Roma (and the others) had an artificially limited theatrical release in order to make it eligible for the Oscars, to generate interesting on the festival circuit, and to satisfy the desires of the director for a "real" screening.
Here in Denmark, Roma could easily have carried a multi-theatre multi-week theatrical release... instead it was screened exactly once for a festival spot (a screening which sold out a month in advance). What's keeping these movies out of theaters is not a lack of interest among theatergoers, but a decision by Netflix to shore up their content monopoly.
Nobody's trying to ban home viewing. The controversy is about Netflix refusing to screen their films in theaters (even when there's a clear market demand), instead locking them up in their walled garden of a subscription service.
No military in the history of the world has done as much to prevent collateral damage (i.e. the killing of innocent bystanders) as the U.S. military. That is just a fact.
Historically, that's obviously untrue. In modern times, it is, at best, disputed. Many militaries have done far worse, of course. But starting in the 90s and continuing through the second Iraq war, the U.S. (not to mention its allies) has by many accounts expended less effort at protecting civilians than they had in former wars, not out of malice, but likely in an effort to instead minimize American soldier deaths at any cost and maintain public support for the war in the U.S. And of course, the safest soldier is one that's not on the ground where people are dying.
The shocker was how people were dying. For the first time, in any of his [war mortality] surveys, the leading cause of death wasn't disease. It was bombs and bullets. [...] And the biggest number [...] were killed by the American-led coalition.
"I should mention that only three of them involved guys with guns. All the rest were helicopter gunships, and bombs from planes. [...] There's no evidence here of soldiers running amok. There's evidence here of a style of engagement that probably has relied very heavily on air power that has resulted in a lot, a lot of civilian deaths. [...] A Pentagon spokesperson said that they've dropped about 50,000 bombs in Iraq. 50,000 bombs. Very, very small fraction of them would need to miss their target or be based on bad information to explain 100,000 civilian deaths."
As the same story later goes in to, the Pentagon soft limit for acceptable number of civilian deaths was 30 per airstrike. (By that standard, I guess they were really careful, given that we didn't have 1.5 million civilian deaths from those 50,000 bombs...)
Go to Settings, change your preferences, then click "Show Bookmarklet and Settings Data" to get a link with your preferences encoded directly in the URL, no cookies needed.
The article isn't talking about people not replying to an email.
This would be the equivalent of an applicant showing up for a scheduled interview, sit around waiting for half an hour, and then finally be told, "oh, yeah, no, we found someone else, so the interview is cancelled".
Which I'm sure has happened, too, but is definitely not the norm.
Experienced developers appear easier to identify than novice ones. The more skilled you are, the more unique your work apparently becomes. That might be in part because beginner programmers often copy and paste code solutions from websites like Stack Overflow.
You wrote "It is unlikely that Smartphone RF causes cancer [because] it's just not ionizing radiation."
That is literally making the argument that for RF radiation to cause cancer, it would likely have to be ionizing. Other causes must thus be unlikely. That is the argument I took issue with. (Given that the vast majority of cancers are not caused by excess ionizing radiation, I don't think your antecedent is true.)
I didn't state anything about your opinion, nor did I claim that you said that the cancer link was impossible. I simply commented on that specific part of your argument, because it's an argument that keeps popping up, and I don't find it sound. I figured that since you're participating in this debate, you might be interested in knowing when your arguments are not convincing, and should perhaps be revised or clarified.
It is unlikely that Smartphone RF causes cancer. It's just not ionizing radiation.
I find the argument that non-ionizing radiation can't cause cancer a bit tired. Cancer is a very complex (set of) disease(s), with a multitude of risk factors, of which ionizing radiation is but one.
RF causes tissue heating, which is linked to cancer in other contexts (e.g. repeated intake of very hot drinks have been linked to esophageal cancer). If the power, frequency and duration of exposure is just right, RF almost certainly can cause cancer. Is cell phone RF anywhere near the "danger zone"? Probably not, but given proliferation of RF sources over the last half a century, I don't mind scientists double checking.
The Swedish government can block any extradition to a non-EU country if they feel like it, so yes, they could totally have given him that guarantee (at least until the next election).
The Government can refuse extradition even if the Supreme Court has not declared against extradition, as the law states that if certain conditions are fulfilled, a person "may" be extradited - not "shall" be extradited.
That kids that use cell phones more are also the ones who aren't training figural memory.
Well, according to TFS, it's apparently especially the kids that hold the phone to their right ear that "aren't training" their figural memory. Funny how that works.
Also curious how the effect was only observed for calls, with one of the referenced articles stating:
No exposure-response associations were observed for sending text messages and duration of gaming, which produces tiny RF-EMF emissions.
The EU has Public Consultations regularly, even if they onlyoccasionally get Slashdot coverage. There are 21 open consultations this very moment, if you feel that you have something to offer.
As for other matters... well, you're asked to select your representatives every 5 years for the EU Parliament and (I suspect) every 4 years for your national assembly and thus also the EU Council of Ministers. You can reach out to your representatives at any time, or work to replace them at the next election. And if you have a problem with the fact that idiots and criminals keep getting elected (and don't we all?), I'm afraid the only real solution is to convince your fellow EU citizens to vote for someone else. Personally I've put my vote behind the European United Left for EU parliament, along with supporting similar reform parties nationally, but you can pick your own poison.;-)
Autonomous cars were one year ago, though I admit it can be hard to remember with quacks like Uber and Tesla constantly making headlines. (Sorry, Japan. You can be second.)
I'm not the poster who replied to you anonymously. But personally, I find that that discussions tend to be more engaging, intellectual and genuine when I don't open with a line like "So let me drop some cluebombs on your idiocy here broheim". YMMV.
Anyway, I can tell my attempt at engaging are falling flat, so I'll get out of your hair now.
When people correct you, take a moment to contemplate that they may be right instead of going full Dunning-Kruger.
8 kWh/day is not 333 W/h, it's 333 W.
And while I can't speak for your electricity bill, mine is in Wh – not W/h.
The rest of your math seems to hold up, though I'd be more interested in math showing that the amortized cost of permanently parking a Tesla car in your garage is actually cheaper than grid electricity... color me skeptical.
The latest thing I've encountered is with Agile process. One engineer had to become the "architect" who was allowed to describe how things were to be implemented but not actually see or review the source code.
And like most things labeled "Agile", it has nothing to do with Agile development... Still, that's not bad at all!
I (briefly) held a job in which the architect not only described at a high level how things were to be implemented, but before you could start coding you had to provide the architect with a detailed implementation plan for him to approve, and at the end he had to review and approve the final code. There was one architect and some 40 developers. By the time I left, my entire team had been idling for an entire two-week sprint because the architect was still working through last month's paperwork, and we'd yet to be given the go-ahead to actually write any code. (This, management told us, was supposed to be Scrum.)
The less wide but still spectacular Super Panavision 70 was used to film the Cinerama presentations [...] 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), which also featured scenes shot in Todd-AO and MCS-70 [...]
Since the film was shot and mastered in 70 mm, it seems reasonable enough to restore it to 70 mm. Unlike 3-screen Cinerama, there are actually still theaters that can project 70 mm analog.
I might give it a pass in my local 70 mm theater though... some years ago they replaced their screen, adding a silver coating to reflect more light for digital stereoscopic 3D projection, but ever since, analog projection has suffered from noticeable "hot spotting" (not a problem with digital projection for some reason). Fortunately, unlike Nolan, I have no problems with digital projection.:-)
The Danish income tax is just around the EU average. E.g. in 2013, the average single Dane paid an effective income tax of 38%, compared to 31% in the US, 49% in Germany or 56% in Belgium. (Source: OECD)
(Many people in the above mentioned countries will react with disbelief when they see these numbers, but then, it really shouldn't surprise anyone that OECD understands the tax systems of the respective countries better than most citizens.)
Incidentally, that Belgian average tax rate of 56% is the same as the Danish marginal (and thus also maximum) rate.
Maybe you're thinking of the OECD "tax burden" (total tax revenue, including VAT and fees, as a percentage of GDP), which is sometimes brought up by politicians campaigning on tax cuts? But even that is only 46%, and while it is indeed (barely) the highest in OECD, it's also a largely meaningless number, as revenue-neutral changes to the tax system can have significant impact on it. (E.g. in Denmark, people pay taxes on welfare checks. If instead we did like most countries and just paid out equivalent tax-free – but smaller – checks, the OECD tax burden would drop an estimated 4% points, and six OECD countries would suddenly be ahead of us.)
Experiments were performed on multiple x86 processor
architectures, including Intel Ivy Bridge (i7-3630QM),
Intel Haswell (i7-4650U), Intel Skylake (unspecified
Xeon on Google Cloud), and AMD Ryzen. The Spectre
vulnerability was observed on all of these CPUs.
Slashdot Mirror
Roma (and the others) had an artificially limited theatrical release in order to make it eligible for the Oscars, to generate interesting on the festival circuit, and to satisfy the desires of the director for a "real" screening.
Here in Denmark, Roma could easily have carried a multi-theatre multi-week theatrical release... instead it was screened exactly once for a festival spot (a screening which sold out a month in advance). What's keeping these movies out of theaters is not a lack of interest among theatergoers, but a decision by Netflix to shore up their content monopoly.
Nobody's trying to ban home viewing. The controversy is about Netflix refusing to screen their films in theaters (even when there's a clear market demand), instead locking them up in their walled garden of a subscription service.
I'd be surprised if any Netflix movies were even nominated
...
Surprise! (...?)
No military in the history of the world has done as much to prevent collateral damage (i.e. the killing of innocent bystanders) as the U.S. military. That is just a fact.
Historically, that's obviously untrue. In modern times, it is, at best, disputed. Many militaries have done far worse, of course. But starting in the 90s and continuing through the second Iraq war, the U.S. (not to mention its allies) has by many accounts expended less effort at protecting civilians than they had in former wars, not out of malice, but likely in an effort to instead minimize American soldier deaths at any cost and maintain public support for the war in the U.S. And of course, the safest soldier is one that's not on the ground where people are dying.
The shocker was how people were dying. For the first time, in any of his [war mortality] surveys, the leading cause of death wasn't disease. It was bombs and bullets. [...] And the biggest number [...] were killed by the American-led coalition.
"I should mention that only three of them involved guys with guns. All the rest were helicopter gunships, and bombs from planes. [...] There's no evidence here of soldiers running amok. There's evidence here of a style of engagement that probably has relied very heavily on air power that has resulted in a lot, a lot of civilian deaths. [...] A Pentagon spokesperson said that they've dropped about 50,000 bombs in Iraq. 50,000 bombs. Very, very small fraction of them would need to miss their target or be based on bad information to explain 100,000 civilian deaths."
– Les Roberts talking about the first Lancet Iraq War mortality study (covering the first two years of the war, and before sectarian violence began dominating mortality) on This American Life.
As the same story later goes in to, the Pentagon soft limit for acceptable number of civilian deaths was 30 per airstrike. (By that standard, I guess they were really careful, given that we didn't have 1.5 million civilian deaths from those 50,000 bombs...)
Go to Settings, change your preferences, then click "Show Bookmarklet and Settings Data" to get a link with your preferences encoded directly in the URL, no cookies needed.
So in other words, we can expect a few years of increased scrutiny, and then everything will be back to business as usual for the tech companies.
The article isn't talking about people not replying to an email.
This would be the equivalent of an applicant showing up for a scheduled interview, sit around waiting for half an hour, and then finally be told, "oh, yeah, no, we found someone else, so the interview is cancelled".
Which I'm sure has happened, too, but is definitely not the norm.
Yeah, you shouldn't need to worry then. From TFA:
Experienced developers appear easier to identify than novice ones. The more skilled you are, the more unique your work apparently becomes. That might be in part because beginner programmers often copy and paste code solutions from websites like Stack Overflow.
From TFA:
it’s possible to de-anonymize a programmer using only their compiled binary code.
My apologies.
You wrote "It is unlikely that Smartphone RF causes cancer [because] it's just not ionizing radiation."
That is literally making the argument that for RF radiation to cause cancer, it would likely have to be ionizing. Other causes must thus be unlikely. That is the argument I took issue with. (Given that the vast majority of cancers are not caused by excess ionizing radiation, I don't think your antecedent is true.)
I didn't state anything about your opinion, nor did I claim that you said that the cancer link was impossible. I simply commented on that specific part of your argument, because it's an argument that keeps popping up, and I don't find it sound. I figured that since you're participating in this debate, you might be interested in knowing when your arguments are not convincing, and should perhaps be revised or clarified.
It is unlikely that Smartphone RF causes cancer. It's just not ionizing radiation.
I find the argument that non-ionizing radiation can't cause cancer a bit tired. Cancer is a very complex (set of) disease(s), with a multitude of risk factors, of which ionizing radiation is but one.
RF causes tissue heating, which is linked to cancer in other contexts (e.g. repeated intake of very hot drinks have been linked to esophageal cancer). If the power, frequency and duration of exposure is just right, RF almost certainly can cause cancer. Is cell phone RF anywhere near the "danger zone"? Probably not, but given proliferation of RF sources over the last half a century, I don't mind scientists double checking.
The Swedish government can block any extradition to a non-EU country if they feel like it, so yes, they could totally have given him that guarantee (at least until the next election).
The Government can refuse extradition even if the Supreme Court has not declared against extradition, as the law states that if certain conditions are fulfilled, a person "may" be extradited - not "shall" be extradited.
source
That kids that use cell phones more are also the ones who aren't training figural memory.
Well, according to TFS, it's apparently especially the kids that hold the phone to their right ear that "aren't training" their figural memory. Funny how that works.
Also curious how the effect was only observed for calls, with one of the referenced articles stating:
No exposure-response associations were observed for sending text messages and duration of gaming, which produces tiny RF-EMF emissions.
The EU has Public Consultations regularly, even if they only occasionally get Slashdot coverage. There are 21 open consultations this very moment, if you feel that you have something to offer.
As for other matters... well, you're asked to select your representatives every 5 years for the EU Parliament and (I suspect) every 4 years for your national assembly and thus also the EU Council of Ministers. You can reach out to your representatives at any time, or work to replace them at the next election. And if you have a problem with the fact that idiots and criminals keep getting elected (and don't we all?), I'm afraid the only real solution is to convince your fellow EU citizens to vote for someone else. Personally I've put my vote behind the European United Left for EU parliament, along with supporting similar reform parties nationally, but you can pick your own poison. ;-)
Autonomous cars were one year ago, though I admit it can be hard to remember with quacks like Uber and Tesla constantly making headlines. (Sorry, Japan. You can be second.)
I'm not the poster who replied to you anonymously. But personally, I find that that discussions tend to be more engaging, intellectual and genuine when I don't open with a line like "So let me drop some cluebombs on your idiocy here broheim". YMMV.
Anyway, I can tell my attempt at engaging are falling flat, so I'll get out of your hair now.
When people correct you, take a moment to contemplate that they may be right instead of going full Dunning-Kruger.
8 kWh/day is not 333 W/h, it's 333 W.
And while I can't speak for your electricity bill, mine is in Wh – not W/h.
The rest of your math seems to hold up, though I'd be more interested in math showing that the amortized cost of permanently parking a Tesla car in your garage is actually cheaper than grid electricity... color me skeptical.
And during that ice age, Earth had to support a human population of 10 million, living in hunter-gatherer cultures.
But now, since an ice age is such fun, we'll try the same thing, only in the other direction, before the end of the century. Obligatory
In private industry, cruft is eventually cleaned out by falling profits.
Hahaha! Good one!
The latest thing I've encountered is with Agile process. One engineer had to become the "architect" who was allowed to describe how things were to be implemented but not actually see or review the source code.
And like most things labeled "Agile", it has nothing to do with Agile development... Still, that's not bad at all!
I (briefly) held a job in which the architect not only described at a high level how things were to be implemented, but before you could start coding you had to provide the architect with a detailed implementation plan for him to approve, and at the end he had to review and approve the final code. There was one architect and some 40 developers. By the time I left, my entire team had been idling for an entire two-week sprint because the architect was still working through last month's paperwork, and we'd yet to be given the go-ahead to actually write any code. (This, management told us, was supposed to be Scrum.)
The original was in Cinerama.
They're not mutually exclusive: Wikipedia says:
The less wide but still spectacular Super Panavision 70 was used to film the Cinerama presentations [...] 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), which also featured scenes shot in Todd-AO and MCS-70 [...]
IMDb also lists the negative format as "65 mm (Eastman 50T 5251)".
Since the film was shot and mastered in 70 mm, it seems reasonable enough to restore it to 70 mm. Unlike 3-screen Cinerama, there are actually still theaters that can project 70 mm analog.
I might give it a pass in my local 70 mm theater though... some years ago they replaced their screen, adding a silver coating to reflect more light for digital stereoscopic 3D projection, but ever since, analog projection has suffered from noticeable "hot spotting" (not a problem with digital projection for some reason). Fortunately, unlike Nolan, I have no problems with digital projection. :-)
We know GMail at least used to keep offline backups because they've had to restore from backups before.
Should we mind that entirely made up tax rate?
The Danish income tax is just around the EU average. E.g. in 2013, the average single Dane paid an effective income tax of 38%, compared to 31% in the US, 49% in Germany or 56% in Belgium. (Source: OECD)
(Many people in the above mentioned countries will react with disbelief when they see these numbers, but then, it really shouldn't surprise anyone that OECD understands the tax systems of the respective countries better than most citizens.)
Incidentally, that Belgian average tax rate of 56% is the same as the Danish marginal (and thus also maximum) rate.
Maybe you're thinking of the OECD "tax burden" (total tax revenue, including VAT and fees, as a percentage of GDP), which is sometimes brought up by politicians campaigning on tax cuts? But even that is only 46%, and while it is indeed (barely) the highest in OECD, it's also a largely meaningless number, as revenue-neutral changes to the tax system can have significant impact on it. (E.g. in Denmark, people pay taxes on welfare checks. If instead we did like most countries and just paid out equivalent tax-free – but smaller – checks, the OECD tax burden would drop an estimated 4% points, and six OECD countries would suddenly be ahead of us.)
Was initially fixed in 10.12.3, 10.13.2 is an update to the existing fix.
Where are you seeing this? All I see are reports that 10.12 has NOT been fixed.
From their paper:
Experiments were performed on multiple x86 processor architectures, including Intel Ivy Bridge (i7-3630QM), Intel Haswell (i7-4650U), Intel Skylake (unspecified Xeon on Google Cloud), and AMD Ryzen. The Spectre vulnerability was observed on all of these CPUs.