial drives, which had the better chips in them (and TRIM).
If you were doing Database transactions on SSDs, you'd realize that there is no way for HDD to compete with SSD in IOPS. If you really wanted and needed IOPS for your Database (doesn't sound like you did, since you're using a laptop), then the cost for the drive would barely register in the decision to buy the drive.
Suffice it to say, your anecdotal evidence means very little to those people who can see the benefit of SSDs. My professional opinion is that most of the SSDs being sold right now are going to Database Server farms, for the IOPS alone, and only the ones that don't make the grade end up on the consumer market.
Let us presume that automated drivers are some ratio better at driving than your average person. Let us measure that ratio at 10x safer on whole, when compared to all drivers in all classifications. Then, without making any changes to insurance rates, a computer based driven car would be able to pay out 10x greater awards for damages (injuries). Instead of $10,000 award, it becomes $100,000.
Also, think of the benefit of being able to drink and still go home in your car without a care about accidents or sobriety check points.
The Horse is dead, you can stop beating upon its carcass.
Latency: Hopping through three dozen phones to reach a tower, then hopping off the other tower and hopping another three dozen devices ... no latency at all.
Privacy: both the start and endpoints of the call have to have the same protocol. And if you pass credentials at all over the six dozen hops in step one, anyone of them can listen in.
Coverage: Works in high density areas NYC or LA, not so well in Wyoming or Idaho.
Bandwidth: You're assuming that a poor device stuck somewhere between endpoints has enough bandwidth to pass the four dozen calls trying to pass through it, because it is the choke point of the mesh.
Battery power is the least of my worries with Mesh.Mesh power will have multiple points that are plugged into power, be it 110/220 wallwarts or car lighter power or even solar power.
This is about not trusting the government with properly going through the channels to expose speech based crimes (Libel, Slander). If you can't trust your government to know when it is appropriate to search that sort of information, then how the hell do you trust them with much more dangerous such as Nationalized Health Care?
I'm one of those few people who just plain don't trust my government, because I know what it is. It is the worst kind of governance ... except for all the others.