Just curious: Specifically which parts of the Gates Foundation approach to philanthropy do you disagree with? Are there specific grants they have made you don't approve of? Do you disagree with their priorities?
Part of the point of philanthropic work is that the person who has the money gets to decide how he gives it away. Otherwise, it wouldn't be called "philanthropy"; it would be called "taxes".
Regarding nationalism, this explanation of their approach overtly expresses that one of their grant making priorities is "improving high school education in the United States." I cannot deny that this is America-centric, but I wholeheartedly support the idea that a wealthy person should contribute to the ongoing positive development of his own country.
"Science" is baloney. It's just the government's way of trying to keep us in line. The dodo bird never existed, it was made up by special interests. The carrier pigeon was also a massive work of fiction. The tropical jungles were never a huge as historians say they were. The climate isn't getting warmer. And if it were getting warmer (which it isn't), it would be because of something completely unrelated to the activity of people.
Mmmm... how about they sweep the excrement overboard? They're on a boat, right? Eating, however, is a bigger problem, except for the first month or so which would be awesome for the tigers.
You choose to believe the laws of thermodynamics were suspended in order for the Big Bang to occur,
Did you mean to respond to a different post? The Pastafarians believe a mass of pasta and meatballs created things.
I believe God created things. Both of us believe something irrational. If there is no God, why does it matter if some of us believe in a God?
If, when you say "God", you mean the commonplace interactions of matter and energy, I certainly don't think you believe in anything irrational. On the other hand, not believing in those things could make it very difficult to get a good grade on a physics examination, which might indeed be an irrational choice.
In my former building, the elevator "close door" button causes the doors to try to close immediately. In my current building, it does nothing. Same company, same site.
It's not a COMPLETE kernel benchmark in that it only exercises certain parts of the kernel.
And since you obviously needed a car analogy: It's still like ONLY testing how fast a car goes 0 to 60 miles per hour, but not the towing capacity, fuel efficiency, braking distance, or crash performance, and a bunch of other things.
I predict that Rand Paul will realize that the way he can best accomplish any of his goals is to vote in lockstep with his party. He'll continue to talk about states rights and true fiscal conservatism, but he will be unable to do anything supporting either, because these ideas are at odds with the Republican party's goals.
My gut agrees, but my brain thinks things are more complex than that. I'm not convinced it's wasteful to spend money stabilizing the economic group most likely to become dangerous criminals or vectors for disease. War is wasteful by definition, but may be needed to provide social stability. The value of the ISS is part PR for science, part PR for international collaboration, part potentially monetizable research, and part curiosity research.
Generally, I think the value of the ISS isn't reasonably measured in whether it "turns a profit". The value seems to me high enough to justify it's function, given the alternatives. And even other alternatives.
Aren't they just proposing removing the dependence on the 1 kilogram cylinders?
From the article:
Physicists may scoff at the thought people allowed to walk among the living who don't know what a Planck value is. But all you need to know is, they're using it to determine the mass of one mole of silicon atoms.
From there on, they'll theoretically be able to deduce a perfect kilogram and it won't have anything to do with lumps of metal ever again./quote
Apparently they are getting really desperate and are behaving like SCO now. If you have tons of getters, setters and other small functions, it is easy to have the same implementation in all cases.
My guess: What Oracle is desparate for is a cross licensing deal with Google to give them access to Google's IP related to massively distributed data storage/retrieval. Google, on the other hand, isn't particularly interested in giving away their crown jewels in this way.
Traditionally, people who worked around computer security restrictions were referred to as "hackers". My understanding is that "cracking" generally only refers to breaking the encryption that protects something, whereas "hacking" is a general term that refers to using a variety of methods to get elevated privileges on a system. Unfortunately, "hacking" also generally refers to any manipulation of the code on a system, which can muddy the distinction between "black hat hackers" and code developers who are commonly referred to as "hackers."
So, technically, the terminology in this case seems to be properly applied. The hackers in question aren't necessarily breaking encryption or other data security devices on the system, but may be using a other means of getting elevated privileges on a system including possibly social engineering. Note that social engineering is certainly NOT "cracking", but is likely to be part of the of "black hat hacker" tool set.
Well, maybe there's something wrong with your constitution if it doesn't allow for such an obvious win-win thing for everyone as universal health care...
Tautology 101: The opinions of non-US citizens are all held by foreigners... SouthParkonomics 101:...who took our jobs... Xenophobia 101:...and are therefore not only invalid, but also a threat to our way of life.
However, to answer your specific (interesting) assertion, I'm not sure that the US health care reform plan is actually what you might call "universal health care".
Politics aside, this is called "drawing a blank". Nobody's on their A-game all the time. There are many other things which arguably show her lack of fitness to lead; this is not really one of them.
Free software (and non-free software, for all that) is inextricably linked with law and politics. So, yes. Slashdot does politics.
Oddly, this is likely pretty apolitical (except that Obama is a politician, and therefore inherently political). Just repetitive. Just repetitive. Just repetitive.
I appreciate the desire to focus on solar energy, science, and all that. I just hope they can come up with an interesting angle on this that make is worth yet another remake of the same episode that wasn't all that interesting in its previous iterations.
Slashdot Mirror
Just curious: Specifically which parts of the Gates Foundation approach to philanthropy do you disagree with? Are there specific grants they have made you don't approve of? Do you disagree with their priorities?
Part of the point of philanthropic work is that the person who has the money gets to decide how he gives it away. Otherwise, it wouldn't be called "philanthropy"; it would be called "taxes".
Agreed. This is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation approach to philanthropy. If you have a complaint about it, explain how you disagree with this approach.
Regarding nationalism, this explanation of their approach overtly expresses that one of their grant making priorities is "improving high school education in the United States." I cannot deny that this is America-centric, but I wholeheartedly support the idea that a wealthy person should contribute to the ongoing positive development of his own country.
"Science" is baloney. It's just the government's way of trying to keep us in line.
The dodo bird never existed, it was made up by special interests.
The carrier pigeon was also a massive work of fiction.
The tropical jungles were never a huge as historians say they were.
The climate isn't getting warmer. And if it were getting warmer (which it isn't), it would be because of something completely unrelated to the activity of people.
Mmmm... how about they sweep the excrement overboard? They're on a boat, right?
Eating, however, is a bigger problem, except for the first month or so which would be awesome for the tigers.
You choose to believe the laws of thermodynamics were suspended in order for the Big Bang to occur,
Did you mean to respond to a different post? The Pastafarians believe a mass of pasta and meatballs created things.
I believe God created things.
Both of us believe something irrational.
If there is no God, why does it matter if some of us believe in a God?
If, when you say "God", you mean the commonplace interactions of matter and energy, I certainly don't think you believe in anything irrational. On the other hand, not believing in those things could make it very difficult to get a good grade on a physics examination, which might indeed be an irrational choice.
This isn't about a power source. It's about finally enabling the eels to celebrate the birth of Jesus the way they're supposed to.
In my former building, the elevator "close door" button causes the doors to try to close immediately. In my current building, it does nothing. Same company, same site.
It's not a COMPLETE kernel benchmark in that it only exercises certain parts of the kernel.
And since you obviously needed a car analogy: It's still like ONLY testing how fast a car goes 0 to 60 miles per hour, but not the towing capacity, fuel efficiency, braking distance, or crash performance, and a bunch of other things.
I predict that Rand Paul will realize that the way he can best accomplish any of his goals is to vote in lockstep with his party. He'll continue to talk about states rights and true fiscal conservatism, but he will be unable to do anything supporting either, because these ideas are at odds with the Republican party's goals.
1) When looking at individual parts of HCR, most people approved of them.
People only like the pieces so long as they dont have to pay for them.
The post you responded to appeared to be from somebody who liked the pieces and is paying for them.
Mark Zuckerberg?
My gut agrees, but my brain thinks things are more complex than that.
I'm not convinced it's wasteful to spend money stabilizing the economic group most likely to become dangerous criminals or vectors for disease.
War is wasteful by definition, but may be needed to provide social stability.
The value of the ISS is part PR for science, part PR for international collaboration, part potentially monetizable research, and part curiosity research.
Generally, I think the value of the ISS isn't reasonably measured in whether it "turns a profit". The value seems to me high enough to justify it's function, given the alternatives. And even other alternatives.
One-handed input without an appropriate name? I'm sticking with my Twiddler.
Okay, props for correct use of the term "twat waffle".
Aren't they just proposing removing the dependence on the 1 kilogram cylinders?
From the article:
Physicists may scoff at the thought people allowed to walk among the living who don't know what a Planck value is. But all you need to know is, they're using it to determine the mass of one mole of silicon atoms.
From there on, they'll theoretically be able to deduce a perfect kilogram and it won't have anything to do with lumps of metal ever again. /quote
Apparently they are getting really desperate and are behaving like SCO now. If you have tons of getters, setters and other small functions, it is easy to have the same implementation in all cases.
My guess: What Oracle is desparate for is a cross licensing deal with Google to give them access to Google's IP related to massively distributed data storage/retrieval. Google, on the other hand, isn't particularly interested in giving away their crown jewels in this way.
I said, "No way!", but mathematics said, "All your English are belong to us."
Or Khan Academy. Out of curiosity, I watched all of Khan's math topics that weren't over my head. Next, I'm on to Addition 2!
Well..it's good to see that it's not only cops in the US that are douches...
And I was thinking "it's good to see that it's not only people in the US that are douches..."
You're wrong.
Heh... thanks, I got a chuckle from this. There's something poetic about that response. :-)
Traditionally, people who worked around computer security restrictions were referred to as "hackers". My understanding is that "cracking" generally only refers to breaking the encryption that protects something, whereas "hacking" is a general term that refers to using a variety of methods to get elevated privileges on a system. Unfortunately, "hacking" also generally refers to any manipulation of the code on a system, which can muddy the distinction between "black hat hackers" and code developers who are commonly referred to as "hackers."
So, technically, the terminology in this case seems to be properly applied. The hackers in question aren't necessarily breaking encryption or other data security devices on the system, but may be using a other means of getting elevated privileges on a system including possibly social engineering. Note that social engineering is certainly NOT "cracking", but is likely to be part of the of "black hat hacker" tool set.
Well, maybe there's something wrong with your constitution if it doesn't allow for such an obvious win-win thing for everyone as universal health care...
Tautology 101: The opinions of non-US citizens are all held by foreigners... ...who took our jobs... ...and are therefore not only invalid, but also a threat to our way of life.
SouthParkonomics 101:
Xenophobia 101:
However, to answer your specific (interesting) assertion, I'm not sure that the US health care reform plan is actually what you might call "universal health care".
Politics aside, this is called "drawing a blank". Nobody's on their A-game all the time. There are many other things which arguably show her lack of fitness to lead; this is not really one of them.
I think you missed the intended sarcasm of the OP.
Free software (and non-free software, for all that) is inextricably linked with law and politics. So, yes. Slashdot does politics.
Oddly, this is likely pretty apolitical (except that Obama is a politician, and therefore inherently political). Just repetitive. Just repetitive. Just repetitive.
I appreciate the desire to focus on solar energy, science, and all that. I just hope they can come up with an interesting angle on this that make is worth yet another remake of the same episode that wasn't all that interesting in its previous iterations.