Nope. We call it Obamacare too. We only switch to calling it the ACA when we're specifically targeting our comments toward right wingers in order to not trigger them by uttering "Obama," in the very very small hope that they'll actually engage their brains for a few moments before returning their inner monologue back to MAGAMAGAMAGA and drowning out rational thought once again.
"Someone on the internet didn't do what I requested! Even though it was only literally impossible!"
Not to say those 10 shills weren't shills, but even if they aren't, expecting them to give a crap what you request.. never mind expecting them to somehow go back in time to create an older account that suits your desires.. is kind of a pointless endeavor.
I don't like pharmaceuticals so I use... and supplements
Not to take away from your larger point but ugh. "I don't trust lab-tested and FDA-approved medicine so instead I'll take some untested shit based purely on Dr. Oz' claim that it was used in ancient China, even though its derived from a plant native to Kansas cause I guess the ancient Chinese were just that good at medicine thanks to.. magic?"
I mean I don't know what you specifically call "supplements" -- there's so many people with differing (often sales-pitchy) definitions.. but most of the time it seems to amount to "something a random guy wearing dreadlocks and sandals claimed was natural" with little further distinction. And yes there are lots of problems with the way the large drug companies operate, and yes the FDA occasionally screws up (though you can double-check them by looking at what similar organizations in other countries say..) But I just can't wrap my head around the concept of believing in essentially magic that fails close to 100% just because "the system" fails 5-10%.
a lot of supporters of obamacare felt I should be protected from myself
No, a lot of Obamacare supporters feel that you're a rare case and when they're crafting a bill designed to cover 350 million people, they can't make 350 million special cases so they're stuck covering the most common cases and yes, there's the odd person that gets screwed. Just like any other legislation no matter how well-intentioned. The vast, vast, vast majority of Americans could not do what you claim to do and most of the ones who could either don't think about it or don't care enough.
And unless you've actually been in a situation where you've required serious medical attention, you can't even say for sure that your "strategy" works any better than the pure dumb luck of just not really needing a strategy at all.
Your insurance might cover breaking a leg to a reasonable degree but what if the next time you visit a doctor, he discovers you've got some form of cancer and you're looking at $100,000 in hospital expenses and medication? Will your insurance cover that? It seems well beyond "minimum coverage" to me. Does your savings have enough to cover that when the insurance company fails to? You probably won't be able to increase your insurance plan at that point or switch to a different provider (well you might be able to under Obamacare since insurance companies are no longer allowed to reject you due to preexisting conditions.)
And how exactly do you expect them to do that? If they want to design their phone so that it runs the same on a fresh battery as it does on a 3 year old battery, that means they have to slow it down to 3 year old standards right off the bat and it will always be slower than its potential. That seems like a pretty shitty tradeoff.
The only other option is to build a better battery that doesn't drop voltage as it ages. And there are lots and lots and lots of companies attempting to do just that. But unless you have a time machine kicking around, that's not going to help you in the near future either.
So that leaves just handling the reboot mode directly. You can't just say "OK don't reboot" -- if there isn't enough power there isn't enough power and all the magic in the world won't fix that. So instead they chose to reduce the amount of power required by slowing the phone down (I wouldn't be surprised if they were also dimming the screen a bit and tweaking other such things in order to reduce the power consumption, hoping you won't notice.)
A gasket adds size and weight.. perhaps not much but when we're dealing with a phone every mm and gram counts (at least for marketing materials even if the users don't notice the difference..) And then even more size and weight to make the interface terminals more end-user-friendly. Internal components tend to use connectors that are practically microscopic and require a very fine touch to pull and re-seat (or specialized tools) while user-facing connectors tend to be fairly large and bulky in comparison.
Not to mention, being able to be opened creates hard lines around the compartments that sends designers into a tizzy, and with phones (especially high end phones such as the iPhone) being as much status symbols as they are tools for some bizarre reason, having them not look "perfect" (by whatever standard of the day) is a serious detriment to sales.
There are definite design advantages to having a sealed case, well above and beyond simply "it forces people to upgrade more often."
If your goal is to stretch out battery life in time, then who cares if you're only getting 94% efficiency by slowing down the processor? The user still sees it running close enough to twice as long to make no difference from that perspective.
End users generally don't care about the technicalities as much as the perception. Of course if you slow the processor down too much then they'll perceive that as well so there's a balancing act involved if they want to play this game.. and it sounds like they didn't quite hit the sweet spot..
It could be more benign (and egotistical) than that.. "if it worked, we would have thought of it long ago because we're so good at things!" Of course "worked" in their context still means "generates a huge profit" rather than "technically feasible" but still..
Define "handful." The senate might be pretty close but the house is very republican-tilted. Either side could potentially start the process of canning the investigation.
in fact seems to quite enjoy keeping a bucket of mud at the ready
Question is whether he was just better at slinging the mud, or if he was swinging the bucket around illegally as well.
the whole idea of Russian Collusion, is a democrat invention to explain Hillary's loss
Actually it was a Trump invention to explain why he was polling so badly prior to the election. And then he ended up winning anyway and shit got all mixed up. A similar thing happened with the so-called dossier -- started off by republicans to discredit Trump in the primaries and the dems just took it over afterward when it was their turn to go up against the Trump hype train, rather than being a democratic invention in the first place.
Mueller and *every* member of his team are obviously from a single political perspective
What exactly is "obvious" about it? Everyone of course has their own opinion and Mueller isn't magically any less opinionated than anyone else, but he still has to do his best to ensure his work is not swayed by his opinion (or the opinion of anyone else on his team.) Do you even know who is on the team? Never mind each member's political viewpoint? Or are you just assuming they're all democrats purely because they haven't walked away from the job before its finished while chanting #MAGAMAGAMAGA on their way out the door?
we find out that he actually fired one of the investigators for texting some seriously partisan stuff to a girl friend
Exactly.
but I don't think the public would see it that way
Which is why he has to be so extremely careful to not indicate even the slightest imbalance. The public is just grinding their teeth looking for an excuse to take anything related to the investigation out of context, one way or the other.
At the very least Mueller opened himself up to criticism for hiring biased investigators
He actually spent a couple weeks at the beginning complaining that he was having trouble hiring people specifically because the partisan (and specifically for/against Trump) bias in the country is so massive right now. Again I don't know who he finally settled on or what their viewpoints are, but presumably Mueller found people who are at least able to perform their job with a reasonable facsimile of impartiality, or this whole thing would have been killed months ago.
yet he hired who he did?
Again, do you know who he hired? Sure maybe one guy got fired for sending partisan texts but do you know the history of that? Maybe he was really good at convincing Mueller he was impartial. Or maybe he really was impartial and something changed between his hiring and his firing. Unless you know the details of the person and their situation, you can't use a single example of a problem -- that was handled appropriately -- to extrapolate a problem with everything. I mean by that logic we may as well say that Trump is automatically a pedophile purely because he supported Roy Moore. That kind of "logic" sounds a whole lot more convincing when it fits your desired narrative than when it doesn't.
the interviews at the Whitehouse by Mueller's team are done
No I hadn't heard that yet. I also consider it kind of irrelevant. I'll believe the investigation is done when the final report is presented.
If this rumor is true, then a couple of weeks to take evidence to a grand jury if you think a crime is there and this is over.
This whole investigation is politically motivated, from day one.
Yes, and that's why Mueller has to be as impartial as he can. If he shows even a slight lean towards the left, Trump will oust him as fast as he can rampage off the pink tweet.
And if he shows a slight rightward lean, Trump's cronies will immediately start flying off with "nothing to see here, Mueller's done all this work and he's decided we're right!" even if he's decided no such thing, and they'll plaster that all over the news so that by the time Mueller does complete his investigation -- regardless of the result -- nobody will care or believe him anymore. In fact they've already started to pull this tactic based purely on the fact that a massive investigation of the US President and most of his staff hasn't managed to result in an impeachment within a 6 month time frame (ignoring the fact that "normal" white collar investigations can easily take 2 or 3 years or longer if the suspect is even remotely good at covering their tracks. Reality isn't a primary concern of the current administration. "Alternative" facts can just be twisted to any degree they feel advances their narrative and apparently Trump supporters see no problem with that.)
The motivation for starting the investigation (under Comey) was definitely politically motivated. But continuing the investigation cannot be. I mean the republicans own all branches of government -- if they wanted, congress could shut it down without harming Trump in the slightest. The only one who can't unilaterally shut it down is Trump himself because that would look, even to a lot of republicans, like a flat out admission of guilt and cover-up. The fact that the republican congress is allowing the investigation to continue suggests that even if there's still political threads, its at least not overly partisan.
So guns are only cool if I'm directly holding it? Good to know. Does it count if I have a tether on it? Or is there a maximum number of inches that the gun can be away from me before its a felony? Is it more or less illegal to have a gun in my truck than it is on my drone and if so, why?
Its not about being a drone, its about being electronic equipment. Having it taken apart might be _more_ troublesome as the customs officials may not recognize the parts individually and get concerned that its bomb components or something.
Easier to just go to Walmart after you get here and spend the $200 or whatever it is these days for a decent quadcopter if you really need to have one in the US.
If it was "as obvious as some though," we wouldn't need a special prosecutor to investigate in the first place. Robert Mueller has to be very careful at this point to cross all the t's and dot all the i's, and even more careful to stay politically impartial because even the slightest deviation (either way) could be the excuse Trump needs to oust him and kill the investigation completely.
Its actually not a big step up. Customs is almost certainly going to be asking you about it anyway so its not really a huge extra burden to punch that into a database. And there's not even much worry about (additional) invasion of privacy since America's border authorities already treat non-Americans as barely even having basic human rights never mind the stronger rights that Americans are granted (which is actually unconstitutional -- "inalienable" doesn't mean "only for people we like".. but another thing American authorities are happy to overlook.)
Well now that's some unnecessary vitriol. Someone piss in your cornflakes this morning?
And no actual human beings don't require "proof." Courts require "evidence," which is not the same as proof. Actual human beings frequently don't even require that -- if they did, religion wouldn't (and couldn't) be a thing. We're pretty good at believing whatever the hell we want to believe, regardless of evidence never mind proof.
"Anyone else" typically does not have such tools. While the tools may well be "freely" accessible, they don't typically make them easy to find by people who aren't already in the in-group. Too much exposure to the public is inherently bad for criminal types as it tends to draw law enforcement much quicker.
Difference is Usenet was decentralized with no authority to take control of the problem. Spotify on the other hand is perfectly within their rights (and likely their capabilities) to filter spam from their own forums. And if they don't, Google will just tweak their page ranking algorithm and the problem will naturally go away after a while once the spammers realize they're just wasting resources (though that still leaves Spotify with a heavily polluted forums section -- they'd still have to try and clean the crud out even after the fact.)
The complex owner should be suing AT&T for damages if they destroyed $150k worth of equipment. Unless destruction of that equipment was part of the original exclusivity contract of course (which it might have been you never know..)
Because it fits his narrative? Ajit Pai doesn't care about small ISPs. His sponsor Verizon is probably coming in right after him offering to buy those guys out.
I think the question isn't "why are they there?" so much as as "why are they usually in focus, even though they're a background detail?"
TFA blames Evangelion, and while I won't try to say they're wrong I'd go a bit further and suggest that its a common theme in dystopic universes everywhere. Perhaps Japanese artists think their country (OK lets face it, city since something like 90% of anime is made in the Tokyo region) is more dystopian than we do. Or maybe its just "the way things are done" and nothing to see here beyond tradition because that's what viewers expect to see.
Also keep in mind that most anime is derived from manga, and the animators are pretty good at keeping the art style fairly consistent with the book in most cases. So you're starting with a (mostly) black and white medium where hard black lines are generally used to signify motion and now you need to draw a hard black line that stands out as not signifying motion. Then when you translate it to full color, in order to keep the same aesthetic you still have to keep those power lines strong even though artistically its not nearly as important.
Anyway I'm just throwing out some thoughts. I'm not an art critic by any stretch of the imagination so maybe I'm way off base but seems like some solid excuses for the phenomena to me!
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. We call it Obamacare too. We only switch to calling it the ACA when we're specifically targeting our comments toward right wingers in order to not trigger them by uttering "Obama," in the very very small hope that they'll actually engage their brains for a few moments before returning their inner monologue back to MAGAMAGAMAGA and drowning out rational thought once again.
"Someone on the internet didn't do what I requested! Even though it was only literally impossible!"
Not to say those 10 shills weren't shills, but even if they aren't, expecting them to give a crap what you request.. never mind expecting them to somehow go back in time to create an older account that suits your desires.. is kind of a pointless endeavor.
I don't like pharmaceuticals so I use ... and supplements
Not to take away from your larger point but ugh. "I don't trust lab-tested and FDA-approved medicine so instead I'll take some untested shit based purely on Dr. Oz' claim that it was used in ancient China, even though its derived from a plant native to Kansas cause I guess the ancient Chinese were just that good at medicine thanks to.. magic?"
I mean I don't know what you specifically call "supplements" -- there's so many people with differing (often sales-pitchy) definitions.. but most of the time it seems to amount to "something a random guy wearing dreadlocks and sandals claimed was natural" with little further distinction. And yes there are lots of problems with the way the large drug companies operate, and yes the FDA occasionally screws up (though you can double-check them by looking at what similar organizations in other countries say..) But I just can't wrap my head around the concept of believing in essentially magic that fails close to 100% just because "the system" fails 5-10%.
a lot of supporters of obamacare felt I should be protected from myself
No, a lot of Obamacare supporters feel that you're a rare case and when they're crafting a bill designed to cover 350 million people, they can't make 350 million special cases so they're stuck covering the most common cases and yes, there's the odd person that gets screwed. Just like any other legislation no matter how well-intentioned. The vast, vast, vast majority of Americans could not do what you claim to do and most of the ones who could either don't think about it or don't care enough.
And unless you've actually been in a situation where you've required serious medical attention, you can't even say for sure that your "strategy" works any better than the pure dumb luck of just not really needing a strategy at all.
Your insurance might cover breaking a leg to a reasonable degree but what if the next time you visit a doctor, he discovers you've got some form of cancer and you're looking at $100,000 in hospital expenses and medication? Will your insurance cover that? It seems well beyond "minimum coverage" to me. Does your savings have enough to cover that when the insurance company fails to? You probably won't be able to increase your insurance plan at that point or switch to a different provider (well you might be able to under Obamacare since insurance companies are no longer allowed to reject you due to preexisting conditions.)
And how exactly do you expect them to do that? If they want to design their phone so that it runs the same on a fresh battery as it does on a 3 year old battery, that means they have to slow it down to 3 year old standards right off the bat and it will always be slower than its potential. That seems like a pretty shitty tradeoff.
The only other option is to build a better battery that doesn't drop voltage as it ages. And there are lots and lots and lots of companies attempting to do just that. But unless you have a time machine kicking around, that's not going to help you in the near future either.
So that leaves just handling the reboot mode directly. You can't just say "OK don't reboot" -- if there isn't enough power there isn't enough power and all the magic in the world won't fix that. So instead they chose to reduce the amount of power required by slowing the phone down (I wouldn't be surprised if they were also dimming the screen a bit and tweaking other such things in order to reduce the power consumption, hoping you won't notice.)
A gasket adds size and weight.. perhaps not much but when we're dealing with a phone every mm and gram counts (at least for marketing materials even if the users don't notice the difference..) And then even more size and weight to make the interface terminals more end-user-friendly. Internal components tend to use connectors that are practically microscopic and require a very fine touch to pull and re-seat (or specialized tools) while user-facing connectors tend to be fairly large and bulky in comparison.
Not to mention, being able to be opened creates hard lines around the compartments that sends designers into a tizzy, and with phones (especially high end phones such as the iPhone) being as much status symbols as they are tools for some bizarre reason, having them not look "perfect" (by whatever standard of the day) is a serious detriment to sales.
There are definite design advantages to having a sealed case, well above and beyond simply "it forces people to upgrade more often."
If your goal is to stretch out battery life in time, then who cares if you're only getting 94% efficiency by slowing down the processor? The user still sees it running close enough to twice as long to make no difference from that perspective.
End users generally don't care about the technicalities as much as the perception. Of course if you slow the processor down too much then they'll perceive that as well so there's a balancing act involved if they want to play this game.. and it sounds like they didn't quite hit the sweet spot..
Hahahaha in an Apple device? How are you not marked +5 Funny already?
It could be more benign (and egotistical) than that.. "if it worked, we would have thought of it long ago because we're so good at things!" Of course "worked" in their context still means "generates a huge profit" rather than "technically feasible" but still..
this investigation has 100% democrat support
Obviously. Not especially relevant though.
only a handful of republicans
Define "handful." The senate might be pretty close but the house is very republican-tilted. Either side could potentially start the process of canning the investigation.
in fact seems to quite enjoy keeping a bucket of mud at the ready
Question is whether he was just better at slinging the mud, or if he was swinging the bucket around illegally as well.
the whole idea of Russian Collusion, is a democrat invention to explain Hillary's loss
Actually it was a Trump invention to explain why he was polling so badly prior to the election. And then he ended up winning anyway and shit got all mixed up. A similar thing happened with the so-called dossier -- started off by republicans to discredit Trump in the primaries and the dems just took it over afterward when it was their turn to go up against the Trump hype train, rather than being a democratic invention in the first place.
Mueller and *every* member of his team are obviously from a single political perspective
What exactly is "obvious" about it? Everyone of course has their own opinion and Mueller isn't magically any less opinionated than anyone else, but he still has to do his best to ensure his work is not swayed by his opinion (or the opinion of anyone else on his team.) Do you even know who is on the team? Never mind each member's political viewpoint? Or are you just assuming they're all democrats purely because they haven't walked away from the job before its finished while chanting #MAGAMAGAMAGA on their way out the door?
we find out that he actually fired one of the investigators for texting some seriously partisan stuff to a girl friend
Exactly.
but I don't think the public would see it that way
Which is why he has to be so extremely careful to not indicate even the slightest imbalance. The public is just grinding their teeth looking for an excuse to take anything related to the investigation out of context, one way or the other.
At the very least Mueller opened himself up to criticism for hiring biased investigators
He actually spent a couple weeks at the beginning complaining that he was having trouble hiring people specifically because the partisan (and specifically for/against Trump) bias in the country is so massive right now. Again I don't know who he finally settled on or what their viewpoints are, but presumably Mueller found people who are at least able to perform their job with a reasonable facsimile of impartiality, or this whole thing would have been killed months ago.
yet he hired who he did?
Again, do you know who he hired? Sure maybe one guy got fired for sending partisan texts but do you know the history of that? Maybe he was really good at convincing Mueller he was impartial. Or maybe he really was impartial and something changed between his hiring and his firing. Unless you know the details of the person and their situation, you can't use a single example of a problem -- that was handled appropriately -- to extrapolate a problem with everything. I mean by that logic we may as well say that Trump is automatically a pedophile purely because he supported Roy Moore. That kind of "logic" sounds a whole lot more convincing when it fits your desired narrative than when it doesn't.
the interviews at the Whitehouse by Mueller's team are done
No I hadn't heard that yet. I also consider it kind of irrelevant. I'll believe the investigation is done when the final report is presented.
If this rumor is true, then a couple of weeks to take evidence to a grand jury if you think a crime is there and this is over.
This whole investigation is politically motivated, from day one.
Yes, and that's why Mueller has to be as impartial as he can. If he shows even a slight lean towards the left, Trump will oust him as fast as he can rampage off the pink tweet.
And if he shows a slight rightward lean, Trump's cronies will immediately start flying off with "nothing to see here, Mueller's done all this work and he's decided we're right!" even if he's decided no such thing, and they'll plaster that all over the news so that by the time Mueller does complete his investigation -- regardless of the result -- nobody will care or believe him anymore. In fact they've already started to pull this tactic based purely on the fact that a massive investigation of the US President and most of his staff hasn't managed to result in an impeachment within a 6 month time frame (ignoring the fact that "normal" white collar investigations can easily take 2 or 3 years or longer if the suspect is even remotely good at covering their tracks. Reality isn't a primary concern of the current administration. "Alternative" facts can just be twisted to any degree they feel advances their narrative and apparently Trump supporters see no problem with that.)
The motivation for starting the investigation (under Comey) was definitely politically motivated. But continuing the investigation cannot be. I mean the republicans own all branches of government -- if they wanted, congress could shut it down without harming Trump in the slightest. The only one who can't unilaterally shut it down is Trump himself because that would look, even to a lot of republicans, like a flat out admission of guilt and cover-up. The fact that the republican congress is allowing the investigation to continue suggests that even if there's still political threads, its at least not overly partisan.
So guns are only cool if I'm directly holding it? Good to know. Does it count if I have a tether on it? Or is there a maximum number of inches that the gun can be away from me before its a felony? Is it more or less illegal to have a gun in my truck than it is on my drone and if so, why?
Its not about being a drone, its about being electronic equipment. Having it taken apart might be _more_ troublesome as the customs officials may not recognize the parts individually and get concerned that its bomb components or something.
Easier to just go to Walmart after you get here and spend the $200 or whatever it is these days for a decent quadcopter if you really need to have one in the US.
If it was "as obvious as some though," we wouldn't need a special prosecutor to investigate in the first place. Robert Mueller has to be very careful at this point to cross all the t's and dot all the i's, and even more careful to stay politically impartial because even the slightest deviation (either way) could be the excuse Trump needs to oust him and kill the investigation completely.
Its actually not a big step up. Customs is almost certainly going to be asking you about it anyway so its not really a huge extra burden to punch that into a database. And there's not even much worry about (additional) invasion of privacy since America's border authorities already treat non-Americans as barely even having basic human rights never mind the stronger rights that Americans are granted (which is actually unconstitutional -- "inalienable" doesn't mean "only for people we like".. but another thing American authorities are happy to overlook.)
What if my drone has a gun on it? Do I have to register it or not? Oh the confusion!
Well now that's some unnecessary vitriol. Someone piss in your cornflakes this morning?
And no actual human beings don't require "proof." Courts require "evidence," which is not the same as proof. Actual human beings frequently don't even require that -- if they did, religion wouldn't (and couldn't) be a thing. We're pretty good at believing whatever the hell we want to believe, regardless of evidence never mind proof.
"Anyone else" typically does not have such tools. While the tools may well be "freely" accessible, they don't typically make them easy to find by people who aren't already in the in-group. Too much exposure to the public is inherently bad for criminal types as it tends to draw law enforcement much quicker.
God help the first Indian who actually shows up at my door for any reason
Uh oh! Danger!
I'm simply going to walk him off my property.
Well that deflated fast ;).
Difference is Usenet was decentralized with no authority to take control of the problem. Spotify on the other hand is perfectly within their rights (and likely their capabilities) to filter spam from their own forums. And if they don't, Google will just tweak their page ranking algorithm and the problem will naturally go away after a while once the spammers realize they're just wasting resources (though that still leaves Spotify with a heavily polluted forums section -- they'd still have to try and clean the crud out even after the fact.)
Its huge news! A scammer figured out how to game Google!
And 3 hours from now we can expect the follow up story where Google tweaks their algorithm to compensate. Hurrah!
The complex owner should be suing AT&T for damages if they destroyed $150k worth of equipment. Unless destruction of that equipment was part of the original exclusivity contract of course (which it might have been you never know..)
.. If only it were a joke.
Because it fits his narrative? Ajit Pai doesn't care about small ISPs. His sponsor Verizon is probably coming in right after him offering to buy those guys out.
I think the question isn't "why are they there?" so much as as "why are they usually in focus, even though they're a background detail?"
TFA blames Evangelion, and while I won't try to say they're wrong I'd go a bit further and suggest that its a common theme in dystopic universes everywhere. Perhaps Japanese artists think their country (OK lets face it, city since something like 90% of anime is made in the Tokyo region) is more dystopian than we do. Or maybe its just "the way things are done" and nothing to see here beyond tradition because that's what viewers expect to see.
Also keep in mind that most anime is derived from manga, and the animators are pretty good at keeping the art style fairly consistent with the book in most cases. So you're starting with a (mostly) black and white medium where hard black lines are generally used to signify motion and now you need to draw a hard black line that stands out as not signifying motion. Then when you translate it to full color, in order to keep the same aesthetic you still have to keep those power lines strong even though artistically its not nearly as important.
Anyway I'm just throwing out some thoughts. I'm not an art critic by any stretch of the imagination so maybe I'm way off base but seems like some solid excuses for the phenomena to me!