Do you really believe that your (or anyone else's) belief in political boundaries has anything at all to do with (will prevent spreading) of dangerous pollution.
Do you really believe that your opinion is worth a damn when the ecosystem is destroyed?
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear...you seem to be trying to prioritize price over planet and I am trying to reverse that in the belief that the resource is more important than quarterly results. Something like a "balance sheet" argument over an "income statement" argument.
What is it about this that you do not want to understand? That you seem to fear so much? Please help me understand how longer term thinking on this (and many others) is not the wisest path? It feels and reads like willful ignorance but I acknowledge you may know something I don't...please explain.
Do references to modulating polluting behavior based on proximity to port and/or coastline belie non-comprehension of the finite boundaries of the oceans? Is out of sight really out of mind?
Are we truly frogs in the boiling pot?
Let’s just leave all those pesky ecological cost accruals to our grandchildren and finally admit that we simply cannot govern ourselves. We can free ourselves from responsibility by agreeing to more convenient facts. So let’s also agree that fish is no longer food, garbage can be beautiful and plastic is a dietary supplement.
I could go on...
Pretty sure the authors are hiding some unnamed intent behind willful ignorance as there are many styles and reasons for meditation. At least they cite efficacy as an outcome...now they should attempt to engage task/measurement appropriate meditation. Meditation has a long history of performance improvement when appropriately targeted for competitive sports, musical performance, creative endeavors, public speaking, (the list goes on...).
RIGHT-O...just like they prevented the mortgage crisis with their prescient vision. Nope...the financial sector blindly rode us (that would be the world) into the proverbial immovable object at full throttle. There is obviously no crisis that may trump the greed of (fill in the blank...in this case...the “financial” sector) when it comes to a well rationalized profit. However I do actually envy your ability to take comfort in such thin rationale.
The success of context claims effectively blocks comments on larger scale problems. We must never allow ourselves to become a part of answering the wrong question without having a hand in formation of the issues. In other words, a precise answer to the wrong question is NOT better than seeking the right question. We must not only remain dedicated to earnest appraisal, but reject what appears to be obvious manipulation of the course of inquiry.
Make no mistake...David Duke is not "less intelligent". I went to LSU at the same time he did. He has a long history of certain "sicknesses"...none of them exclude manipulation. I have always been very skeptical of anyone in his orbit because I could never know which face I might meet or how much deeper the controlled reason runs or when (not if) their ideology would violate broad reasonableness standards. He has a long history of radicalized behavior just outside the moving boundary of tolerated hate speech...most of the time. I have seen him in full nazi drag (with a few buddies) and I have to admit it was just beyond the edge of scary...but the message (and the quickened reflexes of his flock) implied capability in reserve. Do not believe these guys think anything like what they struggle to present to the public or that they are near their boundaries...just run the other way.
Wonder why we can't get this done for natural gas?...the shared use of the pipelines could be monumental for energy distribution as well. All under the "utility" banner...worked pretty well for landline phones.
This point has been rendered in error as of this morning...the new patient is another Texas Presbyterian nurse who apparently was self monitoring but took a flight back from Cleveland to Dallas after her temp began to rise...with a 100+ souls on board.
This tragedy of errors (and this thread) reminds me very much of Camus' "The Plague"...surprising detail and accuracy...almost as if he were here.
See http://evankozierachi.com/uplo... for an old fashioned nervous chuckle.
as I recall the Office of Civil Rights maintains a publicly accessible notification site for HIPAA breaches over a certain size...this is probably a well publicised recent leak that is reasonably attributable to heartbleed...however, I think it might be difficult to conclusively pin down without inside info.
I love this blame shifting argument...maybe it should be extended to banking reform (which fairly recently wrecked the world economy but somehow evaporated) or usary (employed liberally by credit card companies). This whack-a-mole problem begins another cycle of despair by tilting power even more to capital-side interests. One could easily question where this ends. When your account at the company store is overdue...do you lose the right to send your children to school during the harvest season? Do they send a van to pick them up and deliver them to the field? What if the child can earn enough money at the brothel to hire two workers (grown strong men) to take his/her place? We are talking about tipping points and the equity principles of common law? What about lose a few trillion - get bailed out with a stern reprimand...miss a payment and lose your job (for being late...plenty of unemployed to take your place). These imbalances have been around for thousands of years...why is it so hard to see them today?
THIS...a bit strange to me. Begin with the inevitability of death and work backwards. Everyone dies of something...does it really matter if it is preventable? Suffering seems to be the only yardstick here...and it may be if you are completely self involved...but there are a lot of aspects to living/dying. Our treatment of elders would lead a rational person to want to avoid the “throw away” fate, which to me seems to reduce the likelihood dying will have meaning to those who should matter to us because of the estrangement. Hopefully it will be about dignity and purpose...but lessons are passed down just the same...maybe not involving your personal comfort or willing contribution. Preventable implies that we have some measure of control...but that is questionable. Are we pretending it is better to rust out than burn out? Isn't the better question whether you lived at all?...which has different meaning for different people. I question if we can make such value judgements without calling morality...and we all know where that leads...but I do wonder if we stopped trying to insulate our lives from the reality of dying (say we made it a bit more of a team sport) that we might receive the lessons readily...and thus behave differently through familiarity with the inevitable. Denial is rarely the best choice.
How can you act like you don't understand the purpose of the post? Acting like everything is just dandy doesn't necessarily mean you're doing it right either...or more importantly, not avoiding a better solution. In this case, I read the author decrying a persistent problem relating to the adolescent tendency of open source to allow itself to be/remain captive to commercial enterprise...and then complaining about mission decisions (sorta like living rent free with your parents and complaining about the internet connection they provide but don't use). Then, in a search for validation, the poster is asking his on-line, free loading buddies if they have the same problem even if they pay a little rent.
Eventually, OS has to grow up a little. Its cooperative nature is a step in the right direction but right now OS is milking the professional personnel shortage created by the growth/innovation curve for all its worth. This was a great opportunity to reflect on improvement and quality...but no such direct talk has been forthcoming...just a dance around the edges. The day may be approaching when fickle, rock-star OS participants could get kicked to the curb because they suffer from a form of tunnel-vision that commonly accompanies high demand market niches...the logical prey of more mature and reliable processes.
I think you would find these numbers very difficult to substantiate...meaning they appear to be produced to support an agenda and very likely by a dubious source given their divergence from what is generally accepted as "near the truth". That said...I have attempted to assemble broad abstractions such as these as well, but accounting rules, lack of transparency, and complexity of the gov framework rendered my results so grossly unreliable I could not in good faith publish the findings as objective. I wouldn't put too much faith in his (Christopher Chantrill possibly) findings without a LOT more process information. I refer the reader to a very interesting book by Marcia Stigum...the Money Market...to get a better idea of the abstraction process behind government published numbers. This is a serious problem...just not likely the one usgovernmentspending.com says it is.
Don't be daft...governments will generally figure out how will monetize (tax) the players serving their people...it is their historic/absolute right. The big players are not being "good" corporate citizens....dodging tax, accumulating massive reserves, lagging hiring, etc. Governments need control before they can tax. They exempt Canadian companies to groom them to be better taxpayers and economic engines...sooner or later...directly or indirectly.
THIS... is just perfect. Is there anyone that actually believes females are more likely to be shat upon then males? Each side has room for legitimate resentment...some let their resentment get away from them in overly generalized attacks on their "persecutors". Neither extreme is more nearly right or preferable to the other...both have lost perspective and respect...likely because of some past event or series of events. Most importantly, none of these comments has the effect of moving the slider one way or the other because loss of rationality is, by definition, no longer listening.
I think the problem is our relatively naive and immature abstractions. Most of us have well formed defenses for "trolls" in daily life...we simply avoid them...it remains a personal choice. As an abstraction, a filter to refuse (not recognize) an individual's unwanted communication for an an: hour, day, week, month, forever (think of it as a "pissed-off, thumbs down click)...might be a more familiar coping mechanism (mimic peer pressure)...might also create more interesting analytics and lead the way toward more complex decisioning abstractions. SO...implementation of prejudice models should make us all more comfortable and familiar...ha.
Good question...seems like in an iteration coming soon it would be a slam dunk to include adjustments for different corrective prescriptions in the rift itself...obviates surgery and the like. What about the couple of million people (US) with hemianopsia (bilateral blindness in both eyes - right or left). I hope to see the rift as a near cure for this...projecting the full image to the appropriate axon region...might even be individually customizable.
Well said...it appears the greatest attribute of OS may also be its tragic flaw...OS blesses the unbridled creative yet eschews the balance of discipline (with a decided flair and relish). OS is consequently hard wired to only respond to disaster (when abandonment exceeds growth maybe)...which may also be too late and will otherwise be known as the burst of the OS bubble...this is the honeymoon period as business models go. Planning and leadership are essential elements of successful long term/range projects because maximizing upside and minimizing downside momentum is essential to make it over the humps...trusting fate/destiny is risky (foolish). A better model is always right around the corner.
Agreed...credit abuses are the norm rather than the exception. We (Americans) lack the will to rein in abusive credit practices...beginning with the extension of credit...which has becomes a private sector remediation strategy to stave off starvation another day...for only a pound of flesh tomorrow you can feed your family today...great deal eh? Plus it provides another boogey-man to "save the people from"...and another diversion from the central issues of fundamental poor management. What's not to like?
Isn't is about time we acknowledge the corporate cleansing ritual of open source participation also contributes to the gentrification of peer communities...and it might be a bit more complex than simply an unintended consequence? The traditional conflict set between open source and corporate collaboratives persist with the possible driver that open source is now broadly recognized as an effective competitive method. As a more or less direct result, monetized communities like OpenSSL will be presented with trade-offs...similar to those discussed in this thread...from their new overlords. Unfortunately, acceptance of such trade-offs may also be viewed as a function of timing whose eventual destination can be plotted against mission imperatives whose purpose is to re-introduce the persistent conflict set from a position of power...presumably with a different outcome. The bottom line is that it is unlikely gentrified open source projects will be easy to differentiate from thier corporate counterparts...with the exception that the peer community takes much of the risk out of development projects...which non-coincidentally support proprietary products.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you really believe that your (or anyone else's) belief in political boundaries has anything at all to do with (will prevent spreading) of dangerous pollution. Do you really believe that your opinion is worth a damn when the ecosystem is destroyed? Perhaps I didn't make myself clear...you seem to be trying to prioritize price over planet and I am trying to reverse that in the belief that the resource is more important than quarterly results. Something like a "balance sheet" argument over an "income statement" argument. What is it about this that you do not want to understand? That you seem to fear so much? Please help me understand how longer term thinking on this (and many others) is not the wisest path? It feels and reads like willful ignorance but I acknowledge you may know something I don't...please explain.
Do references to modulating polluting behavior based on proximity to port and/or coastline belie non-comprehension of the finite boundaries of the oceans? Is out of sight really out of mind? Are we truly frogs in the boiling pot? Let’s just leave all those pesky ecological cost accruals to our grandchildren and finally admit that we simply cannot govern ourselves. We can free ourselves from responsibility by agreeing to more convenient facts. So let’s also agree that fish is no longer food, garbage can be beautiful and plastic is a dietary supplement. I could go on ...
Pretty sure the authors are hiding some unnamed intent behind willful ignorance as there are many styles and reasons for meditation. At least they cite efficacy as an outcome...now they should attempt to engage task/measurement appropriate meditation. Meditation has a long history of performance improvement when appropriately targeted for competitive sports, musical performance, creative endeavors, public speaking, (the list goes on...).
RIGHT-O...just like they prevented the mortgage crisis with their prescient vision. Nope...the financial sector blindly rode us (that would be the world) into the proverbial immovable object at full throttle. There is obviously no crisis that may trump the greed of (fill in the blank...in this case...the “financial” sector) when it comes to a well rationalized profit. However I do actually envy your ability to take comfort in such thin rationale.
I hope I'm not the only one thinking how batshit crazy this AC post sounds.
The success of context claims effectively blocks comments on larger scale problems. We must never allow ourselves to become a part of answering the wrong question without having a hand in formation of the issues. In other words, a precise answer to the wrong question is NOT better than seeking the right question. We must not only remain dedicated to earnest appraisal, but reject what appears to be obvious manipulation of the course of inquiry.
Isn't this a similar conundrum and lesson brought to point by Heartbleed (resource allocation)...and a recurring theme for OS projects?
Make no mistake...David Duke is not "less intelligent". I went to LSU at the same time he did. He has a long history of certain "sicknesses"...none of them exclude manipulation. I have always been very skeptical of anyone in his orbit because I could never know which face I might meet or how much deeper the controlled reason runs or when (not if) their ideology would violate broad reasonableness standards. He has a long history of radicalized behavior just outside the moving boundary of tolerated hate speech...most of the time. I have seen him in full nazi drag (with a few buddies) and I have to admit it was just beyond the edge of scary...but the message (and the quickened reflexes of his flock) implied capability in reserve. Do not believe these guys think anything like what they struggle to present to the public or that they are near their boundaries...just run the other way.
Wonder why we can't get this done for natural gas? ...the shared use of the pipelines could be monumental for energy distribution as well. All under the "utility" banner...worked pretty well for landline phones.
Am I the only one who finds NASA's presumption of ownership and control a bit presumptive?
This point has been rendered in error as of this morning...the new patient is another Texas Presbyterian nurse who apparently was self monitoring but took a flight back from Cleveland to Dallas after her temp began to rise...with a 100+ souls on board. This tragedy of errors (and this thread) reminds me very much of Camus' "The Plague"...surprising detail and accuracy...almost as if he were here. See http://evankozierachi.com/uplo... for an old fashioned nervous chuckle.
as I recall the Office of Civil Rights maintains a publicly accessible notification site for HIPAA breaches over a certain size...this is probably a well publicised recent leak that is reasonably attributable to heartbleed...however, I think it might be difficult to conclusively pin down without inside info.
I love this blame shifting argument...maybe it should be extended to banking reform (which fairly recently wrecked the world economy but somehow evaporated) or usary (employed liberally by credit card companies). This whack-a-mole problem begins another cycle of despair by tilting power even more to capital-side interests. One could easily question where this ends. When your account at the company store is overdue...do you lose the right to send your children to school during the harvest season? Do they send a van to pick them up and deliver them to the field? What if the child can earn enough money at the brothel to hire two workers (grown strong men) to take his/her place? We are talking about tipping points and the equity principles of common law? What about lose a few trillion - get bailed out with a stern reprimand...miss a payment and lose your job (for being late...plenty of unemployed to take your place). These imbalances have been around for thousands of years...why is it so hard to see them today?
THIS...a bit strange to me. Begin with the inevitability of death and work backwards. Everyone dies of something...does it really matter if it is preventable? Suffering seems to be the only yardstick here...and it may be if you are completely self involved...but there are a lot of aspects to living/dying. Our treatment of elders would lead a rational person to want to avoid the “throw away” fate, which to me seems to reduce the likelihood dying will have meaning to those who should matter to us because of the estrangement. Hopefully it will be about dignity and purpose...but lessons are passed down just the same...maybe not involving your personal comfort or willing contribution. Preventable implies that we have some measure of control...but that is questionable. Are we pretending it is better to rust out than burn out? Isn't the better question whether you lived at all? ...which has different meaning for different people. I question if we can make such value judgements without calling morality...and we all know where that leads...but I do wonder if we stopped trying to insulate our lives from the reality of dying (say we made it a bit more of a team sport) that we might receive the lessons readily...and thus behave differently through familiarity with the inevitable. Denial is rarely the best choice.
and this is what power really means...control of the transition.
How can you act like you don't understand the purpose of the post? Acting like everything is just dandy doesn't necessarily mean you're doing it right either...or more importantly, not avoiding a better solution. In this case, I read the author decrying a persistent problem relating to the adolescent tendency of open source to allow itself to be/remain captive to commercial enterprise...and then complaining about mission decisions (sorta like living rent free with your parents and complaining about the internet connection they provide but don't use). Then, in a search for validation, the poster is asking his on-line, free loading buddies if they have the same problem even if they pay a little rent. Eventually, OS has to grow up a little. Its cooperative nature is a step in the right direction but right now OS is milking the professional personnel shortage created by the growth/innovation curve for all its worth. This was a great opportunity to reflect on improvement and quality...but no such direct talk has been forthcoming...just a dance around the edges. The day may be approaching when fickle, rock-star OS participants could get kicked to the curb because they suffer from a form of tunnel-vision that commonly accompanies high demand market niches...the logical prey of more mature and reliable processes.
I think you would find these numbers very difficult to substantiate...meaning they appear to be produced to support an agenda and very likely by a dubious source given their divergence from what is generally accepted as "near the truth". That said...I have attempted to assemble broad abstractions such as these as well, but accounting rules, lack of transparency, and complexity of the gov framework rendered my results so grossly unreliable I could not in good faith publish the findings as objective. I wouldn't put too much faith in his (Christopher Chantrill possibly) findings without a LOT more process information. I refer the reader to a very interesting book by Marcia Stigum...the Money Market...to get a better idea of the abstraction process behind government published numbers. This is a serious problem...just not likely the one usgovernmentspending.com says it is.
Don't be daft...governments will generally figure out how will monetize (tax) the players serving their people...it is their historic/absolute right. The big players are not being "good" corporate citizens....dodging tax, accumulating massive reserves, lagging hiring, etc. Governments need control before they can tax. They exempt Canadian companies to groom them to be better taxpayers and economic engines...sooner or later...directly or indirectly.
THIS ... is just perfect. Is there anyone that actually believes females are more likely to be shat upon then males? Each side has room for legitimate resentment...some let their resentment get away from them in overly generalized attacks on their "persecutors". Neither extreme is more nearly right or preferable to the other...both have lost perspective and respect...likely because of some past event or series of events. Most importantly, none of these comments has the effect of moving the slider one way or the other because loss of rationality is, by definition, no longer listening.
History is rarely irrelevant, for example, very handy for understanding how to define "PROGRESS" and/or "BETTER"
I think the problem is our relatively naive and immature abstractions. Most of us have well formed defenses for "trolls" in daily life...we simply avoid them...it remains a personal choice. As an abstraction, a filter to refuse (not recognize) an individual's unwanted communication for an an: hour, day, week, month, forever (think of it as a "pissed-off, thumbs down click)...might be a more familiar coping mechanism (mimic peer pressure)...might also create more interesting analytics and lead the way toward more complex decisioning abstractions. SO...implementation of prejudice models should make us all more comfortable and familiar...ha.
Good question...seems like in an iteration coming soon it would be a slam dunk to include adjustments for different corrective prescriptions in the rift itself...obviates surgery and the like. What about the couple of million people (US) with hemianopsia (bilateral blindness in both eyes - right or left). I hope to see the rift as a near cure for this...projecting the full image to the appropriate axon region...might even be individually customizable.
Well said...it appears the greatest attribute of OS may also be its tragic flaw...OS blesses the unbridled creative yet eschews the balance of discipline (with a decided flair and relish). OS is consequently hard wired to only respond to disaster (when abandonment exceeds growth maybe)...which may also be too late and will otherwise be known as the burst of the OS bubble...this is the honeymoon period as business models go. Planning and leadership are essential elements of successful long term/range projects because maximizing upside and minimizing downside momentum is essential to make it over the humps...trusting fate/destiny is risky (foolish). A better model is always right around the corner.
Agreed...credit abuses are the norm rather than the exception. We (Americans) lack the will to rein in abusive credit practices...beginning with the extension of credit...which has becomes a private sector remediation strategy to stave off starvation another day...for only a pound of flesh tomorrow you can feed your family today...great deal eh? Plus it provides another boogey-man to "save the people from"...and another diversion from the central issues of fundamental poor management. What's not to like?
Isn't is about time we acknowledge the corporate cleansing ritual of open source participation also contributes to the gentrification of peer communities...and it might be a bit more complex than simply an unintended consequence? The traditional conflict set between open source and corporate collaboratives persist with the possible driver that open source is now broadly recognized as an effective competitive method. As a more or less direct result, monetized communities like OpenSSL will be presented with trade-offs...similar to those discussed in this thread...from their new overlords. Unfortunately, acceptance of such trade-offs may also be viewed as a function of timing whose eventual destination can be plotted against mission imperatives whose purpose is to re-introduce the persistent conflict set from a position of power...presumably with a different outcome. The bottom line is that it is unlikely gentrified open source projects will be easy to differentiate from thier corporate counterparts...with the exception that the peer community takes much of the risk out of development projects...which non-coincidentally support proprietary products.