I've called an Uber and not been proud of it because I know the driver is being abused. I switched to Lift because they let me tip and found the last Lift I called I didn't have the option (no idea why).
Hint: The US government produces these things called "bills", which are also known colloquially as "cash". I promise you Uber isn't going to do anything to you if you decide to hand some of those over to the driver at the end of your trip.
By the way, if you really, really like paying extra for your ride, you should call a regular taxi instead. You know, the ones that are actually licensed by the government? Last I heard, business wasn't doing so great and they'd really appreciate a few more suckers- I mean patrons.
Weather is not climate. One heat wave 80 years ago doesn't prove anything, especially not if you're comparing the two by the number of deaths. People didn't have AC back then, so of course more died.
Last year was already the warmest year on record, 0.94 C above mid-20th century mean, and we've been having very warm years for the last 2 decades. If your point was that temperatures aren't rising, then I'm going to want to see some data to back up your claims. Even if it's just where you live, can you show temperatures have been flat or falling in the past 4 decades? Or do you just have worse and worse memory and can't remember how cold it was back then?
I think your oversell the power of parenting in social situations. I can't run my son's social life for him in school, and if some large plurality of kids have smartphones and now he's excluded from a lot of social activity because he literally can't participate in it, now I have to deal with the fallout at home.
You should get together with other like-minded parents and ban phones together. Maybe go talk to the school too. If enough parents ask for it, I'm sure they can make some rules against it as well. There's no need to get the legislature involved.
Depends on whether it was heading towards failure already. It could be that the organic niche is being picked up by the likes of Walmart and Safeway and nobody has to go to Whole Foods anymore. Their profit margin was already falling prior to the acquisition.
When I go to a physical establishment, I expect that experience to include one interaction with an employee.
Personally I would prefer that interaction to be me asking "where is X" and them pointing it out to me, rather than the one where I watch them scan my items. The most expensive part of grocery shopping is not the food itself, nor the gas to get there, but my time. If self-checkout can save me 5 minutes, it's already a discount.
Maybe you don't have hills, but any elevation difference works. Maybe there's some underground caverns you can use instead. An exhausted oil reservoir perhaps.
Let's say both you and I run rating agencies. Yours does everything properly, testing often and rating them honestly, and mine barely tests anything at all and just hands out 4 or 5 stars to whoever paid me. Guess what? My agency will make all the money because the businesses love me. I mean, who doesn't like a 5 star rating?
Oh and consumers? A few well-produced ads takes care of them. Do you really think any of them will ever figure out how much testing I do? The ad says I test more than you and that's all they'll ever know. In a few years, yours will be insolvent and be sold at a massive discount and I'll be the only game in town.
Here's the undeniable truth: if rating agencies actually worked, food safety laws would've never have existed in the first place.
I've seen the chargeback rate so high, it was easier for the developers drive to the store and pick up a Dell Server (or whatever), and install that instead of buying the IT Server Service.
What if the chargeback rate is the real IT cost? Then picking up a off-the-shelf server would actually be the right choice for the company since it's so much cheaper.
Users of e-cigarettes exhale the vapour, which may therefore be inhaled by others, leading to passive exposure to nicotine. There is, so far, no direct evidence that such passive exposure is likely to cause significant harm, although one study has reported levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that were outside defined safe-exposure limits.
In other words, it has 2nd hand smoke, but we don't know whether that is harmful or not.
1) Whether enough people with little to no programming experience feel the urge to create code.
Yes, the amount of work that is waiting to be automated is enormous, and the number of people who are semi-technical is huge. If a programming language can connect the two, it will be very popular.
2) Whether enough people can be bothered to install the runtime to run said code.
Py2exe takes care of that on Windows. On Linux it's pre-installed.
3) Whether we continue to have no problem wasting resources on inefficient code or whether we move towards more virtualization/containerization where the individual VMs have to do with very little CPU time.
When your software engineers cost $100,000 a year and your machines cost $200 a year, you have to be running very large workloads for performance to matter. And while those aren't uncommon, there are far more programs that aren't performance-sensitive (whether measured in lines of code or their productivity or the number of programmers).
And C++ isn't even the biggest competitor to Python, that role belongs to Javascript.
All true, but irrelevant, since C++ is "close enough" to compatible with C that in most cases you can simply rename a.c file to.cpp and it will compile and run correctly (possibly with a few minor tweaks).
Since this thread talks about Python 2 and 3, I'd say the similarities are enough that just running the 2to3 tool would get you working Python 3 code. The real difference from C/C++ is the Python interpreter's inability to run both Python 2 and 3 code at the same time, where as your C++ library can be linked with a C library and produce a complete binary.
employers expect you to be 100% working for them during the hours they are paying you to work.
They pay for 40 hours, but they expect you to work 80. There's nothing wrong with spending "work" time doing other stuff if they want to call you in at night and on the weekends. If they want more they can pay overtime.
How would you feel if you hired a housekeeper and paid them for 4 hours, only to find out they took a nap for 3 of them?
If my house is clean they can nap as much as they want.
It wouldn't be fraud if he does both X and Y. It wouldn't even be false advertising. Try flipping the roles around: you don't order a pizza and expect the pizza joint to only serve you and not make pizza for other people. You pay for a pizza, you get a pizza. What the pizza joint does the rest of the time is none of your business.
Businesses think they own someone just because they pay them.
An explosion in a cabin (where a terrorist can position the explosive against a door or window) can have much more impact than one in the hold (where the terrorist has no control over the position of the explosive, which could be in the middle of luggage, away from the skin of the aircraft)
So replace the battery with thermite instead. I guarantee you it'll burn a hole in the fuselage. Have a few of them go off at the same time and the plane will go down.
Somali authorities have released a video they say shows a laptop being given to the passenger after he has passed through the security checkpoint.
What does banning laptops have anything to do with this? The guy could've been handed a suitcase full of C4 after he passed security.
You need to face reality and quit being a coward. There's no such thing as 100% safe. The moment you change your behavior due to terrorists, you lose and they win.
Sorry, but you're the one who's misguided. This is a case where we need more regulation. Right now we have legalized corruption because we are afraid to limit what public officials can do after they quit their government jobs. They go from running the FDA to being paid millions a year as "consultants" for the pharmaceutical industry. As a result, the government does whatever they want. Even if you somehow managed to fix it and cut all of the bad regulations, a few years later, you'd end up with the exact same thing again. When big pharma is paying millions to the people who write rules for them, they're going to get what they want.
We need to give real reason for development of both vaccine/antibiotics
I'm sure you're referring to patents, but why not just pay people to do the research. Hire a few dozen researchers, give them a lab. That would only cost a tiny fraction of what everyone would have to pay a big corporation to do this. Remember, they need to earn billions to make their shareholders happy. Your research lab doesn't.
The benefits of these changes include a higher volume of traffic to airports, increasing airport profits; more efficient routes for airlines, increasing airline profits; and potentially cheaper fares for customers resulting from the first two changes. Speaking personally, I would rather keep my home value and quieter skies.
Do you honestly think that privatizing air traffic control will do anything other than further increase airline and airport profits at the expense of your peace and quiet? If so, I have a bridge to sell you.
Maybe what's more troubling is how we have allowed so much of our communication and public spaces to be commandeered by private companies. People having to depend on closed platforms, servers, and for-profit business plans for everyday life too much
This is exactly what the problem is, but it's not so easy to get people off of the private platforms which have turned into the modern equivalent of public squares.
Practically speaking, the only way to solve the problem is by regulating these platforms and enforce the freedom of speech. That means telling Twitter they can't decide who can post on their platform; ISIS needs to be allowed to disseminate their shitty ideology; and KKK needs to be allowed to hand out fliers.
You can no longer block/shut down ISIS accounts because they too deserve their own place to disseminate their ideological views, Berkeley must allow conservative ass-wipes to give speeches, and the KKK can harass minority people by handing out fliers to them.
Trying to silence them is not how you kill an ideology.
Take a look at history. Why do you think there are so few monarchies now? The idea of democracy didn't just become accepted by everyone overnight. Those in charge, namely the kings and queens of the era, fought tooth and nail to keep it from spreading. They banned books, imprisoned dissenters, tortured them and killed anyone they deemed too dangerous. But despite all that, they still couldn't stop democracy from taking root. People risked their lives to spread those ideas, because they felt they were right.
The same thing happened for Christianity during the Roman times. Who knows how many died for that.
If an idea is appealing, it will take hold no matter how hard you try to suppress it. On the other hand, if it's wrong, it will eventually die on its own. Take Communism for example. Many people tried to fight it, but none succeeded. The Nazis tried to kill it, but it didn't work. Nor did we kill it in Korea. Vietnam made no difference at all, and neither did Regan. In the end, it was the Soviet Union itself that finally killed it. Communism died when people realized it didn't work, that it didn't make people's lives better, and that it ended the tyranny of the capitalists only to replace it with the tyranny of the party elite.
If you want Muslim extremism to go away, then stop fighting it and let it do what it will. Let them create their Islamic State. Let them run their country under Sharia Law. Let them do whatever the fuck they want. When ISIS completely fails as a country (and it will), Muslim extremism will die with it. We just need to sit back and do nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
I've called an Uber and not been proud of it because I know the driver is being abused. I switched to Lift because they let me tip and found the last Lift I called I didn't have the option (no idea why).
Hint: The US government produces these things called "bills", which are also known colloquially as "cash". I promise you Uber isn't going to do anything to you if you decide to hand some of those over to the driver at the end of your trip.
By the way, if you really, really like paying extra for your ride, you should call a regular taxi instead. You know, the ones that are actually licensed by the government? Last I heard, business wasn't doing so great and they'd really appreciate a few more suckers- I mean patrons.
So what you're saying is that burning fossil fuels to produce AC has made an already dangerous climate safer?
Tragedy of the commons. Or you can power the AC with solar.
What cities,regions are shattering the records? I bet you can't even name one?
SF Bay Area? It happened 2 days ago.
Weather is not climate. One heat wave 80 years ago doesn't prove anything, especially not if you're comparing the two by the number of deaths. People didn't have AC back then, so of course more died.
Last year was already the warmest year on record, 0.94 C above mid-20th century mean, and we've been having very warm years for the last 2 decades. If your point was that temperatures aren't rising, then I'm going to want to see some data to back up your claims. Even if it's just where you live, can you show temperatures have been flat or falling in the past 4 decades? Or do you just have worse and worse memory and can't remember how cold it was back then?
I think your oversell the power of parenting in social situations. I can't run my son's social life for him in school, and if some large plurality of kids have smartphones and now he's excluded from a lot of social activity because he literally can't participate in it, now I have to deal with the fallout at home.
You should get together with other like-minded parents and ban phones together. Maybe go talk to the school too. If enough parents ask for it, I'm sure they can make some rules against it as well. There's no need to get the legislature involved.
Depends on whether it was heading towards failure already. It could be that the organic niche is being picked up by the likes of Walmart and Safeway and nobody has to go to Whole Foods anymore. Their profit margin was already falling prior to the acquisition.
When I go to a physical establishment, I expect that experience to include one interaction with an employee.
Personally I would prefer that interaction to be me asking "where is X" and them pointing it out to me, rather than the one where I watch them scan my items. The most expensive part of grocery shopping is not the food itself, nor the gas to get there, but my time. If self-checkout can save me 5 minutes, it's already a discount.
Pedant.
Heh... in my defense, this is Slashdot.
Something exponential-ish (or logistic, or...) would be much more sensible.
Exponential is not what you want. You'll have China producing more solar energy than the universe by 2150.
Maybe you don't have hills, but any elevation difference works. Maybe there's some underground caverns you can use instead. An exhausted oil reservoir perhaps.
Let's say both you and I run rating agencies. Yours does everything properly, testing often and rating them honestly, and mine barely tests anything at all and just hands out 4 or 5 stars to whoever paid me. Guess what? My agency will make all the money because the businesses love me. I mean, who doesn't like a 5 star rating?
Oh and consumers? A few well-produced ads takes care of them. Do you really think any of them will ever figure out how much testing I do? The ad says I test more than you and that's all they'll ever know. In a few years, yours will be insolvent and be sold at a massive discount and I'll be the only game in town.
Here's the undeniable truth: if rating agencies actually worked, food safety laws would've never have existed in the first place.
I've seen the chargeback rate so high, it was easier for the developers drive to the store and pick up a Dell Server (or whatever), and install that instead of buying the IT Server Service.
What if the chargeback rate is the real IT cost? Then picking up a off-the-shelf server would actually be the right choice for the company since it's so much cheaper.
e-cigs are healthier no second hand smoke no paper ash no other crap they add.
They may be healthier, but they do add crap (aka. flavoring) and have 2nd hand smoke. From the Royal College of Physicians:
Users of e-cigarettes exhale the vapour, which may therefore be inhaled by others, leading to passive exposure to nicotine. There is, so far, no direct evidence that such passive exposure is likely to cause significant harm, although one study has reported levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that were outside defined safe-exposure limits.
In other words, it has 2nd hand smoke, but we don't know whether that is harmful or not.
Well he did say large scale. /. is not that large.
1) Whether enough people with little to no programming experience feel the urge to create code.
Yes, the amount of work that is waiting to be automated is enormous, and the number of people who are semi-technical is huge. If a programming language can connect the two, it will be very popular.
2) Whether enough people can be bothered to install the runtime to run said code.
Py2exe takes care of that on Windows. On Linux it's pre-installed.
3) Whether we continue to have no problem wasting resources on inefficient code or whether we move towards more virtualization/containerization where the individual VMs have to do with very little CPU time.
When your software engineers cost $100,000 a year and your machines cost $200 a year, you have to be running very large workloads for performance to matter. And while those aren't uncommon, there are far more programs that aren't performance-sensitive (whether measured in lines of code or their productivity or the number of programmers).
And C++ isn't even the biggest competitor to Python, that role belongs to Javascript.
I wish Python would give you the option of specifying types and let me omit that information only when I want to
Does this do what you want?
All true, but irrelevant, since C++ is "close enough" to compatible with C that in most cases you can simply rename a .c file to .cpp and it will compile and run correctly (possibly with a few minor tweaks).
Since this thread talks about Python 2 and 3, I'd say the similarities are enough that just running the 2to3 tool would get you working Python 3 code. The real difference from C/C++ is the Python interpreter's inability to run both Python 2 and 3 code at the same time, where as your C++ library can be linked with a C library and produce a complete binary.
employers expect you to be 100% working for them during the hours they are paying you to work.
They pay for 40 hours, but they expect you to work 80. There's nothing wrong with spending "work" time doing other stuff if they want to call you in at night and on the weekends. If they want more they can pay overtime.
How would you feel if you hired a housekeeper and paid them for 4 hours, only to find out they took a nap for 3 of them?
If my house is clean they can nap as much as they want.
It wouldn't be fraud if he does both X and Y. It wouldn't even be false advertising. Try flipping the roles around: you don't order a pizza and expect the pizza joint to only serve you and not make pizza for other people. You pay for a pizza, you get a pizza. What the pizza joint does the rest of the time is none of your business.
Businesses think they own someone just because they pay them.
An explosion in a cabin (where a terrorist can position the explosive against a door or window) can have much more impact than one in the hold (where the terrorist has no control over the position of the explosive, which could be in the middle of luggage, away from the skin of the aircraft)
So replace the battery with thermite instead. I guarantee you it'll burn a hole in the fuselage. Have a few of them go off at the same time and the plane will go down.
Somali authorities have released a video they say shows a laptop being given to the passenger after he has passed through the security checkpoint.
What does banning laptops have anything to do with this? The guy could've been handed a suitcase full of C4 after he passed security.
You need to face reality and quit being a coward. There's no such thing as 100% safe. The moment you change your behavior due to terrorists, you lose and they win.
Sorry, but you're the one who's misguided. This is a case where we need more regulation. Right now we have legalized corruption because we are afraid to limit what public officials can do after they quit their government jobs. They go from running the FDA to being paid millions a year as "consultants" for the pharmaceutical industry. As a result, the government does whatever they want. Even if you somehow managed to fix it and cut all of the bad regulations, a few years later, you'd end up with the exact same thing again. When big pharma is paying millions to the people who write rules for them, they're going to get what they want.
We need to give real reason for development of both vaccine/antibiotics
I'm sure you're referring to patents, but why not just pay people to do the research. Hire a few dozen researchers, give them a lab. That would only cost a tiny fraction of what everyone would have to pay a big corporation to do this. Remember, they need to earn billions to make their shareholders happy. Your research lab doesn't.
The benefits of these changes include a higher volume of traffic to airports, increasing airport profits; more efficient routes for airlines, increasing airline profits; and potentially cheaper fares for customers resulting from the first two changes. Speaking personally, I would rather keep my home value and quieter skies.
Do you honestly think that privatizing air traffic control will do anything other than further increase airline and airport profits at the expense of your peace and quiet? If so, I have a bridge to sell you.
My pleasure: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=does+harvard+receive+federal+funding
Maybe what's more troubling is how we have allowed so much of our communication and public spaces to be commandeered by private companies. People having to depend on closed platforms, servers, and for-profit business plans for everyday life too much
This is exactly what the problem is, but it's not so easy to get people off of the private platforms which have turned into the modern equivalent of public squares.
Practically speaking, the only way to solve the problem is by regulating these platforms and enforce the freedom of speech. That means telling Twitter they can't decide who can post on their platform; ISIS needs to be allowed to disseminate their shitty ideology; and KKK needs to be allowed to hand out fliers.
You can no longer block/shut down ISIS accounts because they too deserve their own place to disseminate their ideological views, Berkeley must allow conservative ass-wipes to give speeches, and the KKK can harass minority people by handing out fliers to them.
Trying to silence them is not how you kill an ideology.
Take a look at history. Why do you think there are so few monarchies now? The idea of democracy didn't just become accepted by everyone overnight. Those in charge, namely the kings and queens of the era, fought tooth and nail to keep it from spreading. They banned books, imprisoned dissenters, tortured them and killed anyone they deemed too dangerous. But despite all that, they still couldn't stop democracy from taking root. People risked their lives to spread those ideas, because they felt they were right.
The same thing happened for Christianity during the Roman times. Who knows how many died for that.
If an idea is appealing, it will take hold no matter how hard you try to suppress it. On the other hand, if it's wrong, it will eventually die on its own. Take Communism for example. Many people tried to fight it, but none succeeded. The Nazis tried to kill it, but it didn't work. Nor did we kill it in Korea. Vietnam made no difference at all, and neither did Regan. In the end, it was the Soviet Union itself that finally killed it. Communism died when people realized it didn't work, that it didn't make people's lives better, and that it ended the tyranny of the capitalists only to replace it with the tyranny of the party elite.
If you want Muslim extremism to go away, then stop fighting it and let it do what it will. Let them create their Islamic State. Let them run their country under Sharia Law. Let them do whatever the fuck they want. When ISIS completely fails as a country (and it will), Muslim extremism will die with it. We just need to sit back and do nothing.