In Open Compute I believe the power supplies wait random amount of time before applying power to the rails to fire up the load. What an idea. You auto-magically spread out the time of the start up load over a short time.
The individual will merely have to change which contractor employs them. In this world, education is now proportional to the number of contractors you've been employed by. Sad. Terrible.
If there is nothing to it, and I believe that there is something to it, for longer, then how is that a benefit to Putin? Why would Putin care what I, individually, think? I don't think Putin's statement would make be believe it for longer, because Putin's statement will be forgotten by the time the investigations are concluded.
1. Trump alienating our allies is headline news lately.
2. If he's not dismantling the "globalist octopus", then what is he dismantling?
3. Google "US Population", about 321.4 million. World population is 7 Billion. So the rest of the world is about 95.4 %, sorry I said 96 %.
All Trump is managing to do is alienate our allies. If he is dismantling anything it is America. The rest of the world, which is 96 % of the world's population will go on without us if necessary.
Pizzagate is easy to debunk. If crazy even needs debunking.
As for Trump and any connections to the Russian government, I think the smoke hasn't cleared on that yet. And I think there is more than a fire causing the smoke. But we'll see. It just takes time. I imagine a lot of people couldn't believe Nixon hired some 2nd rate burglars, but I do remember being a teen at summer camp when it was announced that he resigned.
> Later on, King got involved with a miniseries adaptation starring Rebecca DeMornay
> and some forgettable guy.
I think you mean Steven Weber. I saw trailers of it. But not the mini series. I did not consider him to be forgettable. But the actress was forgettable to me.
I seem to recall the first two movies of The Chronicles of Narnia (2005, 2008, Walden Media) were reasonably faithful to the books. Especially the first. Then there was the third movie of the set where The Voyage of the Dawn Treader had to chop out a lot of material to fit into a movie.
I haven't seen Game of Thrones. I've heard nothing but good about it, but even though I have HBO on my Roku, I can't cross the hurdle to decide to invest the time into watching it. Loved LoTR movies. Enjoyed Running Man. Really liked Blade Runner -- and saw it a couple years ago and was surprised that it wasn't made more recently -- the effects were just so good I was shocked when I looked at it more carefully and realized when it was made.
I would love to know more about the leaked script. Or the story. I knew JMS was writing one. After years, I assumed it had disappeared. I had no idea why. Being right in the middle of B5 season 3 DVDs this week, I suspect it would have been a great story.
I'm thinking if Netflix spends $20 million on a short TV series, that is about 1/20 ($400 million) to 1/40 ($800 million) of a major motion picture. So my assumed numbers might be off somewhat. Suppose I said Netflix spends 1/5 to 1/10 as much, yet it is still more engaging than a movie. Would my point still be somewhat valid about how "terribly unfair" (said in whiny voice) that it is?
As for your item 3, what would be gained? If anything, Putin would lose respect. He would look like Trump trying to puff himself up as more important than he actually is. - - - if item 3 held any water.
As for item 4, I happen to be a believer that where there is smoke, there is fire. What we have already is a conflagration. So what would be gained by Putin blowing in a little more smoke?
Dang Netflix! They can make a short one season TV series for 1/20 to 1/40 the cost of a major motion picture, yet it is more engaging than the movie. Each episode leaves you wanting to watch the next. It's just so unfair!
They can't give writers more creative freedom. Nor directors.
The problem is they are locked into a formula. If they're going to spend $500 Million to make a movie, then they have got to guarantee it will be a success and recoup the investment.
So they can't take risks. Can't be innovative. A movie must follow one of Hollywood's formulas for success. And this is the very thing making movies bad.
Here's another idea: How about a movie that doesn't cost $500 Million to make? Don't get a-list actors. Could there possibly be very good but unknown actors? Don't make the movie effects heavy. Do have a good story -- oh but that would require giving more creative freedom, which brings us back to the start.
Let's not forget about impossible physics as part of the plot.
It's not only sequels and prequels, but poorly conceived remakes of ancient TV shows that were made in some earlier millennium. Or horrible remakes of classic sci fi (The Day The Earth Stood Still). Moves based on books that have no resemblance to the book the movie is supposedly based on.
Action movies with adolescent dialog.
New prequels of decades old movies, where the prequel isn't consistent with what it is a prequel to. Or changes the characters in the original movie -- or makes liars out of the heroes.
Movies stretched into categories they don't belong in, as a form of false advertising. Clue: if it has vampires, warewolves, or magic, it probably isn't Sci Fi.
The problem is that new movies rarely have anything new. There are a few good ones. But very few.
I wouldn't mind a really good remake of a classic movie. (Forbidden Planet anyone?) Or a good prequel.
You're missing the point. Your face or fingerprint are going to replace your ticket; and now if they are going to take away your ticket, they will take away your face or finger instead.
> The only people who still believe that Putin did not try to interfere in any way with
> the U.S. election are the same people who believed that Clinton ran a pedophile ring
> from the basement of a pizza restaurant.
You should mention that the pizza restaurant doesn't, in fact, have a basement.
The point was to create a weak, ineffective US. That is done by installing a weak, ineffective illiterate impotent president who is unable to think or speak in complete sentences. He will then install weak ineffective people into top government positions. Often people at odds with the very government function they are supposed to be running. Then leave vast numbers of government positions vacant -- running on autopilot. It's a plus if the president is unable to control himself with women in professional situations. Unable to be told NO on anything. Unable to take advice. A vindictive person without class who must not only win, but must utterly humiliate his perceived enemies.
Alienate the press. Alienate our allies. Get foreign heads of state to to make fun of you behind your back. Treat a NK missile launch as if it is after dinner entertainment for your resort guests. Let one of your rich guests get a picture with the nuclear football guy. I could go on and on, but I'll get near a point . . .
Does anyone actually believe that if a major international crisis broke out right now that the US administration would have a clue how to handle it? The current president doesn't seem to even be aware of who he is, or where he is during a solemn ceremony honoring fallen soldiers.
Unlike the troll earlier, I'll assume this NY Times, and Reuters news is not fake news, and that Putin said what is reported.
Now the question becomes, WHY did Putin say this?
The conclusion that seems obvious to me is that:
1. Putin realizes that something is about to be exposed to the bright light of day
2. He is doing his job of shifting the blame away from the state
At this point, IMO, it does not even pass the laugh test to suggest Russia did not interfere in the US presidential election. Now if I held the contrary opinion (that Russia did not interfere in election) then a possible conclusion could be: Putin is putting out disinformation for some reason in order to interfere with Trump's administration. But then I would recognize that Trump is already interfering with the operation of the Trump administration just fine, without Putin's help. The bumbling fumbling orange clown circus doesn't need any help to be impotently ineffective.
Slashdot Mirror
In Open Compute I believe the power supplies wait random amount of time before applying power to the rails to fire up the load. What an idea. You auto-magically spread out the time of the start up load over a short time.
The individual will merely have to change which contractor employs them. In this world, education is now proportional to the number of contractors you've been employed by. Sad. Terrible.
> But back to original point...if it wasn't binding, then what real difference does it make?
The importance of this is that . . . (gasp!) . . . a man with non-white skin made this agreement! Unacceptable!
I think that is the most likely underlying reason this is so important to some people.
I never dreamed I would say something like this, but: I would be very happy to have George W. back again. (And I didn't not vote for him.)
W. may have had some bad policy ideas. But he surrounded himself with people smarter than he was. He may not have been very bright. But he was sane.
If there is nothing to it, and I believe that there is something to it, for longer, then how is that a benefit to Putin? Why would Putin care what I, individually, think? I don't think Putin's statement would make be believe it for longer, because Putin's statement will be forgotten by the time the investigations are concluded.
> [citation needed]
1. Trump alienating our allies is headline news lately.
2. If he's not dismantling the "globalist octopus", then what is he dismantling?
3. Google "US Population", about 321.4 million. World population is 7 Billion. So the rest of the world is about 95.4 %, sorry I said 96 %.
That sword cuts both ways.
If the agreement is truly a meaningless symbol, then sticking with also will have no effect.
> Individual voters can at least say they voted for him for other reasons . . .
It should have been clear to individual voters 18 months before the election that this guy was unfit for office. Certainly by 12 months. Or 6 months.
All Trump is managing to do is alienate our allies. If he is dismantling anything it is America. The rest of the world, which is 96 % of the world's population will go on without us if necessary.
Pizzagate is easy to debunk. If crazy even needs debunking.
As for Trump and any connections to the Russian government, I think the smoke hasn't cleared on that yet. And I think there is more than a fire causing the smoke. But we'll see. It just takes time. I imagine a lot of people couldn't believe Nixon hired some 2nd rate burglars, but I do remember being a teen at summer camp when it was announced that he resigned.
A good movie doesn't have to slavishly follow the book. But there should be more than a passing resemblance.
> Later on, King got involved with a miniseries adaptation starring Rebecca DeMornay
> and some forgettable guy.
I think you mean Steven Weber. I saw trailers of it. But not the mini series. I did not consider him to be forgettable. But the actress was forgettable to me.
I seem to recall the first two movies of The Chronicles of Narnia (2005, 2008, Walden Media) were reasonably faithful to the books. Especially the first. Then there was the third movie of the set where The Voyage of the Dawn Treader had to chop out a lot of material to fit into a movie.
I haven't seen Game of Thrones. I've heard nothing but good about it, but even though I have HBO on my Roku, I can't cross the hurdle to decide to invest the time into watching it. Loved LoTR movies. Enjoyed Running Man. Really liked Blade Runner -- and saw it a couple years ago and was surprised that it wasn't made more recently -- the effects were just so good I was shocked when I looked at it more carefully and realized when it was made.
I would love to know more about the leaked script. Or the story. I knew JMS was writing one. After years, I assumed it had disappeared. I had no idea why. Being right in the middle of B5 season 3 DVDs this week, I suspect it would have been a great story.
Good point. I would make a distinction between obviously impossible physics, and suspension of disbelief impossible physics.
Obviously impossible: how a character dies in Mission To Mars.
Suspension of disbelief impossible: FTL interstellar travel.
I'm thinking if Netflix spends $20 million on a short TV series, that is about 1/20 ($400 million) to 1/40 ($800 million) of a major motion picture. So my assumed numbers might be off somewhat. Suppose I said Netflix spends 1/5 to 1/10 as much, yet it is still more engaging than a movie. Would my point still be somewhat valid about how "terribly unfair" (said in whiny voice) that it is?
As for your item 3, what would be gained? If anything, Putin would lose respect. He would look like Trump trying to puff himself up as more important than he actually is. - - - if item 3 held any water.
As for item 4, I happen to be a believer that where there is smoke, there is fire. What we have already is a conflagration. So what would be gained by Putin blowing in a little more smoke?
No substance. Check. No facts. Check. Name calling. Check.
And the way overused Hillary / Obama defense. Oh, bu, bu, but . . . Hillary! Obama!
Here is a free clue: Obama is not in power. Hillary is not in power. Trump won. Get over it.
Dang Netflix! They can make a short one season TV series for 1/20 to 1/40 the cost of a major motion picture, yet it is more engaging than the movie. Each episode leaves you wanting to watch the next. It's just so unfair!
They can't give writers more creative freedom. Nor directors.
The problem is they are locked into a formula. If they're going to spend $500 Million to make a movie, then they have got to guarantee it will be a success and recoup the investment.
So they can't take risks. Can't be innovative. A movie must follow one of Hollywood's formulas for success. And this is the very thing making movies bad.
Here's another idea: How about a movie that doesn't cost $500 Million to make? Don't get a-list actors. Could there possibly be very good but unknown actors? Don't make the movie effects heavy. Do have a good story -- oh but that would require giving more creative freedom, which brings us back to the start.
Let's not forget about impossible physics as part of the plot.
It's not only sequels and prequels, but poorly conceived remakes of ancient TV shows that were made in some earlier millennium. Or horrible remakes of classic sci fi (The Day The Earth Stood Still). Moves based on books that have no resemblance to the book the movie is supposedly based on.
Action movies with adolescent dialog.
New prequels of decades old movies, where the prequel isn't consistent with what it is a prequel to. Or changes the characters in the original movie -- or makes liars out of the heroes.
Movies stretched into categories they don't belong in, as a form of false advertising. Clue: if it has vampires, warewolves, or magic, it probably isn't Sci Fi.
The problem is that new movies rarely have anything new. There are a few good ones. But very few.
I wouldn't mind a really good remake of a classic movie. (Forbidden Planet anyone?) Or a good prequel.
You're missing the point. Your face or fingerprint are going to replace your ticket; and now if they are going to take away your ticket, they will take away your face or finger instead.
> The only people who still believe that Putin did not try to interfere in any way with
> the U.S. election are the same people who believed that Clinton ran a pedophile ring
> from the basement of a pizza restaurant.
You should mention that the pizza restaurant doesn't, in fact, have a basement.
Hey now, lets not be nasty. Putin could be nominated for the 2017 Kellyanne Conway award for credibility.
Nailed it in one Mr. Garibaldi.
The point was to create a weak, ineffective US. That is done by installing a weak, ineffective illiterate impotent president who is unable to think or speak in complete sentences. He will then install weak ineffective people into top government positions. Often people at odds with the very government function they are supposed to be running. Then leave vast numbers of government positions vacant -- running on autopilot. It's a plus if the president is unable to control himself with women in professional situations. Unable to be told NO on anything. Unable to take advice. A vindictive person without class who must not only win, but must utterly humiliate his perceived enemies.
Alienate the press. Alienate our allies. Get foreign heads of state to to make fun of you behind your back. Treat a NK missile launch as if it is after dinner entertainment for your resort guests. Let one of your rich guests get a picture with the nuclear football guy. I could go on and on, but I'll get near a point . . .
Does anyone actually believe that if a major international crisis broke out right now that the US administration would have a clue how to handle it? The current president doesn't seem to even be aware of who he is, or where he is during a solemn ceremony honoring fallen soldiers.
Unlike the troll earlier, I'll assume this NY Times, and Reuters news is not fake news, and that Putin said what is reported.
Now the question becomes, WHY did Putin say this?
The conclusion that seems obvious to me is that:
1. Putin realizes that something is about to be exposed to the bright light of day
2. He is doing his job of shifting the blame away from the state
At this point, IMO, it does not even pass the laugh test to suggest Russia did not interfere in the US presidential election. Now if I held the contrary opinion (that Russia did not interfere in election) then a possible conclusion could be: Putin is putting out disinformation for some reason in order to interfere with Trump's administration. But then I would recognize that Trump is already interfering with the operation of the Trump administration just fine, without Putin's help. The bumbling fumbling orange clown circus doesn't need any help to be impotently ineffective.