Windows 9x-ME was really Windows 4 all along. 2000 was version 5, XP-10 is version 6.
I don't want to be pedantic, but since we're all being pedantic, I guess I'll do it anyway. You're looking at the wrong codebase. The predecessor of Win2k (v5) was WinNT 4 (v4). The predecessor of that was WinNT 3.5 (v3.5). The predecessor of that Was WinNT 3.1 (v3.1).
WinME was based on the consumer codebase that (in inverted order) was Win3.x, Win95, Win98, WinME. The entire Win9X/ME series reported internal version 4.x but that had nothing to do with the codebase we run today. Again, Win95 was literally v4.0 and Win98 was v4.1 but the current kernel had its very own v4 (and v3) and WinME wasn't it.
I can actually understand this - suppose I was an agent and I made up a random name, like 'Polly-O string cheese'. If I used it consistently, a spy for the other side could do traffic analysis - things like " 'Polly-O string cheese' always gets a coffee, except for 2 recent periods of about a week each. Suspected agent X was reported as being in country Y, an ally of ours, during those 2 periods, and at no other time. Next time 'Polly-O string cheese' doesn't get a coffee, if X is in country Y, get the Y state security to arrest him.
If I were agent X, I would be very nervous at having to give any name, even if I could make one up each time. Humans are not very good at making up random things...
If a nefarious entity has access to detailed records of what names are written on the plastic cups, as an intelligence agency you're already well-screwed.
Y'know, I wonder if they scrub the money involved for DNA before handing it over to the clerks...
So I have 10 devices I want to hook up. The AC, the lights, refrigerator, washing machine, toaster, whatever. Does that mean I need 10 phone and data contracts with AT&T at 30 bucks (or more) each and then the payments recur every month? I can see why AT&T might like this technology.
No, it means two things:
1} You should reconsider the wisdom of having your household appliances connected to the Internet
2} You should wait for the appliances to have a Wifi modem instead, which isn't completely moronic
Seriously, why should anyone's fridge be consuming any neighborhood spectrum to communicate with a cell tower? Short-range grouping of devices onto one backbone - which more often than not is over wired connections - is far more efficient. But we all know spectrum is a renewable resource... we can just make more, right?
In my city, they started campaigning for people to save water. The result? People saved so much water that they ended up having to raise the rates because they weren't making enough to run the water system. The system basically has a fixed cost to run, regardless of how much water goes through it.In the end, we cut our water usage in half (averaged over the city), but we now pay twice as much for our water.
We've got something similar in my municipality with regards to garbage. A decade ago or so we opened a new landfill. Because of increased recycling and other diverted waste flows, the landfill is seeing reduced income, and has had to increase both tipping fees and what is charged to local towns for regular garbage disposal.
More than 19 out of 20 people killed on the job in America are men - are we interested in squaring that up as well?
Sure, why not?
Decrease the men's fatality rate down the women's rate. That would be a good thing right?
Or are you comfortable that so many men get killed at work? Is it just the price we pay for profits or something?
Okay, let's follow the logic. 19 of 20 people killed on the job in America are men, which means 1 in 20 people killed on the job in America are women. If we decrease the men's fatality rate down to the women's rate, we've got 1 in 20 people killed on the job being men and 1 in 20 people killed on the job being women. That leaves 18 in 20 people killed on the job being neither women nor men. Seems you're biased against asexual people.
Yes. I'm kidding.
But seriously, while I applaud your feel-good sentiment of "make working safe", it's not (entirely) realistic. The disparity is likely caused by more men doing dangerous jobs, for instance long-distance truck driving. You're inherently more likely to end up dead on the job if you drive 8 hours a day than if you sit behind a desk in an office 8 hours a day. It doesn't matter what you do for the truck driver safety-wise, that job isn't ever going to be as safe per-hour-worked as an office job. Sure, you could pad trucks in 50 feet of rubber foam, but that's clearly ridiculous as a safety measure. Effective but impractical.
Somewhere there's an acceptable balance between risk and reward? Here's the crux of my reply to you: how you do you know we're not already at that balance for most jobs in most places?
Don't know. Sometimes you think you've seen one thing but then it turns out it's something entirely different. That's the joy of learning. Our understanding (generally) improves over time.
Is this a case where something has been mathematically proven to not exist after it's been observationally confirmed?
Could be. Or not. I don't have the background to know if this paper is factually correct or not. But that's the thing about radio astronomy regarding things massively distant... you're not actually observing anything. You're taking in massive amounts of data then interpreting it. Sure, your eye does that when you look at a banana but it's not quite the same thing when you point a telescope at the far reaches of the universe and conclude "we've seen X". We've had a lot of cases recently where - for instance - some exoplanets have been found to not actually exist, because... reasons. It's all about how you interpret the data. If the math says that black holes cannot exist, perhaps you reinterpret your observational data and come to a better understanding of what you are seeing.
So you've got a part that costs X, and after two years the cost is reduced by 13%, meaning that the part now costs.87 times X. You can continue to use this part, offering either a 13% reduction in the portion of your overall price that is contributed by this part, or you can maintain overall price and reap slightly more profit. You can also decide to use two of this part to increase device capacity, and now your cost is 1.74 times the original X. You can now reduce your profits by keeping your overall price despite increased cost, or you can increase your product price and hope that purchasers absorb the change
TL;DR? 13% is a trivial cost reduction compared to doubling the cost while doubling the memory.
Or maybe it's just that the electrical engineer doing the circuit layouts was wearing a green shirt that day. Analyst Foo Kin Ublivius believes green shirts cause electrical engineers to be afraid of increasing memory quantities. Others believe memory in smartphones are made from the ground-up brain matter of orphans and restricting storage capacity allows Apple to save their orphans for more important things like assembling iPads.
The "new" DownloadStatusBar addon which worked around the changes in (I think) FF29... well, it's broken again. Probably I can go Googling and find an update somewhere.
If only getting pregnant always required long, conscientious, deliberate effort, and avoiding pregnancy were the easy result of one night's drunken whim.
But that's now how it is, and this proposal won't make it so.
You say that. What if deactivating this "chip" requires a trip to the doctor? What if you get to specify the exact circumstances under which it is permitted to change modes and one of them is that you confirm you decision daily for six weeks? See, this technology could give you most of what you want, if universally installed.
An ability to perform more calculations then a human mind does not mean it will beat us.
True. But it does provide the capacity to "beat us".
First, we self assemble from readily obtainable materials out of a self regulating biosphere. Where as this machine would have to be built and maintained by our industry.
Say rather "by industry". Including the word "our" is unnecessarily specific.
Second, there are fucking billions of us. So sure.. we might be able to build some machines that are smarter then ONE person but there are again... fucking billions of us.
Great point. Except that digital entities can be duplicated with stupifying ease while us biologicals require decades of education.
Third, the machine will have its programming directed by us. It will at best be a slave of whomever paid for it to be created.
By definition, adaptive code of sufficient complexity to be considered artificially alive won't be slave to anyone.
Fourth, that programming will be directed at preforming some task where as our task is generally the propagation of our genes with everything else being some sort of weird byproduct.
Again, by the time we've got code that fits the definition of artificial intelligence, it's no longer just an expert system.
Fifth, we have hundreds of millions of years of evolution behind our programming. And I don't think any collection of programmers is going to surpass it in the next century.
Unfortunately, almost all of that evolution was literally trial-and-error, mostly error. We've got a whole bunch of DNA that is literally not expressed because it's useless. That evolution was about getting from primordial slime oozes to walking upright. The lessons "learned" in the middle about how to do photosynthesis while we were ooze-like isn't even vaguely useful to us. Also, aside from symbiosis with the AIs we're talking about here, we have nowhere to go. Evolution takes so long, a decent climate change on this planet and we're screwed where AI can iterate purposefully to solve its problems.
Eventually might there be robotic rivals to humanity? Sure... but not any time soon.
Soon? As in this afternoon? No, probably not. Soon as in within a decade? Again, probably not. But really, once we develop one instance of something truly self-programming and "intelligent", its complexity growth will be very rapid, just like all of our technologies have been. Just like... flight. The hard part was getting the first airplane off the ground. From there... space shuttles in very little time.
As an outsider - Canadian - I see all of the things you describe. I think your theory is very likely right. Obama wasn't a twisted politician when he started. He had an agenda that was mostly in the favor of the average Joe. The problem I have with professional politics is that I realize you have to compromise to get anything done. If you want Bill A to be passed, you need the support of a lot of other people, and you may need to support Bill B to get the job done, though you don't like it.
It's selling your soul, bit by bit. In the end, some of the fights you were rallying for will cost you - and potentially the nation - more than you're willing to pay. The President isn't the Dictator-in-Chief. He's got rules to live by and the realities are that the office doesn't allow some of the sweeping changes Obama wanted... not alone.
So yeah, broken, depressed, dejected, and he probably views himself as a failure.
It's sad, really, because the nature of politics isn't his fault but his failures will be labeled as his.
"Scientists Accidentally Grow Full Head of Hair On Bald Man"
To be fair, the real article title was too long...
Scientists Accidentally Grow Full Head of Hair On Man Who Was Bald For None of The Reasons That Would Make This Discovery Interesting To A Reasonable Number of People
England != UK. This is the Dept of Education for England not Scotland, or Wales, or Northern Ireland - all of which are UK yet, strangely, they are not England.
Could you maybe make it easier on the world somehow? Maybe by going to war (again)?
I'd offer these as potential names that various factions could use:
The Kilt-Wearing Portion of the Formerly United Kingdom
Island Nation That Is Better Than Nearby Island Nation
Place That Didn't Invent Vodka Despite Plethora Of Potatoes
The Temporarily United Two Islands Which Hate Each Other But Hate That Other Island More
Why Do All Dwarves Have To Use Our Accents
We've Got Doctor Who
Yeah But Karen Gillen Is From Here
Where can I get content worth watching on that display?
Start, Programs, Microsoft Office, Excel.
Alternatively, My Pictures, then some random folder that has anything more than 2 megapixel images in it.
Or some random CAD program. Or page-layout package.
My point, simply, is that you can actually make your own content by using this monitor as a monitor. Don't worry about if it makes a very good TV... it has other, more monitor-y uses.
You have to expect that in a country where manual labor is cheap. In other countries, it makes more economic sense to automate or otherwise fix inefficiencies in the manufacturing process.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd like to highlight that there is a second side to your coin. In other countries, it makes more economic sense to automate the manufacturing process so a larger percentage of the profit is converted to profit for those employees that remain, while those who would have done the inefficient manual assembly become unemployment statistics.
Somewhere in between your statement and mine likely lies an ideal.
Android 4.anything will do just fine. What makes this almost a joke device is the screen resolution of NotEnough x NotEnough. Seriously... 1024x768 was a reasonable desktop resolution fifteen to twenty years ago. 600 vertical pixels in 2014 is an unforgivable sin unless you're putting them on a watch or a contact lens or the head of a pin or something else uselessly small to start with.
When you take off your clothes in front of a camera you should be responsible enough to understand the consequences, just like with literally every other bad decision you can make. Love is not an excuse to be retarded.
If you want to include the word "should", then apply it where it belongs. When you take your clothes off in front of a camera, there should not be consequences beyond your partner being aroused. That the woman in the article has to worry about her "reputation" is what is wrong. Personally the only way her having taken nude pictures impacts my view of her is that I now know she's a fun-loving person comfortable being attractive and sexual. She's not ashamed or repressed or otherwise convinced that the animal she is is somehow a bad thing.
There shouldn't be a big deal over being seen naked.
I get it that we're not there societally yet. I get it that because we're not there, there are consequences. But if we're going to talk about "should", let's put it where it belongs; we all should be comfortable in our natural state. That someone posts a picture of the shape of your butt shouldn't matter any more than someone posting a sound sample of your voice or a molding of your elbow.
Sorry, but as a non-American I have to admit I find that date format the most comfortable. Things are likely different globally, but here people tend to say "May 10th, 2014" much more often than "the 10th of May, 2014". Adding two bonus words so you can satisfy some "most granular to least granular" fetish doesn't fit.
For instance, the catastrophe that happened in the US over a decade ago is called "September 11th", not "the 11th of September".
Frankly I'd be okay with a compromise... 10(5)14 is May 10th, 2014 or the 10th of May, 2014. But as long as everyone insists on using commas, DMY will never have my vote.
I agree. This is a moment where marketing-speak masks the truth. The word they're using - demand - isn't appropriate. There was never and demand for Blu-Ray. What did exist to some degree was willingness to buy. These are not the same thing.
Demand stems from a need to strong desire. "If only someone would make a platter with higher resolution and more intrusive DRM, I'd give my left nut." That's demand. On the other hand, "I heard about this new gizmo with 1080p and intrusive DRM, and it turns out I've got money burning a hole in my pocket so I'm going to go get me one!" That's willingness-to-buy.
Turns out that to a certain degree other products are what there is demand for. Things like streaming video. Now that the products that are in demand actually exist, it turns out willingness-to-buy BluRay is shrinking.
Sony puts a rootkit on a CD? Boycott. Apple tells you you're holding your iPhone wrong? Boycott.
Problem is it's nonsense. A boycott is the fiscal equivalence of silence. Your favorite restaurant changes the way they make ? Boycott is the equivalent of "go somewhere else." Well, that sucks. How about "tell the manager/owner you don't like the new recipe"? Try communicating that you're unhappy and why with them. Otherwise your absence means nothing. It's statistically lost in seasonal variance, for instance.
So, for this, send a letter to the company explaining your problem. Send them a "do not like" letter, basically. Boycott alone is meaningless.
No, no, you missed it... a homeless guy makes a dubious claim. Seriously, a guy who has been homeless for six years is the basis for this thing, with him concluding that technology is desensitizing non-homeless.
It's an even bigger chunk of turd than you thought. This guy isn't a long-time homeless person who might plausibly be able to compare today to the golden yesteryear of homelessness. He doesn't provide anything even resembling evidence, just "you know, e-mail makes people lose their empathy".
I call bullshit. Being homeless makes you notice that people are today - and always have been - insensitive to the plight of the homeless, on average. This dude just never noticed how homeless are treated six years ago when he had a mother, a wife, a house, and a rip-roaring drug habit.
Yes, when amalgam fillings are first placed you are exposed to some mercury vapor.
Yes, but when you die, some of the mercury is always missing. Where did it go? Did it just vanish into the aether? Or was it released from your tooth with hot beverages? I love a hot cup of coffee with extra mercury in the morning, every morning, for the rest of my life. With my 11 silver fillings.
Amalgam is a very durable
It's not. It always loses mercury.
Just because that's an interesting assertion, I'd be interested in the required citation.
Slashdot Mirror
Windows 9x-ME was really Windows 4 all along. 2000 was version 5, XP-10 is version 6.
I don't want to be pedantic, but since we're all being pedantic, I guess I'll do it anyway. You're looking at the wrong codebase. The predecessor of Win2k (v5) was WinNT 4 (v4). The predecessor of that was WinNT 3.5 (v3.5). The predecessor of that Was WinNT 3.1 (v3.1).
WinME was based on the consumer codebase that (in inverted order) was Win3.x, Win95, Win98, WinME. The entire Win9X/ME series reported internal version 4.x but that had nothing to do with the codebase we run today. Again, Win95 was literally v4.0 and Win98 was v4.1 but the current kernel had its very own v4 (and v3) and WinME wasn't it.
I can actually understand this - suppose I was an agent and I made up a random name, like 'Polly-O string cheese'. If I used it consistently, a spy for the other side could do traffic analysis - things like " 'Polly-O string cheese' always gets a coffee, except for 2 recent periods of about a week each. Suspected agent X was reported as being in country Y, an ally of ours, during those 2 periods, and at no other time. Next time 'Polly-O string cheese' doesn't get a coffee, if X is in country Y, get the Y state security to arrest him.
If I were agent X, I would be very nervous at having to give any name, even if I could make one up each time. Humans are not very good at making up random things...
If a nefarious entity has access to detailed records of what names are written on the plastic cups, as an intelligence agency you're already well-screwed.
Y'know, I wonder if they scrub the money involved for DNA before handing it over to the clerks...
So I have 10 devices I want to hook up. The AC, the lights, refrigerator, washing machine, toaster, whatever. Does that mean I need 10 phone and data contracts with AT&T at 30 bucks (or more) each and then the payments recur every month? I can see why AT&T might like this technology.
No, it means two things:
1} You should reconsider the wisdom of having your household appliances connected to the Internet
2} You should wait for the appliances to have a Wifi modem instead, which isn't completely moronic
Seriously, why should anyone's fridge be consuming any neighborhood spectrum to communicate with a cell tower? Short-range grouping of devices onto one backbone - which more often than not is over wired connections - is far more efficient. But we all know spectrum is a renewable resource... we can just make more, right?
In my city, they started campaigning for people to save water. The result? People saved so much water that they ended up having to raise the rates because they weren't making enough to run the water system. The system basically has a fixed cost to run, regardless of how much water goes through it.In the end, we cut our water usage in half (averaged over the city), but we now pay twice as much for our water.
We've got something similar in my municipality with regards to garbage. A decade ago or so we opened a new landfill. Because of increased recycling and other diverted waste flows, the landfill is seeing reduced income, and has had to increase both tipping fees and what is charged to local towns for regular garbage disposal.
Sure, why not?
Decrease the men's fatality rate down the women's rate. That would be a good thing right?
Or are you comfortable that so many men get killed at work? Is it just the price we pay for profits or something?
Okay, let's follow the logic. 19 of 20 people killed on the job in America are men, which means 1 in 20 people killed on the job in America are women. If we decrease the men's fatality rate down to the women's rate, we've got 1 in 20 people killed on the job being men and 1 in 20 people killed on the job being women. That leaves 18 in 20 people killed on the job being neither women nor men. Seems you're biased against asexual people.
Yes. I'm kidding.
But seriously, while I applaud your feel-good sentiment of "make working safe", it's not (entirely) realistic. The disparity is likely caused by more men doing dangerous jobs, for instance long-distance truck driving. You're inherently more likely to end up dead on the job if you drive 8 hours a day than if you sit behind a desk in an office 8 hours a day. It doesn't matter what you do for the truck driver safety-wise, that job isn't ever going to be as safe per-hour-worked as an office job. Sure, you could pad trucks in 50 feet of rubber foam, but that's clearly ridiculous as a safety measure. Effective but impractical.
Somewhere there's an acceptable balance between risk and reward? Here's the crux of my reply to you: how you do you know we're not already at that balance for most jobs in most places?
So, what are those big honking things seeing?
Don't know. Sometimes you think you've seen one thing but then it turns out it's something entirely different. That's the joy of learning. Our understanding (generally) improves over time.
Is this a case where something has been mathematically proven to not exist after it's been observationally confirmed?
Could be. Or not. I don't have the background to know if this paper is factually correct or not. But that's the thing about radio astronomy regarding things massively distant... you're not actually observing anything. You're taking in massive amounts of data then interpreting it. Sure, your eye does that when you look at a banana but it's not quite the same thing when you point a telescope at the far reaches of the universe and conclude "we've seen X". We've had a lot of cases recently where - for instance - some exoplanets have been found to not actually exist, because... reasons. It's all about how you interpret the data. If the math says that black holes cannot exist, perhaps you reinterpret your observational data and come to a better understanding of what you are seeing.
So you've got a part that costs X, and after two years the cost is reduced by 13%, meaning that the part now costs .87 times X. You can continue to use this part, offering either a 13% reduction in the portion of your overall price that is contributed by this part, or you can maintain overall price and reap slightly more profit. You can also decide to use two of this part to increase device capacity, and now your cost is 1.74 times the original X. You can now reduce your profits by keeping your overall price despite increased cost, or you can increase your product price and hope that purchasers absorb the change
TL;DR? 13% is a trivial cost reduction compared to doubling the cost while doubling the memory.
Or maybe it's just that the electrical engineer doing the circuit layouts was wearing a green shirt that day. Analyst Foo Kin Ublivius believes green shirts cause electrical engineers to be afraid of increasing memory quantities. Others believe memory in smartphones are made from the ground-up brain matter of orphans and restricting storage capacity allows Apple to save their orphans for more important things like assembling iPads.
Grab a cheap Mikrotik RB750 or similar and you'll find you have an out-of-the-box solution that's feature-rich, supported, and easy to use.
The "new" DownloadStatusBar addon which worked around the changes in (I think) FF29... well, it's broken again. Probably I can go Googling and find an update somewhere.
If only getting pregnant always required long, conscientious, deliberate effort, and avoiding pregnancy were the easy result of one night's drunken whim.
But that's now how it is, and this proposal won't make it so.
You say that. What if deactivating this "chip" requires a trip to the doctor? What if you get to specify the exact circumstances under which it is permitted to change modes and one of them is that you confirm you decision daily for six weeks? See, this technology could give you most of what you want, if universally installed.
An ability to perform more calculations then a human mind does not mean it will beat us.
True. But it does provide the capacity to "beat us".
First, we self assemble from readily obtainable materials out of a self regulating biosphere. Where as this machine would have to be built and maintained by our industry.
Say rather "by industry". Including the word "our" is unnecessarily specific.
Second, there are fucking billions of us. So sure.. we might be able to build some machines that are smarter then ONE person but there are again... fucking billions of us.
Great point. Except that digital entities can be duplicated with stupifying ease while us biologicals require decades of education.
Third, the machine will have its programming directed by us. It will at best be a slave of whomever paid for it to be created.
By definition, adaptive code of sufficient complexity to be considered artificially alive won't be slave to anyone.
Fourth, that programming will be directed at preforming some task where as our task is generally the propagation of our genes with everything else being some sort of weird byproduct.
Again, by the time we've got code that fits the definition of artificial intelligence, it's no longer just an expert system.
Fifth, we have hundreds of millions of years of evolution behind our programming. And I don't think any collection of programmers is going to surpass it in the next century.
Unfortunately, almost all of that evolution was literally trial-and-error, mostly error. We've got a whole bunch of DNA that is literally not expressed because it's useless. That evolution was about getting from primordial slime oozes to walking upright. The lessons "learned" in the middle about how to do photosynthesis while we were ooze-like isn't even vaguely useful to us. Also, aside from symbiosis with the AIs we're talking about here, we have nowhere to go. Evolution takes so long, a decent climate change on this planet and we're screwed where AI can iterate purposefully to solve its problems.
Eventually might there be robotic rivals to humanity? Sure... but not any time soon.
Soon? As in this afternoon? No, probably not. Soon as in within a decade? Again, probably not. But really, once we develop one instance of something truly self-programming and "intelligent", its complexity growth will be very rapid, just like all of our technologies have been. Just like... flight. The hard part was getting the first airplane off the ground. From there... space shuttles in very little time.
Insightful indeed.
As an outsider - Canadian - I see all of the things you describe. I think your theory is very likely right. Obama wasn't a twisted politician when he started. He had an agenda that was mostly in the favor of the average Joe. The problem I have with professional politics is that I realize you have to compromise to get anything done. If you want Bill A to be passed, you need the support of a lot of other people, and you may need to support Bill B to get the job done, though you don't like it.
It's selling your soul, bit by bit. In the end, some of the fights you were rallying for will cost you - and potentially the nation - more than you're willing to pay. The President isn't the Dictator-in-Chief. He's got rules to live by and the realities are that the office doesn't allow some of the sweeping changes Obama wanted... not alone.
So yeah, broken, depressed, dejected, and he probably views himself as a failure.
It's sad, really, because the nature of politics isn't his fault but his failures will be labeled as his.
"Scientists Accidentally Grow Full Head of Hair On Bald Man"
To be fair, the real article title was too long...
Scientists Accidentally Grow Full Head of Hair On Man Who Was Bald For None of The Reasons That Would Make This Discovery Interesting To A Reasonable Number of People
England != UK. This is the Dept of Education for England not Scotland, or Wales, or Northern Ireland - all of which are UK yet, strangely, they are not England.
Could you maybe make it easier on the world somehow? Maybe by going to war (again)?
I'd offer these as potential names that various factions could use:
The Kilt-Wearing Portion of the Formerly United Kingdom
Island Nation That Is Better Than Nearby Island Nation
Place That Didn't Invent Vodka Despite Plethora Of Potatoes
The Temporarily United Two Islands Which Hate Each Other But Hate That Other Island More
Why Do All Dwarves Have To Use Our Accents
We've Got Doctor Who
Yeah But Karen Gillen Is From Here
Where can I get content worth watching on that display?
Start, Programs, Microsoft Office, Excel.
Alternatively, My Pictures, then some random folder that has anything more than 2 megapixel images in it.
Or some random CAD program. Or page-layout package.
My point, simply, is that you can actually make your own content by using this monitor as a monitor. Don't worry about if it makes a very good TV... it has other, more monitor-y uses.
You have to expect that in a country where manual labor is cheap. In other countries, it makes more economic sense to automate or otherwise fix inefficiencies in the manufacturing process.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd like to highlight that there is a second side to your coin. In other countries, it makes more economic sense to automate the manufacturing process so a larger percentage of the profit is converted to profit for those employees that remain, while those who would have done the inefficient manual assembly become unemployment statistics.
Somewhere in between your statement and mine likely lies an ideal.
Not even when he was only a Commander.
Android 4.anything will do just fine. What makes this almost a joke device is the screen resolution of NotEnough x NotEnough. Seriously... 1024x768 was a reasonable desktop resolution fifteen to twenty years ago. 600 vertical pixels in 2014 is an unforgivable sin unless you're putting them on a watch or a contact lens or the head of a pin or something else uselessly small to start with.
When you take off your clothes in front of a camera you should be responsible enough to understand the consequences, just like with literally every other bad decision you can make. Love is not an excuse to be retarded.
If you want to include the word "should", then apply it where it belongs. When you take your clothes off in front of a camera, there should not be consequences beyond your partner being aroused. That the woman in the article has to worry about her "reputation" is what is wrong. Personally the only way her having taken nude pictures impacts my view of her is that I now know she's a fun-loving person comfortable being attractive and sexual. She's not ashamed or repressed or otherwise convinced that the animal she is is somehow a bad thing.
There shouldn't be a big deal over being seen naked.
I get it that we're not there societally yet. I get it that because we're not there, there are consequences. But if we're going to talk about "should", let's put it where it belongs; we all should be comfortable in our natural state. That someone posts a picture of the shape of your butt shouldn't matter any more than someone posting a sound sample of your voice or a molding of your elbow.
American Date Format :DIE Already!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry, but as a non-American I have to admit I find that date format the most comfortable. Things are likely different globally, but here people tend to say "May 10th, 2014" much more often than "the 10th of May, 2014". Adding two bonus words so you can satisfy some "most granular to least granular" fetish doesn't fit.
For instance, the catastrophe that happened in the US over a decade ago is called "September 11th", not "the 11th of September".
Frankly I'd be okay with a compromise... 10(5)14 is May 10th, 2014 or the 10th of May, 2014. But as long as everyone insists on using commas, DMY will never have my vote.
I generally dislike the meme, but I mis-read this as The MILFOS Project.
Was it even ever popular?
I agree. This is a moment where marketing-speak masks the truth. The word they're using - demand - isn't appropriate. There was never and demand for Blu-Ray. What did exist to some degree was willingness to buy. These are not the same thing.
Demand stems from a need to strong desire. "If only someone would make a platter with higher resolution and more intrusive DRM, I'd give my left nut." That's demand. On the other hand, "I heard about this new gizmo with 1080p and intrusive DRM, and it turns out I've got money burning a hole in my pocket so I'm going to go get me one!" That's willingness-to-buy.
Turns out that to a certain degree other products are what there is demand for. Things like streaming video. Now that the products that are in demand actually exist, it turns out willingness-to-buy BluRay is shrinking.
Go figure.
Don't buy their products. Boycott.
People keep suggesting things like this.
Sony puts a rootkit on a CD? Boycott. Apple tells you you're holding your iPhone wrong? Boycott.
Problem is it's nonsense. A boycott is the fiscal equivalence of silence. Your favorite restaurant changes the way they make ? Boycott is the equivalent of "go somewhere else." Well, that sucks. How about "tell the manager/owner you don't like the new recipe"? Try communicating that you're unhappy and why with them. Otherwise your absence means nothing. It's statistically lost in seasonal variance, for instance.
So, for this, send a letter to the company explaining your problem. Send them a "do not like" letter, basically. Boycott alone is meaningless.
No, no, you missed it... a homeless guy makes a dubious claim. Seriously, a guy who has been homeless for six years is the basis for this thing, with him concluding that technology is desensitizing non-homeless.
It's an even bigger chunk of turd than you thought. This guy isn't a long-time homeless person who might plausibly be able to compare today to the golden yesteryear of homelessness. He doesn't provide anything even resembling evidence, just "you know, e-mail makes people lose their empathy".
I call bullshit. Being homeless makes you notice that people are today - and always have been - insensitive to the plight of the homeless, on average. This dude just never noticed how homeless are treated six years ago when he had a mother, a wife, a house, and a rip-roaring drug habit.
Yes, when amalgam fillings are first placed you are exposed to some mercury vapor.
Yes, but when you die, some of the mercury is always missing. Where did it go? Did it just vanish into the aether? Or was it released from your tooth with hot beverages? I love a hot cup of coffee with extra mercury in the morning, every morning, for the rest of my life. With my 11 silver fillings.
Amalgam is a very durable
It's not. It always loses mercury.
Just because that's an interesting assertion, I'd be interested in the required citation.