In tech circles, your name gets passed around a lot farther than you think. Even if you turn down that job, the fact that you were a dickhat will pass around - eventually to the jobs you do want. IF you don't fit into the culture, you won't fit into the job.
This is doubly true in medium and smaller tech markets (like here in PDX, for instance). We've been trying to hire sysadmins here with experience, and we've been able to weed out at least a couple of resumes so far based just on (bad) reputation.
Sounds more like a high school clique than anything else - a couple of people don't like you, and bam you're isolated and shunned.
The friendly Amazon truck, which just happens to have boiled peanuts among its cargo, adds Bubba's address to its current route. In 27 minutes, 30 seconds, an incredulous Mr. Hatfield is gazing, teary-eyed, at a can of purest dixie delight right there in his hands.
Goddammit, now I want some boiled peanuts...
(To those of us from the South, boiled peanuts are our In-N-Out burger....)
So how, exactly, is this a killer app? Bitcoin is still just a fancy barter token (and I don't see anything that will change that). Anyone with intelligence will still buy BTC and spend them ASAP or recieve BTC and convert them ASAP. Etc... etc...
The only people who profit from this are the exchanges.
and deprived the Fed of tax revenue because they did it in a currency that the Fed don't control, the Fed get pissy and fucking STEAL IT!?
*sigh* I'll keep repeating this until it gets through people's thick skulls.
Sol long as you can calculate a dollar equivalent and pay your taxes in dollars the Feds don't care if you keep your books in BTC, Pesos, or jars of hamster poop. They even have IRS publications that explain how the system works to keep you from running afoul of the laws. It's so easy to do that even I, back when I ran a one-man operation, could (and did) do so. (Living near the Canadian border, I handled a lot of Canadian cash.)
You're running into one of the properties of BitCoin here - it's not anonymous, it's pseudonymous. You can't hide the transaction history of a given coin, because that's how BitCoin works - it's a single vast verifiable public transaction log. If someone doesn't want to accept coins that passed through a particular wallet, then it's easy to verify this. And if there are enough people who won't touch Silk Road coins, then their value will be dubious to the people who ordinarily would.
Which runs into, and makes worse, another property of Bitcoin - it's limited supply and deflationary pressure.
Of course most of these stores actually use a payment processor that immediately converts the bitcoins to USD for them, but if more and more stores start accepting it, at some point the currency may become so practical that such conversions will no longer need to be made. If a company does business with another company that accepts bitcoin, they may as well take bitcoin from their clients and then use those bitcoins to pay their suppliers.
That reflects such a profound misunderstanding of why they immediately convert that I hardly know where to begin. It's not because they can't pay their bills with BTC (most of which are almost certainly net 30, not cash on the barrelhead) - it's because of the extreme volatility of BTC.
Replace BTC with USD in your entire statement, and you'll have your answer as to why everyone (including governments) sees the USD as some sort of "magically universally accepted currency".
No, you won't. What you'll have is BTC supporters handwaving and smokeblowing and complete lack of understanding of the difference between fiat currency (the US dollar) and barter tokens (BTC). The former is backed by the "full faith and credence" of the US Government and one of the largest economies in the world. The latter is backed by absolutely nothing beyond libertarian fantasies.
On top of that, who the hell pays with cash anymore? The true universally accepted currency is the one sitting behind that piece of plastic you keep swiping everywhere. If that happens to be dollars, pesos, or rupees, it doesn't really matter, because the conversion all happens in the background at your bank. Because of this, there is little or no reason BTC couldn't start up their own credit card and BECOME as universally accepted as anything else. The only thing stopping this is the current "magically universally accepted currency" and all the corruption behind it.
No, no reason beyond common sense. Starting and running such a card takes money (real money, not Monopoly money), and depends on a stable exchange rate, stable exchanges, and liquidity. BTC pretty much has none of those.
At Starbucks you are getting a known quality, it may not always be the best but its always the same. Independent places can be hit and mis, but usually once you find one that makes a product you like, its always good there.
Independent places, in my experience, tend to be hit-or-miss at all scales... from the store, to the shift, to the barista/cook/whatever actually doing the work when you place your order.
You know, for the rest of the world outside the USA who has no clue what the hell 96,000 lbs means and aren't bright enough or are too lazy to perform the conversion?
There, fixed that for you.
When I encounter an unfamiliar measurement, I familiarize myself with it. Or I use Google or some other service to convert it into a measurement I *am* familiar with. What I don't do is insist that other people alter their behavior to suit me.
They changed how the setting of the Clock is chosen a few years back... now it includes anything those making the decision believe to represent a "global threat".
The Clock has always been more political than anything else (the Bulletin being mostly an advocate for arms control and elimination), the change just made that more open.
I don't get why annoying your audience is a good thing, at the expense of listening to the people you hired to be experts anyway.
That's because you don't get that on any particular topic, there's only a small subset of people who'll be jarred out of their suspension of disbelief by it. Sufficiently small that there is no real point to trying to get everything possible accurate to the nth degree. (Doubly so when being so accurate would render the events of the plot impossible in the first place.) Hollywood knows this, OCD suffering experts and/. posters seemingly do not.
I was about to say the same thing - chases are dangerous, that's why they have specific regulations in the fire code.
And that brings up another thing... if you want to 'futureproof' your house, tech is about the third or fourth thing on the list at least. Build the house to code or beyond (preferably beyond). Make sure there is maintenance access and load paths to major equipment (water heater, heater, washing machine, dryer). Look to building in accessibility features (hallways wide enough to take wheelchairs and power scooters, a place for a ramp in the future, a handicapped shower/tub, all the stuff you or a future buyer will want when they get old).
Goddam geeks are always worried about the latest shiny, and never concerned about tomorrow.
I've always wondered why we can't do simple infrared or ultraviolet examinations of things with our smart phones.
You could - if the phone were equipped for it. But there's very little call for such capability and no very much use for it if you aren't a specialist, so there's pretty much no motivation for the phone manufacturers to spend the money on more expensive cameras that almost nobody want to buy.
I have a sneaky suspicion it's because not all clothing is opaque in those spectra
You're as ignorant of science as you are of economics.
You have no fucking clue what you're talking about. It's almost like you didn't read what I wrote, or if you did....your below room temperature IQ rendered you unable to comprehend it - leading to your kindergarten level reply.
The key idea in play here isn't the length of the exposure.
I take it you've never done nature photography in the wild of a unusual short duration event that's unpredictable in both occurrence and location? I have, and I'm impressed that they caught even one. (Doubly so since they weren't professional videographers.) Don't let what you see on TV lull you into a false sense of how easy it is.
Nature photography in the wild is, IMO, one of the hardest and most challenging of all photographic disciplines.
I stopped reading not too far in when I encountered this little gem of stupidity; The trouble is, helicopters can only land in nice, big open areas that can be miles from where they're needed..
Um, not quite. Military helicopter pilots are trained to land in spaces much smaller than you might think possible. Military helicopters are also equipped with winches - they don't need to land.
This is an extreme example - but it should give you the general idea. Sadly, the video is missing the most interesting part - the helicopter flying blind and *backwards* out of the narrow part of the canyon.
get on some of the medical databases (if you know any med or nursing students they will have access) and have them to searches - bonus if the databases they have access to include Canada, the EU, and Israel. You will find many thousands of peer-reviewed studies.
Get a clue or an IQ transplant - then you'll realize that none of that alters the basic truth "shows promise as" is not the same as "actually does these things". Nor does "peer-reviewed" automagically equate to "non sloppy science".
Our government has been stifling this all over lies to protect Big Pharma and the logging industry - and more recently big oil now that Canabis/hemp show promise for carbon-neutral fuels and plastics normally derived from petroleum.
No, pretty much nobody has been stifling things - because there's pretty much fuck-all to stifle. The state of research and the results thereof have been vastly overstated for decades in pro-cannibis propaganda. This has resulted in morons like you parroting BS under the mistake impression you have a clue beneath your tinfoil.
you got modded interesting for not knowing the difference between a short and long exposure? Sigh, what a waste of time slashdot has become.
No, I got modded interesting for knowing enough about photography and the processes involved to grasp that this is a variant of the ideas behind some long exposure work.
You can find them as well in other media. Created century ago, it's the same general idea as Magyar's work and that of the printhead scanner guy I mentioned above - capturing single moments in time and combining them into a static image, thus making the viewer think of the flow of time. I tried to catch the same ebb-and-flow in a longer than usual exposure in my picture here. The portrait will be static, the subject is currently still... but time passes regardless as can be seen by the figures moving past. Even art can be fleeting, witness the artist's moving hand...
It's not that Slashdot has become a waste of time, it's that you're clueless about the subject under discussion.
So far, it seems that mass transit is increasingly automated. So why is non-mass transit any different?
Seriously? You haven't noticed the difference between vehicles operating on a 'closed course' on freaking literal physical rails - and a public highway or street?
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds more like a high school clique than anything else - a couple of people don't like you, and bam you're isolated and shunned.
Goddammit, now I want some boiled peanuts...
(To those of us from the South, boiled peanuts are our In-N-Out burger....)
Of course the porn sites benefit from the free advertising too.
So how, exactly, is this a killer app? Bitcoin is still just a fancy barter token (and I don't see anything that will change that). Anyone with intelligence will still buy BTC and spend them ASAP or recieve BTC and convert them ASAP. Etc... etc...
The only people who profit from this are the exchanges.
Score it flamebait or overrated all you want - it's the stone cold truth.
From TFS: It looks surprisingly good for such a short development cycle
It's trivially easy to *look* good - being functional is somewhat harder.
And building a 3.5 billion dollar company is just a *little* bit harder than writing a few scraps of code and soldering some bits together.
*sigh* I'll keep repeating this until it gets through people's thick skulls.
Sol long as you can calculate a dollar equivalent and pay your taxes in dollars the Feds don't care if you keep your books in BTC, Pesos, or jars of hamster poop. They even have IRS publications that explain how the system works to keep you from running afoul of the laws. It's so easy to do that even I, back when I ran a one-man operation, could (and did) do so. (Living near the Canadian border, I handled a lot of Canadian cash.)
Which runs into, and makes worse, another property of Bitcoin - it's limited supply and deflationary pressure.
That reflects such a profound misunderstanding of why they immediately convert that I hardly know where to begin. It's not because they can't pay their bills with BTC (most of which are almost certainly net 30, not cash on the barrelhead) - it's because of the extreme volatility of BTC.
No, you won't. What you'll have is BTC supporters handwaving and smokeblowing and complete lack of understanding of the difference between fiat currency (the US dollar) and barter tokens (BTC). The former is backed by the "full faith and credence" of the US Government and one of the largest economies in the world. The latter is backed by absolutely nothing beyond libertarian fantasies.
No, no reason beyond common sense. Starting and running such a card takes money (real money, not Monopoly money), and depends on a stable exchange rate, stable exchanges, and liquidity. BTC pretty much has none of those.
Independent places, in my experience, tend to be hit-or-miss at all scales... from the store, to the shift, to the barista/cook/whatever actually doing the work when you place your order.
There, fixed that for you.
When I encounter an unfamiliar measurement, I familiarize myself with it. Or I use Google or some other service to convert it into a measurement I *am* familiar with. What I don't do is insist that other people alter their behavior to suit me.
They changed how the setting of the Clock is chosen a few years back... now it includes anything those making the decision believe to represent a "global threat".
The Clock has always been more political than anything else (the Bulletin being mostly an advocate for arms control and elimination), the change just made that more open.
That's because you don't get that on any particular topic, there's only a small subset of people who'll be jarred out of their suspension of disbelief by it. Sufficiently small that there is no real point to trying to get everything possible accurate to the nth degree. (Doubly so when being so accurate would render the events of the plot impossible in the first place.) Hollywood knows this, OCD suffering experts and /. posters seemingly do not.
I was about to say the same thing - chases are dangerous, that's why they have specific regulations in the fire code.
And that brings up another thing... if you want to 'futureproof' your house, tech is about the third or fourth thing on the list at least. Build the house to code or beyond (preferably beyond). Make sure there is maintenance access and load paths to major equipment (water heater, heater, washing machine, dryer). Look to building in accessibility features (hallways wide enough to take wheelchairs and power scooters, a place for a ramp in the future, a handicapped shower/tub, all the stuff you or a future buyer will want when they get old).
Goddam geeks are always worried about the latest shiny, and never concerned about tomorrow.
You could - if the phone were equipped for it. But there's very little call for such capability and no very much use for it if you aren't a specialist, so there's pretty much no motivation for the phone manufacturers to spend the money on more expensive cameras that almost nobody want to buy.
You're as ignorant of science as you are of economics.
And that's without the whole "bouncing around in big waves in small boat" part. :)
As a photographer, the behind-the-scenes/making of episode was one of my favorites.
You have no fucking clue what you're talking about. It's almost like you didn't read what I wrote, or if you did....your below room temperature IQ rendered you unable to comprehend it - leading to your kindergarten level reply.
The key idea in play here isn't the length of the exposure.
I take it you've never done nature photography in the wild of a unusual short duration event that's unpredictable in both occurrence and location? I have, and I'm impressed that they caught even one. (Doubly so since they weren't professional videographers.) Don't let what you see on TV lull you into a false sense of how easy it is.
Nature photography in the wild is, IMO, one of the hardest and most challenging of all photographic disciplines.
I stopped reading not too far in when I encountered this little gem of stupidity; The trouble is, helicopters can only land in nice, big open areas that can be miles from where they're needed..
Um, not quite. Military helicopter pilots are trained to land in spaces much smaller than you might think possible. Military helicopters are also equipped with winches - they don't need to land.
This is an extreme example - but it should give you the general idea. Sadly, the video is missing the most interesting part - the helicopter flying blind and *backwards* out of the narrow part of the canyon.
Get a clue or an IQ transplant - then you'll realize that none of that alters the basic truth "shows promise as" is not the same as "actually does these things". Nor does "peer-reviewed" automagically equate to "non sloppy science".
No, pretty much nobody has been stifling things - because there's pretty much fuck-all to stifle. The state of research and the results thereof have been vastly overstated for decades in pro-cannibis propaganda. This has resulted in morons like you parroting BS under the mistake impression you have a clue beneath your tinfoil.
No, I got modded interesting for knowing enough about photography and the processes involved to grasp that this is a variant of the ideas behind some long exposure work.
You can find them as well in other media. Created century ago, it's the same general idea as Magyar's work and that of the printhead scanner guy I mentioned above - capturing single moments in time and combining them into a static image, thus making the viewer think of the flow of time. I tried to catch the same ebb-and-flow in a longer than usual exposure in my picture here. The portrait will be static, the subject is currently still... but time passes regardless as can be seen by the figures moving past. Even art can be fleeting, witness the artist's moving hand...
It's not that Slashdot has become a waste of time, it's that you're clueless about the subject under discussion.
Seriously? You haven't noticed the difference between vehicles operating on a 'closed course' on freaking literal physical rails - and a public highway or street?
These facts are very relevant, because they're the reason why the situation arose. And they are facts, which aren't subject to discussion.
Not on any planet where both of us are speaking English or in any reality where you have an IQ above room temperature.
Discarding facts with prejudice? That's not a good sign generally.