Eight years? Yeah, right. Trump will be lucky to make two. If he doesn't force congress to impeach him, or resign on his own, his "incredible" health will certainly fail him. He makes Newt Gingrich look like Richard Simmons.
I would almost prefer Trump to Pence to be honest.
Pence is not quite so obviously bat insane. Pence is probably more conservative than Trump, he's also more liked by his own party than Trump, so will be able to get more passed.
Sure, Pence won't do the ludicrous racist and xenophobic things that Trump is trying (and failing for the most part) to pass but he could potentially be more damaging to our economy long term.
If Trump doesn't get us into a ridiculous war, he can't get as much done as Pence could. Pence would be more diplomatically capable of getting stuff passed.
About half of Congressional Republicans hate him with passion — and would rather collude with the opposition than with him.
If this were the case the House Intelligence Committee Republicans wouldn't be dragging their feet on the Russia investigation.
They may not like Trump, but they hate the Democrats more, and if they were to start working with Democrats, they'd upset a good number of their voting base.
Many republicans may not like Trump, but they realize that they have to be careful in how they handle anything that might bring Trump down. Mid term elections and next general election will be impacted by Trump's approval ratings.
High approval ratings for Trump will mean Republicans will have an advantage going into elections. Low approval ratings for Trump could mean many Republicans lose their seats.
Right or wrong many people view the parties based upon how/what the president is doing. Trump may not be a traditional Republican (in fact he's more liberal than Hillary by some measures), but the people are going to judge the republican party based on what Trump does. If Trump gets solidly tied to Russia, many republicans will lose their seats, even if they are republicans that don't like Trump.
All presidents break a sizable portion of their campaign promises. Some of them are promises they couldn't fulfill. Others are promises that they changed their mind on, or never had any will to fulfill.
Trump was amusing, in that he broke a lot of his promises before he even took office (such as prosecuting Hillary). They're all the same though in one regards: Presidential candidates of all parties say what they think will get them elected moreso than they say what they really intend to do.
If you're designing Computer hardware, then I don't have a problem with the title "Engineer".
The problem is, the jobs I've had that had "Engineer" in the title, or ones I've applied to and didn't get in the past, or seen advertised, the vast majority of them were not "Engineering". The Engineer part is becoming a more and more meaningless title, meant to make the job sound more grandiose in most cases.
This does three things: 1) obfuscates what the job really does. 2) diminishes what an Engineer really is. 3) makes "software developer" or "programmer" sound like less of an important or demanding job than it is.
If you're really an engineer- that's fine to call yourself an engineer.
If you're designing and writing software systems or websites, you're no more an engineer than you are a software surgeon or a software lawyer.
Computer Engineers, Software Engineers....how that Potsy....
It's changing a title of a job from one that is functional and meaningful, to one that is meant to stoke the ego and sound grandiose at the expense of being accurate.
The problem is, just like "Janitor" became "Custodian" became "Sanitation Engineer", the same thing is going to happen to programming. Give it a few decades a programmers will be called "Software Surgeons".
Personally, I would rather just be called what I am, and not given some stupid title. I'm not so shallow that I need some flowery title applied to what I do to do it well.
Why would Engineers write code? Shouldn't those Engineers get back to driving the trains and leave the programming for the programmers?
/ Call me a Software Developer. Call me a Programmer. Call me a Code Monkey even. I am not an Engineer. Calling programmers "Engineers" is stupid. It's like calling janitors "sanitation experts" or secretaries "office administrators". Call a rose a rose and stop all this silly flowery job titles.
There is no way I'm letting Facebonk have access to my brain even if it's just to read a brain signal that says "click". Next I know they'll tap into the pleasure centre and post a facebook post everytime I get sexually aroused.
I don't want everyone on Facebook to know when I visit the farm.
Also the old number pad that you press "3" 3 times for the letter "F" and "8" 2 times for the letter "U" when texting.
Those you could do without looking at. Most people had it down-pat pretty well. The modern flat screen keyboard requires visual confirmation to see where you are typing.
At every red light, you can see at least 1/2 driver looking at their phone.
If I hear my phone buzz I will check it at the next light. I keep an eye on the light so not to be one of those people who holds everyone up. Honestly, I don't think that's all that dangerous and don't really intend to stop.
I won't check my phone while driving, I also don't focus completely on the phone when stopped- I'm watching that light too.
Can't speak for the person you are replying to; but,I thought the book overall was OK, the plot was interesting, I found the writing style abhorrent, but the plot very interesting.
I think the book would have been an all time classic if written by a better author with the same plot ideas.
I will probably be chastised for this... I always loved Demolition Man. Stallone is a terrible actor, the film isn't particularly artistic or high-brow, but it was a fun film, a sci-fi premise (right down to the morality study of today's society by using an abstract world).
I liked it... sure, not the artistic appeal or thought provoking ability of Gattica. Perhaps not the commercial draw of Avatar. Still a fun film.
Indeed, good sci-fi usually has at it's heart a critique about modern day society. The science fiction element is to draw us out of our current reality so we can better look at our current reality from a distance.
Everything steals from something else. The point being though, all those movies will be remembered 20 years from now, just as we remember them all from 20+ years in the past.
The Martian was original, it might have even been pretty decent. Who is going to think of it 20 years from now and remember it as a Sci Fi classic?
I'm not saying good Sci-Fi isn't being made- it's just a bit of a stretch to call this "The Golden Age". How can the golden age not contain any memorable classics?
We've had no rain in several days
Hasa Diga Eebowai
And eighty percent of us have AIDS
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Many young girls here get circumsized
Their clits get cut right off
And so we say up to the sky
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Someone once said that any technology advanced enough will appear as magic to someone who isn't used to it. (I'm sure if I weren't lazy I could google-fu who said that).
There are places around the world where economics and science dictated they skipped over the computer generation. They went straight from disconnected villages to smart phones. A lot of the tech and what can and can't be done with it was never learnt. The lady in the summary wasn't necessarily gullible, or stupid, nor did she believe the phone was "magic" I'm sure. However, how the phone worked was probably almost magical, with an unexplained technology she couldn't fathom how it might work.
Going from simple life to smart phone life, it's easy to see how someone can be fooled by what exactly is possible.
OK, fine, this guy had a point. It's not the "Golden Age" (I'd go 1970's for that) but its true sci-fi isn't completely dead/Marvel-ized yet either.
I think that's a perfectly fair assessment. It's impossible to call the current crop of Sci-Fi movies the "golden age", when quite frankly, very few of them are very rememberable, and probably none will show up on anyone's top 100 all time movies list 20 years from now. That said, this isn't the dark ages either. A decade ago there were a lot fewer Sci-Fi movies being made than today.
Slashdot Mirror
Claiming to be an outsider is a common insider trick!
Eight years? Yeah, right. Trump will be lucky to make two. If he doesn't force congress to impeach him, or resign on his own, his "incredible" health will certainly fail him. He makes Newt Gingrich look like Richard Simmons.
I would almost prefer Trump to Pence to be honest.
Pence is not quite so obviously bat insane. Pence is probably more conservative than Trump, he's also more liked by his own party than Trump, so will be able to get more passed.
Sure, Pence won't do the ludicrous racist and xenophobic things that Trump is trying (and failing for the most part) to pass but he could potentially be more damaging to our economy long term.
If Trump doesn't get us into a ridiculous war, he can't get as much done as Pence could. Pence would be more diplomatically capable of getting stuff passed.
About half of Congressional Republicans hate him with passion — and would rather collude with the opposition than with him.
If this were the case the House Intelligence Committee Republicans wouldn't be dragging their feet on the Russia investigation.
They may not like Trump, but they hate the Democrats more, and if they were to start working with Democrats, they'd upset a good number of their voting base.
Many republicans may not like Trump, but they realize that they have to be careful in how they handle anything that might bring Trump down. Mid term elections and next general election will be impacted by Trump's approval ratings.
High approval ratings for Trump will mean Republicans will have an advantage going into elections. Low approval ratings for Trump could mean many Republicans lose their seats.
Right or wrong many people view the parties based upon how/what the president is doing. Trump may not be a traditional Republican (in fact he's more liberal than Hillary by some measures), but the people are going to judge the republican party based on what Trump does. If Trump gets solidly tied to Russia, many republicans will lose their seats, even if they are republicans that don't like Trump.
All presidents break a sizable portion of their campaign promises. Some of them are promises they couldn't fulfill. Others are promises that they changed their mind on, or never had any will to fulfill.
Trump was amusing, in that he broke a lot of his promises before he even took office (such as prosecuting Hillary). They're all the same though in one regards: Presidential candidates of all parties say what they think will get them elected moreso than they say what they really intend to do.
If you're designing Computer hardware, then I don't have a problem with the title "Engineer".
The problem is, the jobs I've had that had "Engineer" in the title, or ones I've applied to and didn't get in the past, or seen advertised, the vast majority of them were not "Engineering". The Engineer part is becoming a more and more meaningless title, meant to make the job sound more grandiose in most cases.
This does three things: 1) obfuscates what the job really does. 2) diminishes what an Engineer really is. 3) makes "software developer" or "programmer" sound like less of an important or demanding job than it is.
If you're really an engineer- that's fine to call yourself an engineer.
If you're designing and writing software systems or websites, you're no more an engineer than you are a software surgeon or a software lawyer.
Best Programmer I ever knew was Indian.
Also, most of the worst programmers I ever knew were too. Just like everywhere, they produce quality and low quality programmers.
Computer Engineers, Software Engineers....how that Potsy....
It's changing a title of a job from one that is functional and meaningful, to one that is meant to stoke the ego and sound grandiose at the expense of being accurate.
The problem is, just like "Janitor" became "Custodian" became "Sanitation Engineer", the same thing is going to happen to programming. Give it a few decades a programmers will be called "Software Surgeons".
Personally, I would rather just be called what I am, and not given some stupid title. I'm not so shallow that I need some flowery title applied to what I do to do it well.
Why would Engineers write code? Shouldn't those Engineers get back to driving the trains and leave the programming for the programmers?
/ Call me a Software Developer. Call me a Programmer. Call me a Code Monkey even. I am not an Engineer. Calling programmers "Engineers" is stupid. It's like calling janitors "sanitation experts" or secretaries "office administrators". Call a rose a rose and stop all this silly flowery job titles.
This article gave me a semi.
To suggest that they job hop suggests that they have a job and aren't living at home in Mom's basement posting on Slashdot all day.
We see you were thinking about Wendy's
You missed the obvious: "I'm Thinking Arby's" reference
There is no way I'm letting Facebonk have access to my brain even if it's just to read a brain signal that says "click". Next I know they'll tap into the pleasure centre and post a facebook post everytime I get sexually aroused.
I don't want everyone on Facebook to know when I visit the farm.
Some are just weird, like Naaktgeboren (born naked)
Born Clothed would have been stranger.
Indeed, It's an open and shut case- I mean Trunk.
Also the old number pad that you press "3" 3 times for the letter "F" and "8" 2 times for the letter "U" when texting.
Those you could do without looking at. Most people had it down-pat pretty well. The modern flat screen keyboard requires visual confirmation to see where you are typing.
At every red light, you can see at least 1/2 driver looking at their phone.
If I hear my phone buzz I will check it at the next light. I keep an eye on the light so not to be one of those people who holds everyone up. Honestly, I don't think that's all that dangerous and don't really intend to stop.
I won't check my phone while driving, I also don't focus completely on the phone when stopped- I'm watching that light too.
Even better when you spot the cops looking at their texts while driving as well.
I've seen this more times than I can count. But like the article is saying, almost everyone is doing it. Cops included.
Can't speak for the person you are replying to; but,I thought the book overall was OK, the plot was interesting, I found the writing style abhorrent, but the plot very interesting.
I think the book would have been an all time classic if written by a better author with the same plot ideas.
I don't know... but I hope it doesn't involve scraping. I don't want to scrape my butt with shells that other people have scraped their butt with.
I will probably be chastised for this... I always loved Demolition Man. Stallone is a terrible actor, the film isn't particularly artistic or high-brow, but it was a fun film, a sci-fi premise (right down to the morality study of today's society by using an abstract world).
I liked it... sure, not the artistic appeal or thought provoking ability of Gattica. Perhaps not the commercial draw of Avatar. Still a fun film.
Indeed, good sci-fi usually has at it's heart a critique about modern day society. The science fiction element is to draw us out of our current reality so we can better look at our current reality from a distance.
Everything steals from something else. The point being though, all those movies will be remembered 20 years from now, just as we remember them all from 20+ years in the past.
The Martian was original, it might have even been pretty decent. Who is going to think of it 20 years from now and remember it as a Sci Fi classic?
I'm not saying good Sci-Fi isn't being made- it's just a bit of a stretch to call this "The Golden Age". How can the golden age not contain any memorable classics?
We've had no rain in several days
Hasa Diga Eebowai
And eighty percent of us have AIDS
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Many young girls here get circumsized
Their clits get cut right off
And so we say up to the sky
Hasa Diga Eebowai
Someone once said that any technology advanced enough will appear as magic to someone who isn't used to it. (I'm sure if I weren't lazy I could google-fu who said that).
There are places around the world where economics and science dictated they skipped over the computer generation. They went straight from disconnected villages to smart phones. A lot of the tech and what can and can't be done with it was never learnt. The lady in the summary wasn't necessarily gullible, or stupid, nor did she believe the phone was "magic" I'm sure. However, how the phone worked was probably almost magical, with an unexplained technology she couldn't fathom how it might work.
Going from simple life to smart phone life, it's easy to see how someone can be fooled by what exactly is possible.
OK, fine, this guy had a point. It's not the "Golden Age" (I'd go 1970's for that) but its true sci-fi isn't completely dead/Marvel-ized yet either.
I think that's a perfectly fair assessment. It's impossible to call the current crop of Sci-Fi movies the "golden age", when quite frankly, very few of them are very rememberable, and probably none will show up on anyone's top 100 all time movies list 20 years from now. That said, this isn't the dark ages either. A decade ago there were a lot fewer Sci-Fi movies being made than today.