That's not true. There are a limited number of POTENTIAL customers, but increasing restaurant sales is not a zero-sum game between competitors -- not 100% of potential customers are going to a different restaurant without the automated ordering and higher efficiency; Many will do the next best thing which is to do something like make their own sandwich at home and bring it to work.
Then the grocery industry loses sales, and jobs are still lost somewhere else. Unless you're a primary industry, or a secondary industry that create a new non-competing market, you're just shifting where the money goes.
Wait, that didn't actually happen. Instead people bought more socks than ever before because people had long wanted more socks than were capable of being produced. Just like hundreds of years ago with socks, what happens when you increase productivity and you can create more of something, consumptions tends to increase because people wanted more, just not at the previous price. People will keep on wanting more shit even as we find ways of making it ever more quickly and at lower costs and probably will until we find some way to alter our brain chemistry.
I'm sorry, but that's the manufacturing industry, which operates on a different basis than the service industry. It certainly doesn't hold true for the restaurant industry, because there is only so much people can eat (Americans being evidence to the contrary). You can't sell people five dinners a day, even if you can ramp up production to make it affordable.
But handling more orders means that others handle less orders, because there's only a limited amount of customers. When those workers go away, it's not a net win in amount of workers for the restaurant industry. It will likely be an overall loss for the industry, because the restaurant workers now laid off elsewhere and their families will have less money to spend at restaurants.
Iâ(TM)m a Christian and Iâ(TM)m looking forward to any and all technological advance that would extend life.
Why? A nagging suspicion that there might not be a better afterlife after all? It has always surprised me how religious people are those who cry the most when people die. You'd think they'd be happy on behalf of the person winning the big prize of eternal joy.
I'm an atheist, and I'm not for extending life past the natural span. The old needs to give room for the new. When you're past the age of reproduction/rearing, there's no benefit to your genes in your survival - you just compete with your offspring for resources.. And if you're suffering from various age related ailments, there's not much benefit to you either. Death is nothing to be feared by an atheist. We know we won't feel a thing, and won't miss life one bit. I'll enjoy life to the fullest while I can, and when I no longer feel I can, or have become a burden, I'll reject any attempts at prolonging it. If suffering, I want an off switch.
How do you know that? For one thing, there's a risk that he would not have survived the surgery, and then a risk of rejection. And even if that went well, he might have died of something else entirely. In best case, it would only have bought him more time, and not saved him. There are no save points and extra lives.
Nowhere in Europe since Christianity took over has polygamy been tolerated
Adultery has, though. Mistresses have not been uncommon at all. The more powerful the man, the more accepted it has been. Not to mention droit de seigneur. Or bedwarmers. Or serial monogamy. Large parts of Europeans can trace their genes back to kings.
Or for those of us with cardiac problems. There is a market for heart rate monitoring devices that are neither aimed at those doing workouts, nor so big, clumsy and unconfigurable as those sold as medical devices. I don't think it would take much work at all to make these devices so they can be equally useful for someone running as someone who wants to monitor their arrhythmia.
Also, you are wrong about women seeking infidelity. The most effective way for them to ensure the survival of their genes is to have a stable relationship with a provider that frees them up to look after the children.
Another effective way of ensuring the survival of her genes is to match them with the genes of the most successful men. Her husband is very useful for bringing up her children, which don't have to be his. Studies after genetic testing became available show that more than ten percent of Western children have a biological father that does not match the man who thinks he's the biological father. The lower the social status of the man, the higher the risk of his raising cucklings. As long as he does not know, the benefit to the mother's genes is great - her sons inherit more successful and attractive genes than if they were from her husband. The risk to the woman is in being found out. As long as the husband is none the wiser, there is no conflict between having a stable relationship with a provider and picking the best genes for her children.
But I disagree on the car selection in the first place. I'd go with something lower mass. 240SX is a popular choice.
Because the 240D is recognizable as one of the slowest non-economy cars that actually sold a lot? Even slower than the Volvo 240. To top it off, the Merc couldn't corner well, and the Volvo couldn't brake well (the old joke was that the heavier Volvos were even slower at 60-0 than 0-60), so it was probably a good thing that they were boats.
Sexual pressure is always there. It's part of being a man. Our gonads and genes do tell us to pursue any low-risk avenue of copulation. We do not follow our urges because not adhering to the societal norms would be counter-productive, but we always have them.
A man will inherently seek (a) pair bonding: have offspring being able to take over his legacy, and (b) promiscuity: to have as many viable offspring as possible Men are drawn to youth and health in sexual partners because any woman can only produce and raise a small number of offspring. A woman will inherently seek: (a) pair bonding: seek a man who will help raise her children, and (c) infidelity: affairs with the "best" men available, because her children does not have to be his. A woman will be very picky in choosing the best available partners, but looks for the most power, status and health for her lovers. For women, age is not a concern for trysts, only for pair bondings. (b) and (c) are different, in that promiscuity hurts a female partner far less than infidelity hurts a male partner. Raising another man's children and be barred for some time from producing heirs is a huge detriment for a man. While a man being unfaithful has very little impact on the female, unless it threatens her family by the man forming new bonds.
These behaviors are inherent, because they make sense from an evolutionary point of view for species that live in large groups not ruled by a single bull. We share these traits with several species of birds, for example. That does not mean that the traits are desirable from a human perspective. Especially not after availability of contraceptives have given humans more control over their reproductive choices. But it is not unexpected that we see people who cannot overcome their baser instincts. Whether it's married women having an affair with a more powerful man than her husband, or men who lust after (almost invariably) young women. Most of us adhere to the norms of the society we live in, because that's ultimately what gives us the best opportunities. But it's a struggle with small rewards.
We used to have established societal expectations that helped to minimize the suffering of the weaker members.
Where the societal expectation was that the most powerful men would have almost all the women, and where most men's options were limited to prostitutes, rape or taking the shilling to increase the opportunity for either.
I'm more for wolf in sheep's clothing cars. Now if someone managed to put a 600+ HP low-weight engine in a Mercedes 240D, and managed to make it street legal, I'd be far more impressed.
If it's a video, it should be clearly marked as such in the submission. This is/. and many here browse with multimedia turned off, and even more have "Other content" checked off in the preferences.
This is a workstation card, or card for a workstation.
Is it? As far as I know, all nVidia's workstation cards are named Quadro and have the ability to run certified drivers tweaked for workstation applications, like CAD/CAM and rendering apps. I expect that there will be a corresponding workstation card, which will cost far more for similar hardware, but this is to my knowledge not one.
In this case, the entire article is only twice the size of the very short story summary here. What's the relevance to slashdot? That ricers exist in Tokyo too? Hardly newsworthy, I should think. This would probably not even get a mention on Jalopnik.
Bronze is a harder metal than pure iron. That means that it keeps a better edge and is less likely to bend.
Both the first and the second sentence is wrong.
First of all, bronze is a lot of different things, but the Rockwell hardness scale scores of various bronze alloys available at the time are in the 40-65 range. That's certainly much harder than copper, which is at 10 on the same scale, but cast iron is at 86. I.e. much higher than bronze. Even modern bronzes, like aluminium and silicon bronze, are less hard than cast iron, although they come closer.
As for keeping an edge, that is related to factors that's not hardness, like ductility and chipping resistance. A stiffer (not harder) blade can resist the edge bending, but can also crack easier. And some metals have a crystallization pattern that makes them more prone to chipping, even with the same hardness. The edge folding over slightly is often preferable to the blade shattering or nicking in use. This is why chefs use a butcher's steel to straighten the edge of the knife.
I'm sure Amazon recommends that those go under the subdomain.bot.net and not under.bot
At any rate, filtering on domain names is often useful. My e-mail server rates anything containing non-traditional domain names in headers or body as 50% likely to be spam. Because quite frankly, the amount of non-spam from.date,.stream,.bid,.faith,.top,.loan and.club is extremely low. I don't think adding.bot to the list will create many false positives; I can already predict the usage.
Depending on the denomination,the cost of printing a US dollar note is between 5.4 cents and 15.5 cents: https://www.federalreserve.gov... [federalreserve.gov]
Some things to take into consideration: 1: The cost does not scale linearly. $50,000 does not cost 50,000 times as much as $1. With bitcoin, it does scale linearly. 2: Most of the US dollars are never printed, but only exist as numbers in banks. Loro clearing houses haven't operated by sending truckloads of bank notes for a long long time. 3: This is production cost, not environmental cost. In some cases, there may be a correlation, but I do not believe this is one of them. 4: Transaction costs are enormously higher with bitcoin. If I give you $10, the cost is minimal. If I transfer $10 in bitcoin to your wallet, the computational costs are staggering.
I empty out the old grounds and rinse the strainer and spout with water which cleans off any stray grounds. This only takes a few seconds. I never use soap which contaminates the flavor of the coffee. I never worry about bacteria because the hot water sterilizes everything every time I use it.
I think you may have missed the point. If you don't clean it out, you may not even notice, because you condition yourself slowly while the flavor of the coffee changes as the rancid build-ups grow. But don't serve that to others, because they are not likewise conditioned.
You apparently don't clean and scrub the strainer, the spout, the clamping mechanism or anything else? I sincerely hope that you only use it for personal use then, and never ever serve guests.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not true. There are a limited number of POTENTIAL customers, but increasing restaurant sales is not a zero-sum game between competitors -- not 100% of potential customers are going to a different restaurant without the automated ordering and higher efficiency; Many will do the next best thing which is to do something like make their own sandwich at home and bring it to work.
Then the grocery industry loses sales, and jobs are still lost somewhere else.
Unless you're a primary industry, or a secondary industry that create a new non-competing market, you're just shifting where the money goes.
Wait, that didn't actually happen. Instead people bought more socks than ever before because people had long wanted more socks than were capable of being produced. Just like hundreds of years ago with socks, what happens when you increase productivity and you can create more of something, consumptions tends to increase because people wanted more, just not at the previous price. People will keep on wanting more shit even as we find ways of making it ever more quickly and at lower costs and probably will until we find some way to alter our brain chemistry.
I'm sorry, but that's the manufacturing industry, which operates on a different basis than the service industry. It certainly doesn't hold true for the restaurant industry, because there is only so much people can eat (Americans being evidence to the contrary). You can't sell people five dinners a day, even if you can ramp up production to make it affordable.
But handling more orders means that others handle less orders, because there's only a limited amount of customers. When those workers go away, it's not a net win in amount of workers for the restaurant industry. It will likely be an overall loss for the industry, because the restaurant workers now laid off elsewhere and their families will have less money to spend at restaurants.
Iâ(TM)m a Christian and Iâ(TM)m looking forward to any and all technological advance that would extend life.
Why? A nagging suspicion that there might not be a better afterlife after all?
It has always surprised me how religious people are those who cry the most when people die. You'd think they'd be happy on behalf of the person winning the big prize of eternal joy.
I'm an atheist, and I'm not for extending life past the natural span. The old needs to give room for the new. When you're past the age of reproduction/rearing, there's no benefit to your genes in your survival - you just compete with your offspring for resources.. And if you're suffering from various age related ailments, there's not much benefit to you either. Death is nothing to be feared by an atheist. We know we won't feel a thing, and won't miss life one bit. I'll enjoy life to the fullest while I can, and when I no longer feel I can, or have become a burden, I'll reject any attempts at prolonging it. If suffering, I want an off switch.
A new kidney would have saved him.
How do you know that? For one thing, there's a risk that he would not have survived the surgery, and then a risk of rejection. And even if that went well, he might have died of something else entirely. In best case, it would only have bought him more time, and not saved him. There are no save points and extra lives.
Nowhere in Europe since Christianity took over has polygamy been tolerated
Adultery has, though. Mistresses have not been uncommon at all. The more powerful the man, the more accepted it has been. Not to mention droit de seigneur. Or bedwarmers. Or serial monogamy.
Large parts of Europeans can trace their genes back to kings.
Or for those of us with cardiac problems.
There is a market for heart rate monitoring devices that are neither aimed at those doing workouts, nor so big, clumsy and unconfigurable as those sold as medical devices. I don't think it would take much work at all to make these devices so they can be equally useful for someone running as someone who wants to monitor their arrhythmia.
Also, you are wrong about women seeking infidelity. The most effective way for them to ensure the survival of their genes is to have a stable relationship with a provider that frees them up to look after the children.
Another effective way of ensuring the survival of her genes is to match them with the genes of the most successful men. Her husband is very useful for bringing up her children, which don't have to be his.
Studies after genetic testing became available show that more than ten percent of Western children have a biological father that does not match the man who thinks he's the biological father. The lower the social status of the man, the higher the risk of his raising cucklings. As long as he does not know, the benefit to the mother's genes is great - her sons inherit more successful and attractive genes than if they were from her husband. The risk to the woman is in being found out.
As long as the husband is none the wiser, there is no conflict between having a stable relationship with a provider and picking the best genes for her children.
Sleeping with the bosses wife or girlfriend come to mind.
Not a problem, unless you're caught.
The plus side is knowing that your (likely former) boss pays for college for your child.
But I disagree on the car selection in the first place. I'd go with something lower mass. 240SX is a popular choice.
Because the 240D is recognizable as one of the slowest non-economy cars that actually sold a lot? Even slower than the Volvo 240. To top it off, the Merc couldn't corner well, and the Volvo couldn't brake well (the old joke was that the heavier Volvos were even slower at 60-0 than 0-60), so it was probably a good thing that they were boats.
Sexual pressure is always there. It's part of being a man.
Our gonads and genes do tell us to pursue any low-risk avenue of copulation. We do not follow our urges because not adhering to the societal norms would be counter-productive, but we always have them.
A man will inherently seek (a) pair bonding: have offspring being able to take over his legacy, and (b) promiscuity: to have as many viable offspring as possible Men are drawn to youth and health in sexual partners because any woman can only produce and raise a small number of offspring.
A woman will inherently seek: (a) pair bonding: seek a man who will help raise her children, and (c) infidelity: affairs with the "best" men available, because her children does not have to be his. A woman will be very picky in choosing the best available partners, but looks for the most power, status and health for her lovers. For women, age is not a concern for trysts, only for pair bondings.
(b) and (c) are different, in that promiscuity hurts a female partner far less than infidelity hurts a male partner. Raising another man's children and be barred for some time from producing heirs is a huge detriment for a man. While a man being unfaithful has very little impact on the female, unless it threatens her family by the man forming new bonds.
These behaviors are inherent, because they make sense from an evolutionary point of view for species that live in large groups not ruled by a single bull. We share these traits with several species of birds, for example.
That does not mean that the traits are desirable from a human perspective. Especially not after availability of contraceptives have given humans more control over their reproductive choices. But it is not unexpected that we see people who cannot overcome their baser instincts. Whether it's married women having an affair with a more powerful man than her husband, or men who lust after (almost invariably) young women.
Most of us adhere to the norms of the society we live in, because that's ultimately what gives us the best opportunities. But it's a struggle with small rewards.
We used to have established societal expectations that helped to minimize the suffering of the weaker members.
Where the societal expectation was that the most powerful men would have almost all the women, and where most men's options were limited to prostitutes, rape or taking the shilling to increase the opportunity for either.
I'm more for wolf in sheep's clothing cars. Now if someone managed to put a 600+ HP low-weight engine in a Mercedes 240D, and managed to make it street legal, I'd be far more impressed.
If it's a video, it should be clearly marked as such in the submission. /. and many here browse with multimedia turned off, and even more have "Other content" checked off in the preferences.
This is
This is a workstation card, or card for a workstation.
Is it? As far as I know, all nVidia's workstation cards are named Quadro and have the ability to run certified drivers tweaked for workstation applications, like CAD/CAM and rendering apps.
I expect that there will be a corresponding workstation card, which will cost far more for similar hardware, but this is to my knowledge not one.
In this case, the entire article is only twice the size of the very short story summary here. What's the relevance to slashdot? That ricers exist in Tokyo too? Hardly newsworthy, I should think. This would probably not even get a mention on Jalopnik.
Bronze is a harder metal than pure iron. That means that it keeps a better edge and is less likely to bend.
Both the first and the second sentence is wrong.
First of all, bronze is a lot of different things, but the Rockwell hardness scale scores of various bronze alloys available at the time are in the 40-65 range. That's certainly much harder than copper, which is at 10 on the same scale, but cast iron is at 86. I.e. much higher than bronze. Even modern bronzes, like aluminium and silicon bronze, are less hard than cast iron, although they come closer.
As for keeping an edge, that is related to factors that's not hardness, like ductility and chipping resistance. A stiffer (not harder) blade can resist the edge bending, but can also crack easier. And some metals have a crystallization pattern that makes them more prone to chipping, even with the same hardness. The edge folding over slightly is often preferable to the blade shattering or nicking in use.
This is why chefs use a butcher's steel to straighten the edge of the knife.
It's just a bad story title. This weapon isn't intended to take out missiles, but take out the launch facilities before launch. TFS says as much too.
I'm sure Amazon recommends that those go under the subdomain .bot.net and not under .bot
At any rate, filtering on domain names is often useful. My e-mail server rates anything containing non-traditional domain names in headers or body as 50% likely to be spam. Because quite frankly, the amount of non-spam from .date, .stream, .bid, .faith, .top, .loan and .club is extremely low. I don't think adding .bot to the list will create many false positives; I can already predict the usage.
How come the Dell security updates aren't announced here too? More people use Dell than Apple.
Have you submitted any story on Dell security updates here?
So the claimed electricity cost is a tolerable 1.5% of capitalization...
That's assuming that Bitcoin is in addition to created capital, and not just a shift in investments. A charge of 1.5% to move investments is high.
Depending on the denomination ,the cost of printing a US dollar note is between 5.4 cents and 15.5 cents: https://www.federalreserve.gov... [federalreserve.gov]
Some things to take into consideration:
1: The cost does not scale linearly. $50,000 does not cost 50,000 times as much as $1. With bitcoin, it does scale linearly.
2: Most of the US dollars are never printed, but only exist as numbers in banks. Loro clearing houses haven't operated by sending truckloads of bank notes for a long long time.
3: This is production cost, not environmental cost. In some cases, there may be a correlation, but I do not believe this is one of them.
4: Transaction costs are enormously higher with bitcoin. If I give you $10, the cost is minimal. If I transfer $10 in bitcoin to your wallet, the computational costs are staggering.
Did anyone look at an actual GIF?
All I can find is a twitter javascript stream and an MP4 video at https://video.twimg.com/tweet_...
Does anyone have an actual link to an animated GIF?
I empty out the old grounds and rinse the strainer and spout with water which cleans off any stray grounds. This only takes a few seconds. I never use soap which contaminates the flavor of the coffee. I never worry about bacteria because the hot water sterilizes everything every time I use it.
I think you may have missed the point. If you don't clean it out, you may not even notice, because you condition yourself slowly while the flavor of the coffee changes as the rancid build-ups grow.
But don't serve that to others, because they are not likewise conditioned.
What cleaning time?
You apparently don't clean and scrub the strainer, the spout, the clamping mechanism or anything else? I sincerely hope that you only use it for personal use then, and never ever serve guests.