... is exactly why humans values these stones so highly. Sure, they're hard, but thats a pretty niche use. Apparently they look pretty. To me they just look like bits of glass which also doesn't tarnish. I honestly don't get why our species craves this stone so much.
If diamonds were as common as rocks and rocks as rare as diamonds- we would be proposing to our girlfriends with engagement rings that had chips of gravel in them.
Africa alone has enough arable land to feed the whole world at the moment in a perfect scenario. Sure, if we have enough fertilizer (we'll get to that), if we have enough clean water (we'll get to that), a stable climate (we'll get to that), and no pollution (we'll get to that) we could support a much larger population.
Fertilizer - this isn't just magically created- a lot of the ingredients in good fertilizer can't just be upped to support more people. Over harvesting seaweed, or fishmeal or bones, or goodness knows what else will cause other problems.
Water - ironic, so much water locked in the ocean. Yet we don't desalinize much. But if we had to we would right? Strangely, there are cities by the ocean with water shortages. If we grow slowly, perhaps water desalinaztion will match population growth- but it's expensive, requires a lot of polluting energy... etc.
Stable Climate - Cliamte change makes some places wetter, some drier, some hotter, some too hot. One area may be set up for an industry to grow one type of crop one day- and then not in a few years. Extreme events- heat waves, drought, etc... kill crops.
Pollution - do I really need to go into that? We all know what that does.
So yes, today's Africa could feed the world if it were managed right- add the rest of the continents and theoretically we could have a much larger world population... But each person you add adds extra strain on all the things above... it makes it more expensive to maintain human life- more of a technological challenge... and it takes away the quality of the lives of the other people on the planet because of that.
Could we squeak by with three times the population we have now... maybe... but I wouldn't want to live amongst that many people.
Now, no trees grow there. Why? Humans cut them all down. I'm sure they realized as they came to the last two or three that they were running out- they probably thought, oh, we really need these trees in the future... but, we really really need them now.
Land for growing trees is infinite, we can build up with skyscrapers for tree growth
Planting trees on the side of a skyscraper might work for an isolated skyscraper. It wouldn't work for a whole city because the skyscrapers would block out light from one another- plus the scale of getting water to all those trees on a skyscraper would be astronomical and the higher you have to pump water the more expensive it is.
Imagine not having a cell phone, or access to much of any technology created in the last 30 decades or so...
Then one day, north and south are reunified... and you've got electric cars driving through north korea, 3g cell phones with no data replaced by the latest and greatest iphone... the sudden shift from impossible to common place...
It is easy to imagine... I drove through West Virginia a few months ago.
That's why it horrifies us that many people are taking that freedom we fought and bled for,
Bled for? Was it a sharp piece of plastic sticking off a cheap keyboard that you cut a finger on whilst gospeling via e-mail the virtues of the wider internet?
You're seeing the glass half empty. What someone really said was "what this phone needs is more display where this empty part of the bezel is". They can't fill the whole bezel so they just fill what they can. If they didn't have the notch you'd just get less screen.
And that's perfectly fine. I don't mind a bezel. I'd rather have a thin bezel than no bezel and a notch taken out of the screen that makes the screen useless for a common scalable design.
The X is only the icing on the shit sundae. The problem runs far deeper, and if Cook doesn't get his head out of his ass (or the proverbial stick) this is not going to end well for Apple.
Apple has more money than they can spend. Apple could put out crap for a decade and still be a fully functioning major player in world technology. Apple's finances are so strong, Cook probably couldn't sink Apple even if he deliberately set out to do just that.
I dunno, maybe we're just getting older and these movies are being made for a younger crowd. Or for the growing Asian market.
Well those marvel superhero movies and many of the action flicks are targeted at the under 30 crowd. That's not to say there aren't some over 30's that enjoy them- you're just not the target audience. Many of the big budget movies are targeted towards the age demographic that actually goes to movies... they're frequently, single and young and have disposable income.
Older folk with kids and bills and so many other places tugging on their wallet don't get out to the cinema as much.
So yes, if you're over 30, a lot of the bigger movies aren't really designed for you any more... sorry. You might still enjoy some of them, but most of them aren't targeting you- and if you were still 21 you'd probably enjoy them more.
Ahhh... so that's why Civ V in the early days ran so slow and used up so much CPU and GPU despite having relatively simple graphics... Firaxis were mining cryptocurrency before it was cool.
/ shouldn't have to say this... but yes I'm joking and not really blaming Firaxis for really running a cryptomining scam
The labor market is fairly tight right now, and all indications are that it's only going to get tighter. This means more competition for workers' time and attention, and if Amazon becomes known as a shithole to work for, they're going to have an impossible time finding people willing to work for them as time passes and as things continue on their current economic trajectory.
It's a rather strange work market at the moment. Fewer people are unemployed but average wage (adjusted for inflation) is dropping quite fast.
It may be that for the lower third- the alternates to Amazon are just as bad. They can be paid peanuts or circus peanuts. Work in bad conditions or terrible conditions. You would think that with so many people employed wages would go up to compete, and usually they do, but they're staying low for now for some reason.
This headline just made me laugh and laugh and laugh, thinking of some phone company exec saying to his staff:
"If the people want notches, by God we will give them notches! Notches on the back, on the sides, on every screen edge! Two on larger edges! I want all notch proposals on my desk by tomorrow morning and there better not be a single place I can think of having a notch that does not have one!".
There will probably be more notches on my next phone than my bedpost.
Most kids would rather be on a cell phone playing games than ANY education method- fun or not.
I'm not saying a diversity of teaching techniques and hands on learning isn't useful- it clearly is a good idea; but the phones should be banned too. The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.
Are they really thinking of the children? How will kids call their parents when a shooter with automatic weapons bursts into the school? For something that happens maybe several times per year, this seems rather short sighted.
Oh, wait. It's France.
Even if France were to go completely insane and adopt ridiculous American style wild-west gun laws; I doubt kids calling their parents would help much in a shooter situation. As long as teachers have phones, someone can call the authorities- which frankly is more important than kids calling their mother .
The first rat to leave the sinking ship gets the primo spot on the adjacent ship.
I've done that several times- and always landed in a job with more money. Planning on sticking out where I am now though long enough to get full retirement.
Last job I left was because it was boring... it was very heavily regulated. I wasn't allowed to do any work without specs and sometimes I'd go two weeks without any specs- and then they would hand them to me and I had two weeks to complete a 4 week project. So I'd alternate with literally nothing to do- and then 80 hour work weeks.
Another job I left when the CIO changed. We went from having the best boss in the world to the worst. He was from Texas very unpolitically correct called most of his employees "retards" and some other ethnic and racial slurs I won't post online. He liked me though (even though I didn't like him). Final straw was in a review meeting and instead of being about me, it was about my coworkers- he was basically asking me to spy on them and report them if they did things wrong.
I updated my resume that night and started applying elsewhere.
Nah that's just globalism, neither party can stop that and the Democrats would prefer to increase it.
You're right in that neither party can stop globalism, and I agree, the Democrats are less likely to slow down some of the affects that has on the US; however, Trump's policies on starting trade wars has driven many jobs in some industries over seas. Jobs are moving to avoid tariffs... on the flip side some jobs are moving here too... although everyside in a trade war loses... and the US is fighting trade wars on more fronts than other countries.
rather than food that has gone through random mutations
Every single thing you eat has random mutations, whether from background radiation, cosmic rays, viruses, errors during mitosis/meiosis, etc.
What the Europeans are doing is technophobic nonsense, with no basis in science. The courts should not be used to enforce superstitions.
I think there is definitely an irrational fear of GMO food in Europe; however, some caution is needed- when you're doing some of the things you're doing with CRISPR you're bypassing what would take, in some cases, millions of generations of selective breeding, to get a gene in place that doesn't naturally exist anywhere in that species.
There needs to be some common sense and oversight, to make sure, for example, pesticide resistance in a crop doesn't get crossed with a wild relative of the crop and spread to a wild population of an undesirable plant.
Yeah, that could happen with selective breeding too... but there would be many-many between generations where you'd probably catch that first.
The court exempted conventional mutagenesis -- the unnatural use of chemicals or radiation to create mutations for plant breeding -- because it has "a long safety record."
Maybe it's just because I've played so much Fallout, but I'll take genetically edited food over irradiated food any day....cutting out genes (and as the summary says, not adding genes-especially genes from other organisms)has to be inherently safer than dosing what's destined to be our food with radiation.
If the radiation is to create mutations in the seed, then that is not the same as irradiating your food. They're merely trying to increase the rate of mutations in hope that some are positive mutations.
Slashdot Mirror
... is exactly why humans values these stones so highly. Sure, they're hard, but thats a pretty niche use. Apparently they look pretty. To me they just look like bits of glass which also doesn't tarnish. I honestly don't get why our species craves this stone so much.
If diamonds were as common as rocks and rocks as rare as diamonds- we would be proposing to our girlfriends with engagement rings that had chips of gravel in them.
Africa alone has enough arable land to feed the whole world at the moment in a perfect scenario. Sure, if we have enough fertilizer (we'll get to that), if we have enough clean water (we'll get to that), a stable climate (we'll get to that), and no pollution (we'll get to that) we could support a much larger population.
Fertilizer - this isn't just magically created- a lot of the ingredients in good fertilizer can't just be upped to support more people. Over harvesting seaweed, or fishmeal or bones, or goodness knows what else will cause other problems.
Water - ironic, so much water locked in the ocean. Yet we don't desalinize much. But if we had to we would right? Strangely, there are cities by the ocean with water shortages. If we grow slowly, perhaps water desalinaztion will match population growth- but it's expensive, requires a lot of polluting energy... etc.
Stable Climate - Cliamte change makes some places wetter, some drier, some hotter, some too hot. One area may be set up for an industry to grow one type of crop one day- and then not in a few years. Extreme events- heat waves, drought, etc... kill crops.
Pollution - do I really need to go into that? We all know what that does.
So yes, today's Africa could feed the world if it were managed right- add the rest of the continents and theoretically we could have a much larger world population... But each person you add adds extra strain on all the things above... it makes it more expensive to maintain human life- more of a technological challenge... and it takes away the quality of the lives of the other people on the planet because of that.
Could we squeak by with three times the population we have now... maybe... but I wouldn't want to live amongst that many people.
Easter Island used to be heavily wooded.
Now, no trees grow there. Why? Humans cut them all down. I'm sure they realized as they came to the last two or three that they were running out- they probably thought, oh, we really need these trees in the future... but, we really really need them now.
A future model for humanity?
Land for growing trees is infinite, we can build up with skyscrapers for tree growth
Planting trees on the side of a skyscraper might work for an isolated skyscraper. It wouldn't work for a whole city because the skyscrapers would block out light from one another- plus the scale of getting water to all those trees on a skyscraper would be astronomical and the higher you have to pump water the more expensive it is.
Imagine not having a cell phone, or access to much of any technology created in the last 30 decades or so...
Then one day, north and south are reunified... and you've got electric cars driving through north korea, 3g cell phones with no data replaced by the latest and greatest iphone... the sudden shift from impossible to common place...
It is easy to imagine... I drove through West Virginia a few months ago.
You're seeing the glass half empty. What someone really said was "what this phone needs is more display where this empty part of the bezel is". They can't fill the whole bezel so they just fill what they can. If they didn't have the notch you'd just get less screen.
And that's perfectly fine. I don't mind a bezel. I'd rather have a thin bezel than no bezel and a notch taken out of the screen that makes the screen useless for a common scalable design.
The X is only the icing on the shit sundae. The problem runs far deeper, and if Cook doesn't get his head out of his ass (or the proverbial stick) this is not going to end well for Apple.
Apple has more money than they can spend. Apple could put out crap for a decade and still be a fully functioning major player in world technology. Apple's finances are so strong, Cook probably couldn't sink Apple even if he deliberately set out to do just that.
I dunno, maybe we're just getting older and these movies are being made for a younger crowd. Or for the growing Asian market.
Well those marvel superhero movies and many of the action flicks are targeted at the under 30 crowd. That's not to say there aren't some over 30's that enjoy them- you're just not the target audience. Many of the big budget movies are targeted towards the age demographic that actually goes to movies... they're frequently, single and young and have disposable income.
Older folk with kids and bills and so many other places tugging on their wallet don't get out to the cinema as much.
So yes, if you're over 30, a lot of the bigger movies aren't really designed for you any more... sorry. You might still enjoy some of them, but most of them aren't targeting you- and if you were still 21 you'd probably enjoy them more.
Ahhh... so that's why Civ V in the early days ran so slow and used up so much CPU and GPU despite having relatively simple graphics... Firaxis were mining cryptocurrency before it was cool.
/ shouldn't have to say this... but yes I'm joking and not really blaming Firaxis for really running a cryptomining scam
The labor market is fairly tight right now, and all indications are that it's only going to get tighter. This means more competition for workers' time and attention, and if Amazon becomes known as a shithole to work for, they're going to have an impossible time finding people willing to work for them as time passes and as things continue on their current economic trajectory.
It's a rather strange work market at the moment. Fewer people are unemployed but average wage (adjusted for inflation) is dropping quite fast.
It may be that for the lower third- the alternates to Amazon are just as bad. They can be paid peanuts or circus peanuts. Work in bad conditions or terrible conditions. You would think that with so many people employed wages would go up to compete, and usually they do, but they're staying low for now for some reason.
The most costly "terrorist" attack on the US this century will probably be a cyber attack.
The most lives and injuries will almost certainly be of a more conventional nature.
Don't be silly, the mob would never want to be associated with Trump.
Actually Trump had a lot of ties with the mob in the 60's and 70's.
Jerome Jacobson Jingleheimer Schmidt,
his name is my name too;
whenever we go out,
people always shout
Jerome Jacobsom Jingleheimer Schmidt
You know, most people don't notch their bedpost every time they pleasure themselves while looking at Hentai Porn on their smart-phone.
Well... * duh *, otherwise my bed would have more notches than my phone.
Sacre bleu!
That's a thing they say, right?
Je ne sais quoi!
This headline just made me laugh and laugh and laugh, thinking of some phone company exec saying to his staff:
"If the people want notches, by God we will give them notches! Notches on the back, on the sides, on every screen edge! Two on larger edges! I want all notch proposals on my desk by tomorrow morning and there better not be a single place I can think of having a notch that does not have one!".
There will probably be more notches on my next phone than my bedpost.
They could have refused notches completely and mock Apple for doing something so ugly and impractical.
It really is an absurd (and ugly) design "feature". I've yet to meet one person who has said, "what this phone needs is a notch".
Most kids would rather be on a cell phone playing games than ANY education method- fun or not.
I'm not saying a diversity of teaching techniques and hands on learning isn't useful- it clearly is a good idea; but the phones should be banned too. The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.
Are they really thinking of the children? How will kids call their parents when a shooter with automatic weapons bursts into the school? For something that happens maybe several times per year, this seems rather short sighted.
Oh, wait. It's France.
Even if France were to go completely insane and adopt ridiculous American style wild-west gun laws; I doubt kids calling their parents would help much in a shooter situation. As long as teachers have phones, someone can call the authorities- which frankly is more important than kids calling their mother .
The first rat to leave the sinking ship gets the primo spot on the adjacent ship.
I've done that several times- and always landed in a job with more money. Planning on sticking out where I am now though long enough to get full retirement.
Last job I left was because it was boring... it was very heavily regulated. I wasn't allowed to do any work without specs and sometimes I'd go two weeks without any specs- and then they would hand them to me and I had two weeks to complete a 4 week project. So I'd alternate with literally nothing to do- and then 80 hour work weeks.
Another job I left when the CIO changed. We went from having the best boss in the world to the worst. He was from Texas very unpolitically correct called most of his employees "retards" and some other ethnic and racial slurs I won't post online. He liked me though (even though I didn't like him). Final straw was in a review meeting and instead of being about me, it was about my coworkers- he was basically asking me to spy on them and report them if they did things wrong.
I updated my resume that night and started applying elsewhere.
Nah that's just globalism, neither party can stop that and the Democrats would prefer to increase it.
You're right in that neither party can stop globalism, and I agree, the Democrats are less likely to slow down some of the affects that has on the US; however, Trump's policies on starting trade wars has driven many jobs in some industries over seas. Jobs are moving to avoid tariffs... on the flip side some jobs are moving here too... although everyside in a trade war loses... and the US is fighting trade wars on more fronts than other countries.
I've left every job because I was poached with money.
Always with money, never poached using water?
rather than food that has gone through random mutations
Every single thing you eat has random mutations, whether from background radiation, cosmic rays, viruses, errors during mitosis/meiosis, etc.
What the Europeans are doing is technophobic nonsense, with no basis in science. The courts should not be used to enforce superstitions.
I think there is definitely an irrational fear of GMO food in Europe; however, some caution is needed- when you're doing some of the things you're doing with CRISPR you're bypassing what would take, in some cases, millions of generations of selective breeding, to get a gene in place that doesn't naturally exist anywhere in that species.
There needs to be some common sense and oversight, to make sure, for example, pesticide resistance in a crop doesn't get crossed with a wild relative of the crop and spread to a wild population of an undesirable plant.
Yeah, that could happen with selective breeding too... but there would be many-many between generations where you'd probably catch that first.
The court exempted conventional mutagenesis -- the unnatural use of chemicals or radiation to create mutations for plant breeding -- because it has "a long safety record."
Maybe it's just because I've played so much Fallout, but I'll take genetically edited food over irradiated food any day....cutting out genes (and as the summary says, not adding genes-especially genes from other organisms)has to be inherently safer than dosing what's destined to be our food with radiation.
If the radiation is to create mutations in the seed, then that is not the same as irradiating your food. They're merely trying to increase the rate of mutations in hope that some are positive mutations.