A person is a irresponsible admin if they don't know the entire policy for any RBL they use. The fact that you used them without knowing if they have a clear removal strategy is irresponsible, as is anyone else who uses them.
Seems like from the box there is an implied right to connect to the servers. Sounds like he's being stymied by customer support when legally in the right. I don't think he'll get out of the customer support department without a legal notice
This is a good thing for companies to practice from a profit point of view. Its the process that makes the most money. It also means that people who can not afford to pay a higher price (e.g. students, the elderly) can get software/movie tickets at something they can afford.
I understand that you're "not supposed to", and yes, it is illegal. I'm saying women are going to get the short end of the stick because of it though. I am not personally going to do it, but I know that people will. You're not going to change that, and I'm not sure if it should be change. I think the law should.
You're talking about people who have been working 80 hours a week for years. These are, by and large, not people with young kids. These are the people who have had to move any possible family plans out into the future when they're past being junior faculty. My guess is that these are not the sort of people at your work.
Yup, I know, that's why I cited examples of stockbrokers, etc. I KNOW my workplace is well suited to that sort of life, just as I know my friend's workplace (a video game company) doesn't sound like a place a primary caregiver could work. The company shouldn't have to change their business so any employee can do that career and be a primary caregiver of a child.
>> I would contend both of us would be professionally obligated to take B. >In the U.S., asking about family planning during a job interview is illegal for exactly that reason.
The law is trying to get around something: the fact that women will be assumed to be more likely to be the primary caregiver of children if you cannot ask. The law is disadvantageous to women. If you can ask about being a primary caregiver, you can make intellegent descisions, rather than just guessing on sex and age like employers do now. I'm not saying "NO REGULATION" just more sophisticated knowledge based regulation rather than coarse rules we have today.
While both probably contribute, my personal experience tells me that it's mainly sexism: the majority of female scientists who I know, tenured or un-tenured, don't have kids, and those who want kids have made the decision to wait until they get tenure.
This is something I strongly disagree with. An example from work:
We can't have a meeting at 2. I have to get my kid from school.
At my place of work, this sort of comment is widely accepted as a valid excuse for not having a meeting. Which is one of the reasons I love working here, as I see it being a good place for me to be a good and involved father while carrying on interesting work. (BTW, that is a comment I've heard from both men and women here).
I think that what it comes down to is this: when you have two equally qualified job candidates, you're more likely to hire the one that most reminds you of you. Because hiring and tenure committees are still male-dominated, the male candidate benefits from this. However, as the number of women who are tenured increases, I expect this will become less of a factor.
(Warning, generalization coming on) There are some fields where being the primary caretaker of a child is incompatable with the job. I'm thinking video game programmer and entry level broker as two easy example where a person cannot be the primary caretaker of a child and reasonably hold themselves to the same standards as their peers, simply because they can't easily work irregular and long hours like these positions require. This may or may not apply to your field (although I'm curious, as my SO is 4 months from a Neuro degree).
A thought experiment: You and I are appointed to a hireing commitee.
We have two candidates who are essentially identical and we have one seat available for them
The only difference is: A is 65% likely to become a primary caregiver of a child within 7 years B is 10% likely to become a primary caregiver of a child within 7 years
I would contend both of us would be professionally obligated to take B.
I am not stating that women SHOULD be the primary caretaker of their children/families, but they often are. I do not have children yet, but my personality and skillset are well suited to being the primary caretaker. The libertarian streak in me says companies shouldn't have to accomodate primary caretakers if they aren't suited to. However, women who want those positions shouldn't accept mates that require them to be primary caregivers.
Until employers can and do get accurate numbers on this based on non-sex factors (such as interviews on life plans, etc), then I would have to say that they're only doing their job, just like the judge does in family court when deciding custody in divorce, more often giving it to women, who statistically have less time-intensive jobs. Both are screwed up, but the current/PC client is not conducive to healthy change, only dumb quota systems.
I think I understand what your resources are, and I think I can see what you should do.
Firstly, I think you are short 1 camera, 1 Mic and one computer. You might be able to do without the extra computer.
If you can get the extra computer and mic, set the emcee up in one pub with the camera and mic. Set up one further mic and camera in that pub, and a mic and camera in each of the other two pubs.
Use a piece of video conferencing software that can 1> Tile multiple connections and 2> show that view, or one large view of who has the "floor". There are tons for both windows and linux. Also make sure it can take commands interactively.
For the buzzers, use video game controllers. There are several that can output to the screen serially. Get one of those. On linux, the app that displays them is called "joytest".
Now you run an IRC server on one of the computers. Then you write an expect (why expect? because its designed for this sort of thing, and it takes 5 minutes to learn[expect.nist.gov]) script that monitors the irc channel. Expect is a language designed for scripting interactive programs like telnet, ftp, bots, lynx, etc.
Before the emcee asks a question, he types a command like "question". This will tell the expect script watching the irc session to tell each client of videoconfercing software to set to a view of him speaking. When he's done, he can type "everyone" and the script will tile the screen again. When a the first person pushes the buzzer, it will give the floor to that pub. Depending on how complex you wish to get your rules for missed questions, this could get much more sophisticated quickly. Then the emcee can type "everyone" or something like that and the expect script can then set the video conference back to tiled mode while you play music waiting for the next question.
If you'd like help with this, I've used all of the above before, and can help. I do this sort of thing at work:o). Reply here with a way to contact you and I'll get back to you.
Beef isn't packed in there. Veal is. That's why its so tasty and tender without lots of cooking: veal is what happens when you take the cow analog of the lazy fat kid who sits on the couch playing xbox all day long and serve him up for dinner. With parmesan.
I don't really care how they "make" the animals. I don't eat meat (but will cook it if asked), but I use all sorts of products from them and don't give a crap about them. I like the idea of lab-crafted meat (europeans research stuff in this area), but only because of the lower energy requirements therefore cost, not any "animal rights" issues.
And as far as "investing" in biodeisel, look who owns the commercial rights to Uni of New Hampshire's biodiesel research program. I have my bet on them putting out something that will make some bank, perhaps an essential patent. (Why New Hampshire? My personal theory is Vermont has its valuable liquid, and New Hampshire is envious).
Btw, it seems you grew up near a range. Where was that, and where are you heading off for grad school?
"As" isn't poisioning anyone, just like the waste from Nuke plants isn't. "As" is *harder* to get rid of than "U" is the point, not that it's killing people. My case is that Nuke is Better than Photovoltaic Cells, not that either will kill or not kill people.
And while a production system with no waste is "beautiful" from an engineering perspective, its not from an economic perspective. I think you'd be impressed if you went through a plant design with an engineer (or engineering student) about how they use all the heat and byproducts. Very little is wasted as is. Pound for Pound they may waste less, because I'd bet many of the fun chemicals *weren't* used from the buffalo, just washed off before cooking, or destroyed and turned into smoke via cooking.
And about the feed stat: http://www.openi.co.uk/h031222.htm
You can get more from table 17 of http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/Agoutlook /AOT ables/
There are a LOT of animals that don't move at all if being raised for food (fowl, veal)
Biodiesel won't be profitable while created from soy IMO. I think they're going to need to get the algae route working, and when they do, it will rock out. I predict it first actually taking hold at industrial plants, where they can throw a "refinery" in plant as part of their production line. While its limited to oil and soy, I think its not going to get off the ground.
Its an efficency thing, mac. http://earthsci.org/energy/solar/page3.html Talks about how As (arensic) is used in solar cells.
My real beef is with solar cells. They may not yeild a net gain of energy due to their low production efficency and their low running effienciency. They looked promising for like 4 minutes in the 70's, but they lose economically and from an engineering prospective nowadays. Think of them as "Messy to create batteries" and you have a better understanding of how they're useful. Need a calculator? No problem. Power a house? Not worth it. ---
Your dairy farm example is an example of efficent plant design.
Efficent plant design is ALWAYS a concern of the industrialists of the country. If you look at major engineering colleges, you will find a discipline called "Chemical Engineering". This is the study of making plants (chemical, not tasty salad ingerdiants) as profitable as possible. However, industrialists are not interested in promoting research that does not have term profit for them or and is not in their core business. When Biodiesel can be created from algae and a couple tanks, you BET every piece of nutrative waste coming out of every plant in America will pump that stuff out and use it themselves or sell their extra on a surplus exchange.
---
And the fact it can "also provide for a small town" is not necessarily a great thing. That's a LOT of excess power that takes alot of conditioning to make usable. You can't just pump electicity into the power grid. Actually, the US power grid is SCARY with how non-resistant it is to all sorts of changes and loads. Remember the Blackout last year? That's REALLY easy to cause again. They'd do better to build something like an ore processing plant nearby and use that electricity directly rather than try to put the excess on-grid. Its a good thing terrorists don't usually have electrical engineering degree's, otherwise the US would be fucked.
BTW, most of the grain in the US is for feed animals. Stop eating them, and advocate that, and the landmass will be freed up for windmills and soy (for biodiseil). However I think that's a dumb reason to stop eating meat.
I am currently putting in the grad app to study Eletric Power so I'm definitly interested.
That's not very space efficent for energy produced until you get to BIG installations. And you need to have clear skies lots of the time.
So you need clear skies and wide open spaces. Sounds like there are going to be 0 people and 0 use for that generation capacity, so then you take another percentage off the top to move the voltage.
Therefore solar towers suck too, unless you're stuck in the desert.
Arsenic IS a waste product of the process that makes solar cells. As is selenium. Just like uranium, you don't want these highly poisionous, yet elemental, substances sitting around. And worse than uranium, there is no easy process to decompose them, ever (where radioactive compounds can be turned into inert compounds via nuclear reations).
The ranch is a cool idea, but it's not scalable to solve the country's problem.
And windy places that are near peoeple are often valuable and pretty places, and so people fight tooth and nail to keep them off.
I miss kuro5hins spell checker and format defaults.
Solor [sic] power
The PERMENANT arsnic and other compounds from creating cells is much worse for the envioronment than any radioactive waste.
Wind power
Not alot of sites. Towers are dangerous. Towers are fought by local landownders
Hydroelectric power
Dams are the most environmentally unfriendly thing ever. And they cause floods.
BioChemical power
Um....Like petoleum?
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, it sounded like you too did use MAPS.
I'm not saying the group added to the RBL was irresponsible. I'm saying all the the people who use MAPS to put together their blacklist are.
A person is a irresponsible admin if they don't know the entire policy for any RBL they use. The fact that you used them without knowing if they have a clear removal strategy is irresponsible, as is anyone else who uses them.
General Relativity != Special Relativity Special was discovered first and is more specific. General Reletivity is not consistant with QM.
ServSafe used to be called TIPS
CompUSA, of course.
Georgia Tech (I can see the reactor from the windows of my office building)
Incorrect, there are certain implied rights. That's why there is a need to disclaim they do not apply for certain products in certain jurisdictions.
Seems like from the box there is an implied right to connect to the servers. Sounds like he's being stymied by customer support when legally in the right. I don't think he'll get out of the customer support department without a legal notice
What UNIX based operating systems have you used in the last couple years, for how long did you use them, and for what purpose?
This is called "Market Segmentation".
This is a good thing for companies to practice from a profit point of view. Its the process that makes the most money. It also means that people who can not afford to pay a higher price (e.g. students, the elderly) can get software/movie tickets at something they can afford.
Joel Spolsky wrote about it here.
Anyone managed to find the replacement list for the DVD's? It says you can switch your copies for other movies
I understand that you're "not supposed to", and yes, it is illegal. I'm saying women are going to get the short end of the stick because of it though. I am not personally going to do it, but I know that people will. You're not going to change that, and I'm not sure if it should be change. I think the law should.
You're talking about people who have been working 80 hours a week for years. These are, by and large, not people with young kids. These are the people who have had to move any possible family plans out into the future when they're past being junior faculty. My guess is that these are not the sort of people at your work.
Yup, I know, that's why I cited examples of stockbrokers, etc. I KNOW my workplace is well suited to that sort of life, just as I know my friend's workplace (a video game company) doesn't sound like a place a primary caregiver could work. The company shouldn't have to change their business so any employee can do that career and be a primary caregiver of a child.
>> I would contend both of us would be professionally obligated to take B.
>In the U.S., asking about family planning during a job interview is illegal for exactly that reason.
The law is trying to get around something: the fact that women will be assumed to be more likely to be the primary caregiver of children if you cannot ask. The law is disadvantageous to women. If you can ask about being a primary caregiver, you can make intellegent descisions, rather than just guessing on sex and age like employers do now. I'm not saying "NO REGULATION" just more sophisticated knowledge based regulation rather than coarse rules we have today.
While both probably contribute, my personal experience tells me that it's mainly sexism: the majority of female scientists who I know, tenured or un-tenured, don't have kids, and those who want kids have made the decision to wait until they get tenure.
This is something I strongly disagree with. An example from work:
We can't have a meeting at 2. I have to get my kid from school.
At my place of work, this sort of comment is widely accepted as a valid excuse for not having a meeting. Which is one of the reasons I love working here, as I see it being a good place for me to be a good and involved father while carrying on interesting work. (BTW, that is a comment I've heard from both men and women here).
I think that what it comes down to is this: when you have two equally qualified job candidates, you're more likely to hire the one that most reminds you of you. Because hiring and tenure committees are still male-dominated, the male candidate benefits from this. However, as the number of women who are tenured increases, I expect this will become less of a factor.
(Warning, generalization coming on) There are some fields where being the primary caretaker of a child is incompatable with the job. I'm thinking video game programmer and entry level broker as two easy example where a person cannot be the primary caretaker of a child and reasonably hold themselves to the same standards as their peers, simply because they can't easily work irregular and long hours like these positions require. This may or may not apply to your field (although I'm curious, as my SO is 4 months from a Neuro degree).
A thought experiment:
You and I are appointed to a hireing commitee.
We have two candidates who are essentially identical and we have one seat available for them
The only difference is:
A is 65% likely to become a primary caregiver of a child within 7 years
B is 10% likely to become a primary caregiver of a child within 7 years
I would contend both of us would be professionally obligated to take B.
I am not stating that women SHOULD be the primary caretaker of their children/families, but they often are. I do not have children yet, but my personality and skillset are well suited to being the primary caretaker. The libertarian streak in me says companies shouldn't have to accomodate primary caretakers if they aren't suited to. However, women who want those positions shouldn't accept mates that require them to be primary caregivers.
Until employers can and do get accurate numbers on this based on non-sex factors (such as interviews on life plans, etc), then I would have to say that they're only doing their job, just like the judge does in family court when deciding custody in divorce, more often giving it to women, who statistically have less time-intensive jobs. Both are screwed up, but the current/PC client is not conducive to healthy change, only dumb quota systems.
Why do we have to decrease CO2?
Couldn't we just increase particulate emissons and be done with it already?
I know she'd like the first one, and I'd bet the computer at her house doesn't have the nicest graphics card, although its only a year or so old.
What do you think? She's bored at home and this would help alot.
I think I understand what your resources are, and I think I can see what you should do.
:o). Reply here with a way to contact you and I'll get back to you.
Firstly, I think you are short 1 camera, 1 Mic and one computer. You might be able to do without the extra computer.
If you can get the extra computer and mic, set the emcee up in one pub with the camera and mic. Set up one further mic and camera in that pub, and a mic and camera in each of the other two pubs.
Use a piece of video conferencing software that can 1> Tile multiple connections and 2> show that view, or one large view of who has the "floor". There are tons for both windows and linux. Also make sure it can take commands interactively.
For the buzzers, use video game controllers. There are several that can output to the screen serially. Get one of those. On linux, the app that displays them is called "joytest".
Now you run an IRC server on one of the computers. Then you write an expect (why expect? because its designed for this sort of thing, and it takes 5 minutes to learn[expect.nist.gov]) script that monitors the irc channel. Expect is a language designed for scripting interactive programs like telnet, ftp, bots, lynx, etc.
Before the emcee asks a question, he types a command like "question". This will tell the expect script watching the irc session to tell each client of videoconfercing software to set to a view of him speaking. When he's done, he can type "everyone" and the script will tile the screen again. When a the first person pushes the buzzer, it will give the floor to that pub. Depending on how complex you wish to get your rules for missed questions, this could get much more sophisticated quickly. Then the emcee can type "everyone" or something like that and the expect script can then set the video conference back to tiled mode while you play music waiting for the next question.
If you'd like help with this, I've used all of the above before, and can help. I do this sort of thing at work
Its a blast and tax freetacular all the way if you do it the right way
Beef isn't packed in there. Veal is. That's why its so tasty and tender without lots of cooking: veal is what happens when you take the cow analog of the lazy fat kid who sits on the couch playing xbox all day long and serve him up for dinner. With parmesan.
l pr oduction.html
http://www.ontarioveal.on.ca/all_about_veal/vea
I don't really care how they "make" the animals. I don't eat meat (but will cook it if asked), but I use all sorts of products from them and don't give a crap about them. I like the idea of lab-crafted meat (europeans research stuff in this area), but only because of the lower energy requirements therefore cost, not any "animal rights" issues.
And as far as "investing" in biodeisel, look who owns the commercial rights to Uni of New Hampshire's biodiesel research program. I have my bet on them putting out something that will make some bank, perhaps an essential patent. (Why New Hampshire? My personal theory is Vermont has its valuable liquid, and New Hampshire is envious).
Btw, it seems you grew up near a range. Where was that, and where are you heading off for grad school?
"As" isn't poisioning anyone, just like the waste from Nuke plants isn't. "As" is *harder* to get rid of than "U" is the point, not that it's killing people. My case is that Nuke is Better than Photovoltaic Cells, not that either will kill or not kill people.
k /AOT ables/
And while a production system with no waste is "beautiful" from an engineering perspective, its not from an economic perspective. I think you'd be impressed if you went through a plant design with an engineer (or engineering student) about how they use all the heat and byproducts. Very little is wasted as is. Pound for Pound they may waste less, because I'd bet many of the fun chemicals *weren't* used from the buffalo, just washed off before cooking, or destroyed and turned into smoke via cooking.
And about the feed stat:
http://www.openi.co.uk/h031222.htm
You can get more from table 17 of
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/Agoutloo
There are a LOT of animals that don't move at all if being raised for food (fowl, veal)
Biodiesel won't be profitable while created from soy IMO. I think they're going to need to get the algae route working, and when they do, it will rock out. I predict it first actually taking hold at industrial plants, where they can throw a "refinery" in plant as part of their production line. While its limited to oil and soy, I think its not going to get off the ground.
Its an efficency thing, mac.
http://earthsci.org/energy/solar/page3.html
Talks about how As (arensic) is used in solar cells.
My real beef is with solar cells. They may not yeild a net gain of energy due to their low production efficency and their low running effienciency. They looked promising for like 4 minutes in the 70's, but they lose economically and from an engineering prospective nowadays. Think of them as "Messy to create batteries" and you have a better understanding of how they're useful. Need a calculator? No problem. Power a house? Not worth it.
---
Your dairy farm example is an example of efficent plant design.
Efficent plant design is ALWAYS a concern of the industrialists of the country. If you look at major engineering colleges, you will find a discipline called "Chemical Engineering". This is the study of making plants (chemical, not tasty salad ingerdiants) as profitable as possible. However, industrialists are not interested in promoting research that does not have term profit for them or and is not in their core business. When Biodiesel can be created from algae and a couple tanks, you BET every piece of nutrative waste coming out of every plant in America will pump that stuff out and use it themselves or sell their extra on a surplus exchange.
---
And the fact it can "also provide for a small town" is not necessarily a great thing. That's a LOT of excess power that takes alot of conditioning to make usable. You can't just pump electicity into the power grid. Actually, the US power grid is SCARY with how non-resistant it is to all sorts of changes and loads. Remember the Blackout last year? That's REALLY easy to cause again. They'd do better to build something like an ore processing plant nearby and use that electricity directly rather than try to put the excess on-grid. Its a good thing terrorists don't usually have electrical engineering degree's, otherwise the US would be fucked.
BTW, most of the grain in the US is for feed animals. Stop eating them, and advocate that, and the landmass will be freed up for windmills and soy (for biodiseil). However I think that's a dumb reason to stop eating meat.
I am currently putting in the grad app to study Eletric Power so I'm definitly interested.
That's not very space efficent for energy produced until you get to BIG installations. And you need to have clear skies lots of the time.
So you need clear skies and wide open spaces. Sounds like there are going to be 0 people and 0 use for that generation capacity, so then you take another percentage off the top to move the voltage.
Therefore solar towers suck too, unless you're stuck in the desert.
Arsenic IS a waste product of the process that makes solar cells. As is selenium. Just like uranium, you don't want these highly poisionous, yet elemental, substances sitting around. And worse than uranium, there is no easy process to decompose them, ever (where radioactive compounds can be turned into inert compounds via nuclear reations).
The ranch is a cool idea, but it's not scalable to solve the country's problem.
And windy places that are near peoeple are often valuable and pretty places, and so people fight tooth and nail to keep them off.
I miss kuro5hins spell checker and format defaults.
Solor [sic] power The PERMENANT arsnic and other compounds from creating cells is much worse for the envioronment than any radioactive waste. Wind power Not alot of sites. Towers are dangerous. Towers are fought by local landownders Hydroelectric power Dams are the most environmentally unfriendly thing ever. And they cause floods. BioChemical power Um....Like petoleum?
You asshat's didn't read that this is only for picking up extras.