Discovery reminds me of DS9 and Enterprise. There is a war on, everyone wants to preserve their morals and way of life as much as possible, but bad things happen to them that make it exceedingly difficult.
By Discovery's time the Federation is basically post-race and post-feminist. It's odd that a decade later by Kirk's time they seem to have regressed. Still, much of the conflict on Discovery comes from the desire of some of the crew to stick to their principals and high standards, and of others to do what is necessary to win the war. And the best of them find a way to do both.
Discovery isn't all that dark though - DS9 was darker and edgier. Season 3 of Enterprise was more desperate too, with the ship barely making it and something like 1/5th of the crew being killed IIRC.
This is indeed true. HGST R&D is still done in Japan, and their target markets that will pay slightly more for increased reliability and durability (servers, appliances like DVRs etc.)
A far more obvious and likely explanation is that they are simply reducing their costs by not supporting older versions of Windows. It costs money to develop for and test for those older versions, and to keep supporting them.
Most users never upgrade their version of Office. It comes with the PC, that's it. Businesses and home users alike. MS don't sell Windows 7 or 8.1 any more, so it will likely have near zero impact on their Office sales and save them a load of money.
The Orville is okay, but they need to get away from recycling very very old sci-fi standards and do something a bit original. I mean really, Planet of the and Ship in a Bottle have been done to death already. If they can be more original it could grow into something really good.
I'm really looking forward to season 2 of Star Trek Discovery. And Altered Carbon.
With students and especially children, society has decided that it's okay to favour them because students should concentrate more on study than earning and because bringing up children is highly beneficial for society but very expensive for the parent.
In some places the same logic applies to older people. They might have a fixed income (pension), and in fact some governments give them extra benefits like the UK's winter fuel allowance (because so many were freezing to death).
So the real question here is if it's okay for society to favour certain groups, either to compensate for some disadvantage or because it benefits society to do so, but at the same time it's not okay for private individuals or businesses to do the same. Of course most places are fine with individuals giving their own money to the charities of their choice, for example.
You also hit upon another complication, which is that the discount is effectively the same as a surcharge for everyone who doesn't qualify. This is actually being tested in the UK the moment. The Labour Party had an event where they subsidised the tickets of some people from minority backgrounds, and a Tory politician complained that it was a "white surcharge".
Other examples include fake groups like "Antifa Boston". If you search Slashdot (google with site:slashdot.org is a good option) you can see quite a few people on here complaining about them, and influencing others.
@SouthLoneStar is another infamous one on Twitter, spewing fake news that went viral such as a photo supposedly showing a Muslim woman ignoring a terror attack victim. That's a good one to google as a starting point in your research.
The UK was hit quite hard too. @DavidJo52951945 or "David Jones" was claiming to be an ordinary British citizen and had over 100,000 followers, but was exposed as a Russian troll.
The media frequently re-posted some of these tweets. The guardian investigated if you are interested.
Okay, I'm sorry you had to suffer that, but that's not the question here. The question is, what should be done about it?
Mashiki is advocating that people should just accept sexual assault and not complain, because he was assaulted once and unable to get it addressed. Do you agree with him, or do you think that everyone, of any gender, should be able to complain?
I is the thing you are calculating by measuring V and using a fixed R. Well, not R exactly, but a fixed load, which is the CPU at 100%.
Say you decide that your test will be CPU at 100% on both cores, screen on maximum brightness, radios turned off. That's going to be fairly consistent across devices. If you are Apple you can even measure I under these conditions, but you don't actually need to. All you need to do is measure V, and do it on a decent number of sample devices, checking at what point the drop in V causes the device to reset under load.
Now you can calculate battery health based on V under your fixed load, and predict with a fair degree of accuracy when it won't be able to run the phone under load.
That is certainly what Apple does. They monitor voltage, and when it drops to a certain point start to throttle the CPU before the phone resets. Add some code to ignore those low readings when calculating battery % left so it doesn't jump from 50% to 2%, and quietly slip it into an iOS update.
You honestly see nothing wrong with your boss, the guy with the power to fire you and decide your future career prospects and raises, pressuring you to get in the hot tub with him?
If it was you, how would you react? Would you be confident that your refusal wasn't going to hurt your career?
Those times weren't even the "good old days", at least not for most people. Female, non-white, gay, transgender, disabled... Basically anything other than healthy straight white male sucked to be back then.
Hell, you could ask a co-worker out right now, with the best intentions, fully respecting today's rules, and be called a "slimy asshole" 30 years down the line, simply because 30 years from now the rules will have changed to the extent your today's actions would be immoral, or, God forbid, illegal.
Have the rules changed though? Sure, you could get away with it much more easily in the 70s, but was it actually legally and/or morally okay back then? I don't think so.
We aren't showing those cartoons either. Just like Disney lost potential revenue on racist cartoons it produced back in the 30s because they can't be shown or sold any more.
Plus, not one of these guys who has been accused of historic sexual assault/harassment has gone to jail.
Jobs got plenty of criticism for his behaviour too, particularly towards his daughter. But as far as I know, he didn't sexually harass or assault anyone.
I guess there is a line somewhere between being a poor father and being a sexual predictor.
Suggesting that white janitors and white CEO's enjoy the same level of "privilege" is absolutely deranged.
It is, which is why that's not what anyone except your straw man is doing.
In this case the janitor's white privilege would be that if they get caught with a tiny amount of weed on them they are much less likely to end up in jail than a black janitor, all other things being equal. Of course, the rich CEO is even less likely to end up doing time.
The word used to describe these interactions of multiple factors like race and affluence is "intersectionality".
Under the intersectionality regime, EVERYONE can be a victim except "the man".
The whole point if intersectionality is that no-one is just "a man". Everyone is a mixture of things that intersect - gender, race, class, social status, age, (dis)ability, health, even political views and faith.
Slashdot Mirror
No one really knows PayPal. Their ToS are some of the longest and most unreadable in the world, and change often.
PayPal is just awful. High fees, crap service, tax dodging and the dispute resolution is a joke.
These new guys can't be any worse.... Can they?
Risk and low ROI. But nuclear has massive subsidies already, far more than wind and solar. It just doesn't seem to add up.
Discovery reminds me of DS9 and Enterprise. There is a war on, everyone wants to preserve their morals and way of life as much as possible, but bad things happen to them that make it exceedingly difficult.
By Discovery's time the Federation is basically post-race and post-feminist. It's odd that a decade later by Kirk's time they seem to have regressed. Still, much of the conflict on Discovery comes from the desire of some of the crew to stick to their principals and high standards, and of others to do what is necessary to win the war. And the best of them find a way to do both.
Discovery isn't all that dark though - DS9 was darker and edgier. Season 3 of Enterprise was more desperate too, with the ship barely making it and something like 1/5th of the crew being killed IIRC.
The most important lesson is: back your data up or suffer data loss every 5-10 years.
I'm sure Backblaze would like you to use their service, but I prefer SpiderOak.
This is indeed true. HGST R&D is still done in Japan, and their target markets that will pay slightly more for increased reliability and durability (servers, appliances like DVRs etc.)
WD is more consumer focused.
A far more obvious and likely explanation is that they are simply reducing their costs by not supporting older versions of Windows. It costs money to develop for and test for those older versions, and to keep supporting them.
Most users never upgrade their version of Office. It comes with the PC, that's it. Businesses and home users alike. MS don't sell Windows 7 or 8.1 any more, so it will likely have near zero impact on their Office sales and save them a load of money.
in the later criminal trial the prosecution was unable to reach the standard of evidence required for a criminal conviction
Uh no. It went to court, and that was from the judges own decision in the case.
That's what I said! You even quoted it!
But if it's that simple then why are people not investing?
If SMR was as cheap as $1bn in R&D then investors would be all over it.
The Orville is okay, but they need to get away from recycling very very old sci-fi standards and do something a bit original. I mean really, Planet of the and Ship in a Bottle have been done to death already. If they can be more original it could grow into something really good.
I'm really looking forward to season 2 of Star Trek Discovery. And Altered Carbon.
With students and especially children, society has decided that it's okay to favour them because students should concentrate more on study than earning and because bringing up children is highly beneficial for society but very expensive for the parent.
In some places the same logic applies to older people. They might have a fixed income (pension), and in fact some governments give them extra benefits like the UK's winter fuel allowance (because so many were freezing to death).
So the real question here is if it's okay for society to favour certain groups, either to compensate for some disadvantage or because it benefits society to do so, but at the same time it's not okay for private individuals or businesses to do the same. Of course most places are fine with individuals giving their own money to the charities of their choice, for example.
You also hit upon another complication, which is that the discount is effectively the same as a surcharge for everyone who doesn't qualify. This is actually being tested in the UK the moment. The Labour Party had an event where they subsidised the tickets of some people from minority backgrounds, and a Tory politician complained that it was a "white surcharge".
Other examples include fake groups like "Antifa Boston". If you search Slashdot (google with site:slashdot.org is a good option) you can see quite a few people on here complaining about them, and influencing others.
@SouthLoneStar is another infamous one on Twitter, spewing fake news that went viral such as a photo supposedly showing a Muslim woman ignoring a terror attack victim. That's a good one to google as a starting point in your research.
The UK was hit quite hard too. @DavidJo52951945 or "David Jones" was claiming to be an ordinary British citizen and had over 100,000 followers, but was exposed as a Russian troll.
The media frequently re-posted some of these tweets. The guardian investigated if you are interested.
Okay, I'm sorry you had to suffer that, but that's not the question here. The question is, what should be done about it?
Mashiki is advocating that people should just accept sexual assault and not complain, because he was assaulted once and unable to get it addressed. Do you agree with him, or do you think that everyone, of any gender, should be able to complain?
I is the thing you are calculating by measuring V and using a fixed R. Well, not R exactly, but a fixed load, which is the CPU at 100%.
Say you decide that your test will be CPU at 100% on both cores, screen on maximum brightness, radios turned off. That's going to be fairly consistent across devices. If you are Apple you can even measure I under these conditions, but you don't actually need to. All you need to do is measure V, and do it on a decent number of sample devices, checking at what point the drop in V causes the device to reset under load.
Now you can calculate battery health based on V under your fixed load, and predict with a fair degree of accuracy when it won't be able to run the phone under load.
That is certainly what Apple does. They monitor voltage, and when it drops to a certain point start to throttle the CPU before the phone resets. Add some code to ignore those low readings when calculating battery % left so it doesn't jump from 50% to 2%, and quietly slip it into an iOS update.
You honestly see nothing wrong with your boss, the guy with the power to fire you and decide your future career prospects and raises, pressuring you to get in the hot tub with him?
If it was you, how would you react? Would you be confident that your refusal wasn't going to hurt your career?
affordable
Tell us your plan to make these new plants affordable. As in more affordable than renewables+storage.
Those times weren't even the "good old days", at least not for most people. Female, non-white, gay, transgender, disabled... Basically anything other than healthy straight white male sucked to be back then.
Hell, you could ask a co-worker out right now, with the best intentions, fully respecting today's rules, and be called a "slimy asshole" 30 years down the line, simply because 30 years from now the rules will have changed to the extent your today's actions would be immoral, or, God forbid, illegal.
Have the rules changed though? Sure, you could get away with it much more easily in the 70s, but was it actually legally and/or morally okay back then? I don't think so.
We aren't showing those cartoons either. Just like Disney lost potential revenue on racist cartoons it produced back in the 30s because they can't be shown or sold any more.
Plus, not one of these guys who has been accused of historic sexual assault/harassment has gone to jail.
Jobs got plenty of criticism for his behaviour too, particularly towards his daughter. But as far as I know, he didn't sexually harass or assault anyone.
I guess there is a line somewhere between being a poor father and being a sexual predictor.
Suggesting that white janitors and white CEO's enjoy the same level of "privilege" is absolutely deranged.
It is, which is why that's not what anyone except your straw man is doing.
In this case the janitor's white privilege would be that if they get caught with a tiny amount of weed on them they are much less likely to end up in jail than a black janitor, all other things being equal. Of course, the rich CEO is even less likely to end up doing time.
The word used to describe these interactions of multiple factors like race and affluence is "intersectionality".
Under the intersectionality regime, EVERYONE can be a victim except "the man".
The whole point if intersectionality is that no-one is just "a man". Everyone is a mixture of things that intersect - gender, race, class, social status, age, (dis)ability, health, even political views and faith.
Nearly half of all rape charges are thrown out or rejected for prosecution.
Sure, but do you understand that declining to prosecute or the prosecution failing is not the same as the accuser having lied?
Mashiki really seems to think that if someone is not convicted for any reason, it means that the accuser lied.
On an related note Mashiki has accused me of all sorts of crazy stuff over the years, yet I have not been convicted of any of it.