I'm convinced that meal-time conversation only exists to cover up the disgusting sounds people make while eating. Besides, not having to spend time eating frees everyone up for a longer and less distracted conversation in a more comfortable environment.
The joy of eating ?
I'll admit that I enjoy tasty food to an extent, but personally, if I didn't have to eat, I wouldn't.
I've signed up and selected two "troves" to follow (Technology News and Science News). But, on the home page (which I'm assuming is your personal feed when logged in), I'm seeing stories that aren't tagged as being in either channel. I'm also seeing stories on my feed that are tagged as being in that channel, but which do not appear on the page for that channel.
It looks like Trove has the potential for dozens or even hundreds of channels with the same overall theme. As a non-curator, it looks like you'll have to browse through these channels and decide which ones are worth following. And I already see about a half dozen tech-related channels just attached to the stories listed on the above channel, which means there's going to be a lot of duplication.
I'm not sure how that's useful or convenient, but we'll just have to see...
1) BitCoin has very small per-transaction fees. There are a whopping-big number of credit card transactions each day, each with fees of about 5%. Bitcoin will eliminate most of these, for a whopping-big cost savings.
There's an assumption here that fees won't be charged in the conversion of BTC to and from other currencies. If BTC isn't going to be the primary currency of your future fantasy, you're likely to lose a lot to those fees. If BTC is going to be the primary currency, there are a number of other, serious issues (like the accumulation of wealth by few people) that would likely make a BTC-based economy very short lived.
Only if you hoard BTC. Otherwise, you're stuck trying to scrounge up fractions of BTC while those earl[y|ier] adopters get richer. It also creates a situation where it would be beneficial to strangle the supply of BTC, forcing a division in order to magnify the value of your own stash. The more BTC you own, the more beneficial it is for you if BTC were divided.
Now, imagine successful companies taking in more BTC than they expend, just like they do with currently-accepted currencies. BTC begins to accumulate in fewer and fewer hands. Not too different from today, except that BTC has a limited supply. The remaining BTC must be divided so that it is capable of covering the needs of the economy. With every division, these companies (or individuals, or governments) become more and more economically powerful and the distance between the top and bottom becomes larger.
If you think the current inequalities and "the 1%" are bad thing today, BTC as a currency would be an absolute nightmare.
Losing coins are not a problem as they are infinitely divisible. Currently only to 8 decimal places, but that can be increased if needed. One bitcoin or even a fraction of a bitcoin is enough to run the whole world economy.
Which could alleviate one problem at the expense of exacerbating another: hoarding. When smaller and smaller fractions of a BTC become more and more valuable, those holding on to their BTC get richer and richer.
Almost as if they have too much fun with their "interrogation" and do not want to have it stopped short...
I think it's worth considering another reason anyone doing a job might wish to stretch a simple task out as long as possible: to make for a relatively easy workday. It's worse in this situation, though, because it directly inconveniences someone.
And you think it would be a huge problem for society if half the population didn't work, taking into account that maintaining them would be essentially free? (as no salaries have to be paid to produce food, shelter, etc...
Automation of food and shelter production doesn't mean they're going to be free. Some major corporation will have spent lots of money to build, and would be continuously spending money to maintain, the machines that are being used for food production and building construction. Someone has to pay that bill.
If you combine that with the fact that you refuse to accept mild weather as contradictory evidence, now you're moving into a faith-based, rather than scientific, realm.
Except mild or even cold weather is not necessarily contradictory evidence. If one were to theorize that the ratio of heads to tails in a series of coin flips were to increase over time, the fact that the current flip of the coin resulted in tails is hardly a contradiction of the theory.
Sure, it would be questionable to claim any appearance of tails was also evidence for that theory, but it's also questionable to claim that each appearance of tails is a deathblow to the theory.
You have to look at the change in average over time. In other words, climate vs. weather.
Everybody should be able to drive at whatever speed they are comfortable with...
You're piloting a vehicle weighing a ton or more that's capable of causing destruction and potentially ending lives in a fraction of a second. You really have to take driving much more seriously than that.
Or do we just give up having fast CPUs and go back to (shudder) copper?? It is this very property (its central place as a commodity) that would give me the strong opinion that it should not be used as a currency at all.
Yep. It's amusing to me when gold bugs claim that gold's usefulness as a conductive material gives it an "inherent value" that also makes it a good choice as a currency (or as a backing for currency).
If we were to switch back to gold and keep using it in various manufacturing, that's a drain on the limited supply of gold available for use as currency. That's bad.* As you pointed out, cost could increase to balance that out, and that's bad, too.
If we were to stop using gold in manufacturing, product quality potentially suffers. Also, gold loses this "inherent value" that gold bugs love to push as a selling point.
* Also, it further undermines the GP's point about gold not being "regulated" by humans, which already ignores the fact that individuals can still hoard the gold, thus artificially limiting the supply available for circulation. Sorry, gold bugs, but there's no form of currency free from human tampering of one sort or another.
Meanwhile, kids are killing themselves because they're being bullied for doing nothing other than being themselves. Where's the author's outrage over that?
Possibly in a different article? Or were you expecting this one article to lay bare the author's opinions on every aspect of life?
It was an ugly truth, but censoring her for saying it doesn't help anyone except people who would rather pretend that aids in africa isn't a problem that lines up with race and economic status.
The AIDS issue in Africa may line up with race, but it's not a racial issue; it's a cultural issue. Cultures may be associated primarily with one group or another, but they are different things. Her tweet essentially claims that she has nothing to worry about simply because of her race, and not because she understands the importance of, for example, safe sex when it comes to AIDS.
And for crap's sake, she was a PR exec who displays her connection to her now-former employer on her personal Twitter account. It boggles my mind that she would think nothing of posting what she did under those circumstances. I don't know if IAC would have let her keep her job if she hadn't associated her account with the company, but, because she had, it seems logical that they would let her go for a pretty obvious disregard for the image of her employer (which she was specifically being paid to be concerned about).
They have no *right* to "keep other people from stealing it."
That's a pretty fucked up argument. How many other industries would you apply that to? Do banks have no right to keep people from stealing the money they hold? Maybe that's a different situation, because it's not actually their money. But what about brick and mortar stores? Do you have no right to prevent others from stealing or copying your work? Because I'm pretty sure the law says otherwise.
But that's all ignoring that this person apparently hasn't been fined for downloading the movie; he's been fined for distributing the movie. And for that, they do have a right to keep others from doing; it's called copyright.
Legally speaking, every male American citizen between the ages of 17-45 who is not an active duty member of the armed forces and every female member of the National Guard is a member of the 'militia of the United States' by federal law (10 USC 311). That militia is formed for the purpose of draft selection but, it's still a militia set up by federal law and if that doesn't meet the requirements for "A well regulated Militia" then I don't know what does.
Isn't automatic inclusion pretty much the exact opposite of "well-regulated"?
Now all the spammers will get their servers overloaded. If they send out millions of e-mails and they all immediately get "opened" by google trying to pull in the picture data.
I seriously doubt that. It would be rather dumb for them to cache these images on a per-email basis and not a per-URL basis. It sounds like they're just using a (modified) caching proxy. They'll likely grab and cache the image on its first ever request. All subsequent requests for that same image would then be served by the proxy's cache.
But to turn your "I have never understood anti gun folk irrational fear of an inanimate object." comment around, I've never understood pro gun folks irrational fear of leaving their house without their gun or living without one in the first place. Are you really so lacking in confidence of your ability to defend yourself should someone try and physically attack you or what?
I think, ironically, it's their fear of guns that drives them to not leave home without a gun of their own.
It's typically phrased "love the sinner, hate the sin", but given the context of your comment, I think you simply accidentally wrote "hate" instead of "love".
A person's sexuality is an integral part of their self; it is as much a part of them as the color of their skin.
The problem is that they don't see it that way. I'm sure you're aware that plenty of them (not all, of course) believe that homosexuality is a choice. In that way, "being gay" is as unnatural as dyeing your hair sky blue; it's a conscious deviation from what's "normal".
They hopefully will convince Mozilla to back this out, and figure out a better UI for the user to deal with. A small red clickable icon that leads to more clicking is not going to fly with non-tech users.
Disclaimer: I'm in the Java SE Product Management team at Oracle.
Just to add to my colleague in Engineering Joe McGlynn's comment #61 -- we're happy to help here however we can. We do frequently speak with mcoates, but are happy to plug into any other channels the mozilla team think would be worthy (as we seemed to somehow miss this one until it was too late I think we need more contact/channels). For example, I think we can help address questions related to the Java 6 (and Java 5, for that matter) updates as they are still supported and do receive updates along with the latest public baseline(s).
As comment #50 notes, bugzilla is not forum software - so I'll leave it at that and send @bsmedberg a quick note and continue to try to catch up wit @coates.
First I've heard that Java 5 and 6 are not considered dead yet.
Yeah, I don't know what he thinks he's talking about. According to Oracle's own website, public updates to Java 5 ended in October 2009, and Java 6 in February 2013.
Enterprises can apparently pay to continue receiving critical bug fixes, but that hardly seems relevant to the discussion.
Even in those cases you can always just pull a knife and stab them a few times or just hit them in the face with a sharp rock. Problem solved. No one will ever fuck with you again after that.
You say that as if "being left alone" would be the most significant result of an assault with a deadly weapon. It's probably true that no one would mess with you after that, but only because you'd probably be forced out of normal society.
If they're not weightless in space, why would they be weightless in free-fall? I mean, the engines weren't working but that doesn't mean the artificial gravity McGuffin was offline.
I actually just saw Into Darkness the other day. During that sequence there was actually an announcement that the ship was losing gravity control. There were also a number of scenes depicting crew members falling down hallways as if they were pits. Kirk and Scotty were even running on the wall at one point and had to jump over a hole that was once a hallway. They were also hanging from the side of a walkway at another point.
What constituted "down" shifted fairly frequently during the entire sequence. I got the impression that this was because "down" was no longer relative to the ship, but to Earth, and the tumbling Enterprise caused walls to become floors and hallways to become pits.
All while the Enterprise was supposedly in free fall. They definitely should have been weightless.
Slashdot Mirror
Equality, rightly understood, as our founding fathers understood it...
That's why many of them own slaves...
The table conversation ?
I'm convinced that meal-time conversation only exists to cover up the disgusting sounds people make while eating. Besides, not having to spend time eating frees everyone up for a longer and less distracted conversation in a more comfortable environment.
The joy of eating ?
I'll admit that I enjoy tasty food to an extent, but personally, if I didn't have to eat, I wouldn't.
I've signed up and selected two "troves" to follow (Technology News and Science News). But, on the home page (which I'm assuming is your personal feed when logged in), I'm seeing stories that aren't tagged as being in either channel. I'm also seeing stories on my feed that are tagged as being in that channel, but which do not appear on the page for that channel.
No, I'm not talking about Slashdot and Trove. I'm actually referring to this part in the summary:
Users are encouraged to curate "troves," collections of stories that relate to a particular theme.
And this Technology News channel as an example.
It looks like Trove has the potential for dozens or even hundreds of channels with the same overall theme. As a non-curator, it looks like you'll have to browse through these channels and decide which ones are worth following. And I already see about a half dozen tech-related channels just attached to the stories listed on the above channel, which means there's going to be a lot of duplication.
I'm not sure how that's useful or convenient, but we'll just have to see...
1) BitCoin has very small per-transaction fees. There are a whopping-big number of credit card transactions each day, each with fees of about 5%. Bitcoin will eliminate most of these, for a whopping-big cost savings.
There's an assumption here that fees won't be charged in the conversion of BTC to and from other currencies. If BTC isn't going to be the primary currency of your future fantasy, you're likely to lose a lot to those fees. If BTC is going to be the primary currency, there are a number of other, serious issues (like the accumulation of wealth by few people) that would likely make a BTC-based economy very short lived.
For the end user this is a good thing.
Only if you hoard BTC. Otherwise, you're stuck trying to scrounge up fractions of BTC while those earl[y|ier] adopters get richer. It also creates a situation where it would be beneficial to strangle the supply of BTC, forcing a division in order to magnify the value of your own stash. The more BTC you own, the more beneficial it is for you if BTC were divided.
Now, imagine successful companies taking in more BTC than they expend, just like they do with currently-accepted currencies. BTC begins to accumulate in fewer and fewer hands. Not too different from today, except that BTC has a limited supply. The remaining BTC must be divided so that it is capable of covering the needs of the economy. With every division, these companies (or individuals, or governments) become more and more economically powerful and the distance between the top and bottom becomes larger.
If you think the current inequalities and "the 1%" are bad thing today, BTC as a currency would be an absolute nightmare.
Losing coins are not a problem as they are infinitely divisible. Currently only to 8 decimal places, but that can be increased if needed. One bitcoin or even a fraction of a bitcoin is enough to run the whole world economy.
Which could alleviate one problem at the expense of exacerbating another: hoarding. When smaller and smaller fractions of a BTC become more and more valuable, those holding on to their BTC get richer and richer.
Almost as if they have too much fun with their "interrogation" and do not want to have it stopped short ...
I think it's worth considering another reason anyone doing a job might wish to stretch a simple task out as long as possible: to make for a relatively easy workday. It's worse in this situation, though, because it directly inconveniences someone.
And you think it would be a huge problem for society if half the population didn't work, taking into account that maintaining them would be essentially free? (as no salaries have to be paid to produce food, shelter, etc...
Automation of food and shelter production doesn't mean they're going to be free. Some major corporation will have spent lots of money to build, and would be continuously spending money to maintain, the machines that are being used for food production and building construction. Someone has to pay that bill.
If you combine that with the fact that you refuse to accept mild weather as contradictory evidence, now you're moving into a faith-based, rather than scientific, realm.
Except mild or even cold weather is not necessarily contradictory evidence. If one were to theorize that the ratio of heads to tails in a series of coin flips were to increase over time, the fact that the current flip of the coin resulted in tails is hardly a contradiction of the theory.
Sure, it would be questionable to claim any appearance of tails was also evidence for that theory, but it's also questionable to claim that each appearance of tails is a deathblow to the theory.
You have to look at the change in average over time. In other words, climate vs. weather.
Everybody should be able to drive at whatever speed they are comfortable with...
You're piloting a vehicle weighing a ton or more that's capable of causing destruction and potentially ending lives in a fraction of a second. You really have to take driving much more seriously than that.
Let's be clear; the NSA has not broken the letter of the law...
However; the NSA has certainly broken the spirit of the law....
Every National Security Overreach Hearing.
Or do we just give up having fast CPUs and go back to (shudder) copper?? It is this very property (its central place as a commodity) that would give me the strong opinion that it should not be used as a currency at all.
Yep. It's amusing to me when gold bugs claim that gold's usefulness as a conductive material gives it an "inherent value" that also makes it a good choice as a currency (or as a backing for currency).
If we were to switch back to gold and keep using it in various manufacturing, that's a drain on the limited supply of gold available for use as currency. That's bad.* As you pointed out, cost could increase to balance that out, and that's bad, too.
If we were to stop using gold in manufacturing, product quality potentially suffers. Also, gold loses this "inherent value" that gold bugs love to push as a selling point.
* Also, it further undermines the GP's point about gold not being "regulated" by humans, which already ignores the fact that individuals can still hoard the gold, thus artificially limiting the supply available for circulation. Sorry, gold bugs, but there's no form of currency free from human tampering of one sort or another.
Meanwhile, kids are killing themselves because they're being bullied for doing nothing other than being themselves. Where's the author's outrage over that?
Possibly in a different article? Or were you expecting this one article to lay bare the author's opinions on every aspect of life?
It was an ugly truth, but censoring her for saying it doesn't help anyone except people who would rather pretend that aids in africa isn't a problem that lines up with race and economic status.
The AIDS issue in Africa may line up with race, but it's not a racial issue; it's a cultural issue. Cultures may be associated primarily with one group or another, but they are different things. Her tweet essentially claims that she has nothing to worry about simply because of her race, and not because she understands the importance of, for example, safe sex when it comes to AIDS.
And for crap's sake, she was a PR exec who displays her connection to her now-former employer on her personal Twitter account. It boggles my mind that she would think nothing of posting what she did under those circumstances. I don't know if IAC would have let her keep her job if she hadn't associated her account with the company, but, because she had, it seems logical that they would let her go for a pretty obvious disregard for the image of her employer (which she was specifically being paid to be concerned about).
Since when is Pennsylvania a "red state?"
Better zip up, your confirmation bias is showing.
For the past couple decades, Pennsylvania's been blue as far as Presidential elections go. Historically, though, it's been mostly red. (Source)
They have no *right* to "keep other people from stealing it."
That's a pretty fucked up argument. How many other industries would you apply that to? Do banks have no right to keep people from stealing the money they hold? Maybe that's a different situation, because it's not actually their money. But what about brick and mortar stores? Do you have no right to prevent others from stealing or copying your work? Because I'm pretty sure the law says otherwise.
But that's all ignoring that this person apparently hasn't been fined for downloading the movie; he's been fined for distributing the movie. And for that, they do have a right to keep others from doing; it's called copyright.
Legally speaking, every male American citizen between the ages of 17-45 who is not an active duty member of the armed forces and every female member of the National Guard is a member of the 'militia of the United States' by federal law (10 USC 311). That militia is formed for the purpose of draft selection but, it's still a militia set up by federal law and if that doesn't meet the requirements for "A well regulated Militia" then I don't know what does.
Isn't automatic inclusion pretty much the exact opposite of "well-regulated"?
Now all the spammers will get their servers overloaded. If they send out millions of e-mails and they all immediately get "opened" by google trying to pull in the picture data.
I seriously doubt that. It would be rather dumb for them to cache these images on a per-email basis and not a per-URL basis. It sounds like they're just using a (modified) caching proxy. They'll likely grab and cache the image on its first ever request. All subsequent requests for that same image would then be served by the proxy's cache.
I have never understood anti gun folk irrational fear of an inanimate object.
Nukes, too. What's there to fear from countries keeping a few inanimate objects in their own house, right?
But to turn your "I have never understood anti gun folk irrational fear of an inanimate object." comment around, I've never understood pro gun folks irrational fear of leaving their house without their gun or living without one in the first place. Are you really so lacking in confidence of your ability to defend yourself should someone try and physically attack you or what?
I think, ironically, it's their fear of guns that drives them to not leave home without a gun of their own.
The "hate the sinner, not the sin" mentality...
It's typically phrased "love the sinner, hate the sin", but given the context of your comment, I think you simply accidentally wrote "hate" instead of "love".
A person's sexuality is an integral part of their self; it is as much a part of them as the color of their skin.
The problem is that they don't see it that way. I'm sure you're aware that plenty of them (not all, of course) believe that homosexuality is a choice. In that way, "being gay" is as unnatural as dyeing your hair sky blue; it's a conscious deviation from what's "normal".
Yeah, I don't know what he thinks he's talking about. According to Oracle's own website, public updates to Java 5 ended in October 2009, and Java 6 in February 2013.
Enterprises can apparently pay to continue receiving critical bug fixes, but that hardly seems relevant to the discussion.
Even in those cases you can always just pull a knife and stab them a few times or just hit them in the face with a sharp rock. Problem solved. No one will ever fuck with you again after that.
You say that as if "being left alone" would be the most significant result of an assault with a deadly weapon. It's probably true that no one would mess with you after that, but only because you'd probably be forced out of normal society.
If they're not weightless in space, why would they be weightless in free-fall? I mean, the engines weren't working but that doesn't mean the artificial gravity McGuffin was offline.
I actually just saw Into Darkness the other day. During that sequence there was actually an announcement that the ship was losing gravity control. There were also a number of scenes depicting crew members falling down hallways as if they were pits. Kirk and Scotty were even running on the wall at one point and had to jump over a hole that was once a hallway. They were also hanging from the side of a walkway at another point.
What constituted "down" shifted fairly frequently during the entire sequence. I got the impression that this was because "down" was no longer relative to the ship, but to Earth, and the tumbling Enterprise caused walls to become floors and hallways to become pits.
All while the Enterprise was supposedly in free fall. They definitely should have been weightless.