"Most importantly, humanity survived higher temperatures in the past."
But there were much less of us and the available food to human ratio was at least POTENTIALLY better for humans during the Roman period... Not much we can do for 2 or 3 billion people of crops burn or flood.
"The republicans in the senate have made confirming appointments nearly impossible and have confirmed fewer of Obama's appointees than any other previous senate."
Really? The senate had a supra majority on Obama's side and could push ANYTHING through for a healthy chunk of the "last 4 years".
That's a good question. I'd lean on the "Senate is stronger" of the two houses side -- so if that looks like it's swapping to the "R"s I'll probably vote for myself or a 3rd candidate for pres. I can't see myself voting for Obama after all the shenanigans. Too many Czars -- too many executive orders, too many bogus" recess appointments and a complete lack of willingness to work with the other party after mid-term elections slapped him down. THAT stuff (the doubling down on persevered power grabs that obviously people don't like) freaks me out as someone who believes in the separation of power.
I was happy that Clinton was in office when congress Reps took control of congress. I was happy Bush was in office when the Dems took over congress. Both instances stopped some pretty whacked spending plans and actually got *SOME* reforms pushed through -- and the system worked the way it was DESIGNED to -- SLOW AND DELIBERATE AND FILLED WITH COMPROMISE.
If we end up with Obama for another 4 years, I hope to god we have a strong republican house and senate. One willing to push for constitutional challenges on executive orders -- and that maybe -- just MAYBE -- he'll tilt right and COMPROMISE if TWO elections put a more conservative slant to our legislature.
"as bad as O is, it would be worse with republicans in charge. I truly do believe that."
I don't doubt you do believe that. The problem is it's 'O' that's done it... not a "republican". There's been more shenanigans from the "D"s (because they had total control for two years) with regards to both executive and legislative maneuvering than I can recall ever.
Is it because the Dems are bad? No. It's because they had total and supra majority control.
My vote for president as a rule of thumb is for the candidate who is of the OPPOSITE party of whoever controls congress. Some of our best and most productive years as a nation have been when the two branches are in opposite party control.
It is a minor thing. But it's an EXTRA thing. You need to make sure the step is done in addition to mass imaging.
"Either way all the major suppliers are going that direction so you'll have to face down the UEFI bios setting sooner or later."
I totally agree -- and I hear the guys in charge of deployment groan about it. Then again, I heard them groan about the issues of flipping from win2k to xp. And in a shop as large as ours, we actually *STILL* find a few win2k boxes.
"Also I haven't seen a BIOS reset on it's own since the 90s"
I've seen it happen at least 5-10 times a year -- and usually at remote sites (right after a power outage mostly, but sometimes just 'because'). That's mostly because there's a few thousand PCs in our division alone. I'm a DBA with a specialty in generating/creating custom statistical medical reports for our clients and research studies (as well as custom programming projects) but because *IM* the only "tech" within 100 miles, I end up hoofing it out in the field for stuff like this around my area. I'm also one of the few guys who can walk almost ANYBODY through ANYTHING and end up fielding some "way out there" calls for remote sites because the help-desk fails and $corp_overlords don't want to send out a tech if they can avoid it -- but even *I* have difficulty talking someone through bios changes over the phone.
"Sorry for the hasty comment earlier."
You sir are a gentleman. I likewise apologize for my short fuse. I could/should have responded better. A bad day combined with an expectation of typical "slashdot" noise (not an excuse -- just background).
"Me thinks you don't understand mass deployments."
Me thinks you make bad assumptions based on poor reading habits.
"The help desk would never have to walk someone though modifying the BIOS because the computer would never be deployed if it wasn't changed before hand."
Me further thinks you didn't read my post very well (re: bios settings getting lost).
"We just made sure to make the changes as we unboxed and prepped them."
Me thinks I was right that you didn't read my post very well (re: updating new deployment SOP and making sure it's followed).
I certainly hope you read your employer's SOPs better than you read slashdot posts.... I'm saying the "groans" and lack of "back slaps" encountered in TFA would be expected in a big shop...
"You're really missing the point. He's not patting himself on the back (much). He's wondering why nobody he works with seems even to want to adapt to changing tech. He KNOWS it was an easy fix, and the fact that nobody else could get it is boggling his brain."
It's not as simple as that. If you've a shop with thousands of workstations deployed and you add another point of failure (simple bios setting in the TFA's example) on PCs that may be deployed for years, you've got yet ANOTHER thing that can go wrong if the bios settings get lost. I'd like to see $help_desk walk someone through changing the bios settings. That machine is going to need a visit from a $pendy tech. And, oh yeah -- update the SOP for new PC deployment and make sure everyone signs off and follows it.
In a SMALL shop, this isn't really a problem. It's not unlikely that there's as many different hardware flavors as there are total PCs. But in a LARGE shop, PC UNIFORMITY saves time and money.
It's enough to justify the groans from his co-workers...
Do you have family here? Will you be able to provide for yourself when you arrive? Of not, then you are right. You are not wanted. At least not wanted to get here quickly. We let in over 1.3 million people a year. How many people does your home country see immigrate there per year?
I hate to be cold -- but explain to me what SHOULD we do? Let in 3 billion all at once? Including you? How would your country react to 3 billion people knocking on its door?
"it is THAT terrible. with no family connection in the US and with an advanced degree, you could wait YEARS to get a green card. without a degree, you would have to wait decades."
Yes. And when I go to a REAL popular movie, I wait in a long line, too. THAT is the point. Do we import poverty? Because if we just open the flood gates what's too keep the US from economic collapse?
"Didn't Obama just say that he won't enforce illegal immigration laws on young people? Picking and choosing."
And going a step further and providing them with work visa's. The first is bad enough -- failing to enforce the laws for which his branch is responsible -- but to create law by allowing them work visas is just a flipping scary precedent.
"Andrew Jackson was actually acting on a bill in the books of Congress."
It's not that simple. Laws passed in Georgia which were (and are) unconstitutional lead directly to the Treaty of New Ectota -- because Jackson refused to prevent Georgia from continuing to enforce unconstitutional laws effectively ignoring the SCOTUS.
"He didn't just say "I'm going to do this against everyone's wishes"."
No... he said "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it" with regards to SCOTUS declaring those laws unconstitutional. Which effectively let Georgia do terrible things.
"If only "just signing the guestbook" was as simple as it sounds. Go look up the actual process and you'll find out really quick why some people avoid the legal route: It's loaded with bureaucratic red tape & bullshit and, in the cases of some key foreign nations that supply many of our legals and illegals, chocked full of corruption right down to the bottom level of officials."
Because we don't allow over 1 million people a year to immigrate to the US legally, right? Add to that the number of people who violate US sovereignty and immigration laws and births. You end up with a pretty damn big number every flipping year.
So, yes, there's a huge bureaucratic process. My wife and her family with through that process. Started in 1985 and they were in the US 1987. My wife became a citizen in the mid 90's. It's not THAT terrible.
The system *IS* set up to make it difficult for people with no support system or skills to move here. It's that way by design. Why would it or should it be any other way?
"The Supreme Court TRIED to stop that practice by issuing decisions that the Indians did not need to move, but the slave-owning Democrats who were in charge (like Andrew Jackson) decided the Supreme Court can shutup, and moves the Indians anyway."
And this is an example of why the executive branch cannot and should not decide WHAT laws to to enforce a la cart. Imagine if Eisenhower decided he didn't like Brown v Board of Education (and he didn't) and wouldn't enforce it. These are dangers waters to wade...
Didn't work for my son,though. He just wasn't interested. But he did go for Harry Potter. I read the first 5 books to him. He re-read those on his own -- then completed the series as it came out.
So, I left him alone to find is own interests. Around age 11 he picked up a copy of Percy Jackson. He ate up the entire series. Turns out he has the same "useless superpower" that I have -- the ability to read freakishly fast. He's now getting ready to turn 13 and has read through most of my older Heinleins (I'm not ready to try to explain to my wife Stranger, Time enough for Love, etc... so those are off limits), Asimovs and all my old "serials" (Simon Hawke, Robert Asprin, etc).
I think the best advice is to READ to your kids. Get them interested. Read what they like. And if you can, Be EMOTIVE when you read.
As a side note, I used to end an evening with a cliff-hanger. Right smack dab in the middle of the chapter there'd be something like "... and then there was a BANG! Ok... We're done for tonight". Drove my son insane. Made him seek out the book and read ahead.
But, huge GOBS of stuff that can float a REALLY long time *HASN'T* been around that long. MAYBE a tree uprooted might make it across the pacific... or maybe it would be gobbled up or weighted down by stuff in the water before it made it across the ocean.
But a weather treated pier? Boats? Weather treated lumber for homes? Plastics? I'd think those might be more likely to make it across the ocean.
You are right. There is. But it's a private college -- and likely suffer far less from this than a public university. And that's not the ONLY reason. What happened between then and now? Oh yeah! Government funded student loans and government admission requirements! Think that didn't drive up the price?
"It really is a mystery."
Not so much. When the market was more "free", tuition at Harvard was cheaper (per your example). Toss in government involvement (ease of student loans, regulate admissions standards for example) and get a FLOOD of applicants they can't POSSIBLY take who can ALL FIND the money SOMEWHERE -- the price will go up. It's not so mysterious. Not saying that SOME government regulation isn't in order -- but what was implemented has made the cost of a college education terribly expensive.
"If the government REALLY "got in the middle", this wouldn't be a problem in the first place since public colleges and universities would be dirt cheap or even free, as they are in most other OECD countries."
Because buildings are free. Because teachers work for free. Because libraries are free...
It's really nice these "OCED countries" can afford such things -- since most of them have their military security supplemented by US tax dollars either directly, or indirectly.
"Perhaps the GOP-dominated Congress will soon suggest"...
Congress has been DNC dominated from what? 2008 until 2010? STRONGLY dominated? And the GOP had slight majorities before then... This report is from 2007 with just a recent update...
Your dig at the GOP just doesn't sound reasonable...
The "Global Warming Alarmists" will say it's a plot to prevent the study of of anthropogenic climate change by the "Deniers" and prove just how bad it is.
And the "Deniers" will say it's a plot to keep the "Alarmists" evil lie from coming to light.
"but that in no way makes them 'work better'. =) "
I don't know... just off the top of my head, I'd say it keeps the cards from shaking (or maybe a combination of heat/cooling related expansion/contraction of the metal on the contacts) and possibly losing a connection to the motherboard over time -- or during an earthquake for example. Or maybe just a big truck going down the street one too many times.
I'd feel a lot more "warm" and "fuzzy" knowing cards are not only attached to the motherboard, but stabilized by the chassis.
"We want to force them to comply with the will of the majority. And frankly, most of the laws of society exists to force people who lack empathy and benevolence to comply under penalty of imprisonment."
Are you talking about the US? Because that is nearly the opposite of what our founders intended.
You may want to look up "liberty" and what it meant to our founders...
Slashdot Mirror
"But other areas will no doubt become better for growing at the same time."
Absolutely true. But will they be able to be cultivated fast enough? Even if the climate is good for agriculture, will the SOIL?
Even these issues can be addressed, but how fast? With 6+ billion people on the planet, we don't have much margin for error.
New Horizons should be named the "Ralphie Probe"?
"Most importantly, humanity survived higher temperatures in the past."
But there were much less of us and the available food to human ratio was at least POTENTIALLY better for humans during the Roman period... Not much we can do for 2 or 3 billion people of crops burn or flood.
BTW, I'm a skeptic on AGW...
"The republicans in the senate have made confirming appointments nearly impossible and have confirmed fewer of Obama's appointees than any other previous senate."
Really? The senate had a supra majority on Obama's side and could push ANYTHING through for a healthy chunk of the "last 4 years".
That's a good question. I'd lean on the "Senate is stronger" of the two houses side -- so if that looks like it's swapping to the "R"s I'll probably vote for myself or a 3rd candidate for pres. I can't see myself voting for Obama after all the shenanigans. Too many Czars -- too many executive orders, too many bogus" recess appointments and a complete lack of willingness to work with the other party after mid-term elections slapped him down. THAT stuff (the doubling down on persevered power grabs that obviously people don't like) freaks me out as someone who believes in the separation of power.
I was happy that Clinton was in office when congress Reps took control of congress. I was happy Bush was in office when the Dems took over congress. Both instances stopped some pretty whacked spending plans and actually got *SOME* reforms pushed through -- and the system worked the way it was DESIGNED to -- SLOW AND DELIBERATE AND FILLED WITH COMPROMISE.
If we end up with Obama for another 4 years, I hope to god we have a strong republican house and senate. One willing to push for constitutional challenges on executive orders -- and that maybe -- just MAYBE -- he'll tilt right and COMPROMISE if TWO elections put a more conservative slant to our legislature.
"as bad as O is, it would be worse with republicans in charge. I truly do believe that."
I don't doubt you do believe that. The problem is it's 'O' that's done it... not a "republican". There's been more shenanigans from the "D"s (because they had total control for two years) with regards to both executive and legislative maneuvering than I can recall ever.
Is it because the Dems are bad? No. It's because they had total and supra majority control.
My vote for president as a rule of thumb is for the candidate who is of the OPPOSITE party of whoever controls congress. Some of our best and most productive years as a nation have been when the two branches are in opposite party control.
Who needs "checks and balances"...
"but it seems like a minor thing to me"
It is a minor thing. But it's an EXTRA thing. You need to make sure the step is done in addition to mass imaging.
"Either way all the major suppliers are going that direction so you'll have to face down the UEFI bios setting sooner or later."
I totally agree -- and I hear the guys in charge of deployment groan about it. Then again, I heard them groan about the issues of flipping from win2k to xp. And in a shop as large as ours, we actually *STILL* find a few win2k boxes.
"Also I haven't seen a BIOS reset on it's own since the 90s"
I've seen it happen at least 5-10 times a year -- and usually at remote sites (right after a power outage mostly, but sometimes just 'because'). That's mostly because there's a few thousand PCs in our division alone. I'm a DBA with a specialty in generating/creating custom statistical medical reports for our clients and research studies (as well as custom programming projects) but because *IM* the only "tech" within 100 miles, I end up hoofing it out in the field for stuff like this around my area. I'm also one of the few guys who can walk almost ANYBODY through ANYTHING and end up fielding some "way out there" calls for remote sites because the help-desk fails and $corp_overlords don't want to send out a tech if they can avoid it -- but even *I* have difficulty talking someone through bios changes over the phone.
"Sorry for the hasty comment earlier."
You sir are a gentleman. I likewise apologize for my short fuse. I could/should have responded better. A bad day combined with an expectation of typical "slashdot" noise (not an excuse -- just background).
"Me thinks you don't understand mass deployments."
Me thinks you make bad assumptions based on poor reading habits.
"The help desk would never have to walk someone though modifying the BIOS because the computer would never be deployed if it wasn't changed before hand."
Me further thinks you didn't read my post very well (re: bios settings getting lost).
"We just made sure to make the changes as we unboxed and prepped them."
Me thinks I was right that you didn't read my post very well (re: updating new deployment SOP and making sure it's followed).
I certainly hope you read your employer's SOPs better than you read slashdot posts.... I'm saying the "groans" and lack of "back slaps" encountered in TFA would be expected in a big shop...
"You're really missing the point. He's not patting himself on the back (much). He's wondering why nobody he works with seems even to want to adapt to changing tech. He KNOWS it was an easy fix, and the fact that nobody else could get it is boggling his brain."
It's not as simple as that. If you've a shop with thousands of workstations deployed and you add another point of failure (simple bios setting in the TFA's example) on PCs that may be deployed for years, you've got yet ANOTHER thing that can go wrong if the bios settings get lost. I'd like to see $help_desk walk someone through changing the bios settings. That machine is going to need a visit from a $pendy tech. And, oh yeah -- update the SOP for new PC deployment and make sure everyone signs off and follows it.
In a SMALL shop, this isn't really a problem. It's not unlikely that there's as many different hardware flavors as there are total PCs. But in a LARGE shop, PC UNIFORMITY saves time and money.
It's enough to justify the groans from his co-workers...
Do you have family here? Will you be able to provide for yourself when you arrive? Of not, then you are right. You are not wanted. At least not wanted to get here quickly. We let in over 1.3 million people a year. How many people does your home country see immigrate there per year?
I hate to be cold -- but explain to me what SHOULD we do? Let in 3 billion all at once? Including you? How would your country react to 3 billion people knocking on its door?
"it is THAT terrible. with no family connection in the US and with an advanced degree, you could wait YEARS to get a green card. without a degree, you would have to wait decades."
Yes. And when I go to a REAL popular movie, I wait in a long line, too. THAT is the point. Do we import poverty? Because if we just open the flood gates what's too keep the US from economic collapse?
"Didn't Obama just say that he won't enforce illegal immigration laws on young people? Picking and choosing."
And going a step further and providing them with work visa's. The first is bad enough -- failing to enforce the laws for which his branch is responsible -- but to create law by allowing them work visas is just a flipping scary precedent.
"Andrew Jackson was actually acting on a bill in the books of Congress."
It's not that simple. Laws passed in Georgia which were (and are) unconstitutional lead directly to the Treaty of New Ectota -- because Jackson refused to prevent Georgia from continuing to enforce unconstitutional laws effectively ignoring the SCOTUS.
"He didn't just say "I'm going to do this against everyone's wishes"."
No... he said "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it" with regards to SCOTUS declaring those laws unconstitutional. Which effectively let Georgia do terrible things.
"If only "just signing the guestbook" was as simple as it sounds. Go look up the actual process and you'll find out really quick why some people avoid the legal route: It's loaded with bureaucratic red tape & bullshit and, in the cases of some key foreign nations that supply many of our legals and illegals, chocked full of corruption right down to the bottom level of officials."
Because we don't allow over 1 million people a year to immigrate to the US legally, right? Add to that the number of people who violate US sovereignty and immigration laws and births. You end up with a pretty damn big number every flipping year.
So, yes, there's a huge bureaucratic process. My wife and her family with through that process. Started in 1985 and they were in the US 1987. My wife became a citizen in the mid 90's. It's not THAT terrible.
The system *IS* set up to make it difficult for people with no support system or skills to move here. It's that way by design. Why would it or should it be any other way?
"The Supreme Court TRIED to stop that practice by issuing decisions that the Indians did not need to move, but the slave-owning Democrats who were in charge (like Andrew Jackson) decided the Supreme Court can shutup, and moves the Indians anyway."
And this is an example of why the executive branch cannot and should not decide WHAT laws to to enforce a la cart. Imagine if Eisenhower decided he didn't like Brown v Board of Education (and he didn't) and wouldn't enforce it. These are dangers waters to wade...
Agreed. Those are good starters.
Didn't work for my son,though. He just wasn't interested. But he did go for Harry Potter. I read the first 5 books to him. He re-read those on his own -- then completed the series as it came out.
So, I left him alone to find is own interests. Around age 11 he picked up a copy of Percy Jackson. He ate up the entire series. Turns out he has the same "useless superpower" that I have -- the ability to read freakishly fast. He's now getting ready to turn 13 and has read through most of my older Heinleins (I'm not ready to try to explain to my wife Stranger, Time enough for Love, etc... so those are off limits), Asimovs and all my old "serials" (Simon Hawke, Robert Asprin, etc).
I think the best advice is to READ to your kids. Get them interested. Read what they like. And if you can, Be EMOTIVE when you read.
As a side note, I used to end an evening with a cliff-hanger. Right smack dab in the middle of the chapter there'd be something like "... and then there was a BANG! Ok... We're done for tonight". Drove my son insane. Made him seek out the book and read ahead.
I sometimes forget... I'm the evil twin. Gotta go find the "good" version of me and get rid of him.
That was my guy reaction, too.
But, huge GOBS of stuff that can float a REALLY long time *HASN'T* been around that long. MAYBE a tree uprooted might make it across the pacific... or maybe it would be gobbled up or weighted down by stuff in the water before it made it across the ocean.
But a weather treated pier? Boats? Weather treated lumber for homes? Plastics? I'd think those might be more likely to make it across the ocean.
"There is a huge amount of waste and fraud."
You are right. There is. But it's a private college -- and likely suffer far less from this than a public university. And that's not the ONLY reason. What happened between then and now? Oh yeah! Government funded student loans and government admission requirements! Think that didn't drive up the price?
"It really is a mystery."
Not so much. When the market was more "free", tuition at Harvard was cheaper (per your example). Toss in government involvement (ease of student loans, regulate admissions standards for example) and get a FLOOD of applicants they can't POSSIBLY take who can ALL FIND the money SOMEWHERE -- the price will go up. It's not so mysterious. Not saying that SOME government regulation isn't in order -- but what was implemented has made the cost of a college education terribly expensive.
"If the government REALLY "got in the middle", this wouldn't be a problem in the first place since public colleges and universities would be dirt cheap or even free, as they are in most other OECD countries."
Because buildings are free. Because teachers work for free. Because libraries are free...
It's really nice these "OCED countries" can afford such things -- since most of them have their military security supplemented by US tax dollars either directly, or indirectly.
Or maybe the "alarmists" will attack the facilities -- PRETENDING to be the "anti-GW" people!
TIN FOIL HAT FOR YOU!
"Perhaps the GOP-dominated Congress will soon suggest"...
Congress has been DNC dominated from what? 2008 until 2010? STRONGLY dominated? And the GOP had slight majorities before then... This report is from 2007 with just a recent update...
Your dig at the GOP just doesn't sound reasonable...
This is the perfect tin-foil-hat scenario!
The "Global Warming Alarmists" will say it's a plot to prevent the study of of anthropogenic climate change by the "Deniers" and prove just how bad it is.
And the "Deniers" will say it's a plot to keep the "Alarmists" evil lie from coming to light.
Pass the popcorn!
"but that in no way makes them 'work better'. =) "
I don't know... just off the top of my head, I'd say it keeps the cards from shaking (or maybe a combination of heat/cooling related expansion/contraction of the metal on the contacts) and possibly losing a connection to the motherboard over time -- or during an earthquake for example. Or maybe just a big truck going down the street one too many times.
I'd feel a lot more "warm" and "fuzzy" knowing cards are not only attached to the motherboard, but stabilized by the chassis.
I'd think that qualifies as 'works better'...
"We want to force them to comply with the will of the majority. And frankly, most of the laws of society exists to force people who lack empathy and benevolence to comply under penalty of imprisonment."
Are you talking about the US? Because that is nearly the opposite of what our founders intended.
You may want to look up "liberty" and what it meant to our founders...