JUST MAYBE BECAUSE THE fellow lives in the bush out in the Aleutian peninsula and generates his electricity burning whale oil? OR maybe his internet by satellite is not fast enough to respond to the job offers in time? Could be all sorts of legitimate reasons why insisting on working remotely is causing employers to overlook his job inquiries. How many times have you had the dream of turning into a hermit when working on a.NET project. OR moving to Alaska.
It doesn't matter why he wants to work remotely. He could be Skynet for all people care.
Remote workers are not as productive as "there" workers on a number of levels guaranteed, and also quite possibly on actual measurable work performance too.
This is all about the perception the company has of him, not the other way around. "But he has XYZ" is completely irrelevant.
You must be one of the "everybody gets a trophy" generation. "Give me something (because of self-inflicted hardship)!" "I am an XYZ type person, give me something because of it!" Meh. Nobody wants that type around when the company might fail if the project fails.
Sorry, you are competing with a bunch of young guys who while not nearly as good, nor efficient, but will show up in the town and then the office and be there for the management to see. They can do this because they rent, don't have entrenched families, and aren't tied to where they are.. and probably got there a year or two ago anyway.
Management like to do stuff like walk around the building looking for who's there and who's not, and of who's there, who is working. Maybe not as enforcement, but as "gee I am a great manager look at all my guys working" type of thing.
Remote workers often disappear to other companies because this entrenched commitment is not present. Remotely working lets them jump ship for fewer reasons faster. (The company I work for has been burned by this repeatedly.)
Plus, getting someone involved in a complicated project remotely sucks ass, and is a drain on everybody else, having to produce a bunch more documentation that a conversation in a hallway could accomplish, remote desktop sharing sessions, etc. Sometimes I work on complicated stuff with others in my company, and it always sucks to have that one guy that can only see one computer screen and only hear what's going on. Unless it's pure program coding or graphics or something, they never pull their own weight.
Start looking hard for LOCAL jobs where you don't have to be "remote". Use your experience to branch out into new areas that widens your skill set to the point you can find a local job. Or, move to where the jobs are temporarily. Just don't say "I will only work for you remotely" because companies do deliberately pass that up because they've already had bad experiences with that.
One last point, the economy is still pretty bad. Nobody is getting a lot of jobs right now. The government is lying to you about it, or the job growth isn't in my state, NOBODY I know is doing "gosh I got this great new job" it's all "I haven't gotten a raise in 5 years and there are no worthwhile job prospects elsewhere". If there is a good economy, it's in China or something. You might consider lowering your expectations a bit. If you really want to work, you gotta compete with other guys that really need to work. From here, it sounds like you aren't on several levels.
I should add, all sarcasm aside: I really do love museums and I really do think they're valuable and educational.
But these claimed results are a little hard to swallow.
I have no doubt art is valuable. Just not to the folks who "win" something and then choose to not go to a field trip.
The kids who are smart, driven, and interested in stuff have.... wait for it... parents who are smart, driven, and interested in stuff. Those parents, are ALSO more likely to approve a field trip.
They need to be looking at the kids who "won" but didn't go. THOSE are going to be a pile of nigh-dregs of society, because their parents are, and the results of the study will be necessarily skewed the way they wanted, and found.
If you make a payout if SETI finds alien life, you suddenly give a financial motive to finding it. It could taint the results. Next Wow Signal we find and suddenly you'll have people who paid into it saying it's proof, and scientists saying it isn't. Lawyers will become involved.
Too messy if you ask me.
OR, more likely, the guy in the government who won't leak stuff for political reasons will leak that aliens have been here for half a century or more already and that our government covered it up.
The hype for this book was huge, with people claiming that it revolutionize the way we would cook and introduce a whole new "scientific" approach to cooking. That was complete nonsense -- it's more about fancy technology and fancy ingredients, with lots of fun pictures. If you like $600 coffee-table books, by all means, get a copy... or maybe get the photos for a steal in an $80 iPad app.
That's already been done.
The guy's name is "Alton Brown".
We don't need this arrogant asshole patent troll to do it. It's been done. (and probably better, I might add)
Also note, the energy available for things like tearing cars and bodies apart is much higher at higher speeds.
At 40 MPH there is X amount of energy in the system. At 80 MPH there is FOUR TIMES the energy in the system.
Even a difference between 65 and 75 mph makes a significant difference in the availability of energy to do bad stuff to things insurance companies have to pay for.
Slamming the brakes also assumes the person behind you isn't too close and is paying attention, and the guy behind him, the guy behind him, so on and so forth. Even if you avoid the pile up you just caused a traffic jam. If you can avoid the collision by temporarily speeding up it's much safer to do so.
Also, driving period has the potential to become dangerous. Delcaring passing a slower driver as a dangerous manuever is absurd.
The general point remains. These devices lack situational context, and a design by committee formula for what consistutes safe based on this data is likely to be stupendously flawed. I tend to equate it to the absurdity that IT regulations tend to produce such as the hidden essid requirement of PCI-DSS.
No. The guy behind caused a traffic jam by following too closely.
The point of the gap is to reduce the severity of the maneuvers you are forced to execute by things happening around you. It gives you options.
Make a gap, keep the gap, be safer. The gap allows you to accelerate fast too if you need to. Otherwise, you are forced to brake hard if something enters your driving space because "get behind the threat" is the only option you have left if you didn't leave a decent gap.
From one perspective some of us do care - they do make stuff that works reasonably well.
But my suspicion is that there's more to this than just abandoning Cisco. In many cases it's a lot cheaper to set up a router based on a PC and Linux, which probably is what happens in "emerging markets".
As for the NSA - they could probably do a lot better for the economy if they did put their effort into tracking down and nuking scammers, spammers and other internet pests - and their karma would be better. And they better use the CIA and others to really "take care" of those problems.
Yup. NSA knows where all the child porn distributors are, what they are using to do it, and who the people are.
Don't let the details in YOUR head confuse what you need to put in some OTHER head.
Simple and quick sentences. No semi-colons. Small words. Emails that point to documentation instead of putting the documentation in the email.
While highly annoying, there is a significant percentage of people in the world that cannot parse written word more complicated than "stop" or "yield" or "merge left".... and you can guess some not even that.
I'm not a big fan of legislation forcing people to make changes like this though. What would probably be smart is if some landlords got a clue and voluntarily made properties very energy efficient, and then used that as a selling point when advertising the property for rent. I don't think I've ever seen this done yet, which strikes me as a little bit odd.
In a good portion of cities, it's a landlord's market.
Around here, if you do not apply the moment you find and find acceptable (not ideal, just "can deal with this") place it'll get snapped up from under you.
Units stay on the market and "toured" for about three or four days, maybe longer if the landlord is slow about booking appointments. They don't need to advertise much if at all beyond a simple sign out front, or maybe Craigs list.
"Better advertising" from "but but they are efficient" would only be needed on new, highly over-priced or poorly located units.
It's almost impossible to find any >1080p monitors with better than 60 Hz. Some overclockable Korean monitors have it, but it's arguable whether the panel can keep up. Many gamers forego higher resolution in order to get higher refresh rates.
This guy may actually have a point (haven't RTFA). If a graphics card can display consistent 60 fps on 2560x1600 or 144 fps on 1920x1080, then there's nothing better to do (pending 4K, which will be reasonably priced soon enough)
Make them run cooler
Make them smaller
Make them less expensive
Make better drivers for more operating systems (imagine acceleration in a virtual machine so good we can cross-hardware and operating systems easily)
Make the drivers less important by putting more of it on the card
Yes, GPUs have come a long way, but making them run faster with more pixels and more surfaces and lighting isn't the only thing in play.
Use checktls.com to verify that outlook.com, hotmail.com, live.com, yahoo.com, etc. do not have SSL. Any messages sent to or from theses systems cross the wires in plain text for NSA to capture. This is reason enough to not use any of these services. At least gmail offers SSL/TLS with PFS algorithm on their SMTP servers.
NSA can get copies of the certificates used.
MOST email providers don't run SMTP securely. How would those services communicate with the run of the mill ISP if they forced secured mode.
Look, ya moron, email isn't secure, it never was, and won't be, unless you are personally trading private keys with the people you correspond with.
The insistence on using real names was what turned me completely off on G+
It was an obvious attempt to monetize my information to the point that they were getting more out of it than I would. Heck, Facebook while basically a cesspool at least uses "enticement" to get the information instead of "forced". While they gather what they can, they don't force me to participate. (I have massive ad-block capabilities so I don't worry about Facebook much.
That, and Google hooked it up with Youtube, forever linking what you watch and what you post with your real name, you CANNOT dissasociate them once Google has done that. And now you've got a company handing over your real name to the company that decides to have a copyright shit fit over the background music that happened to be playing on the radio while I filmed my cat getting it's head stuck in a watermelon and uploaded it to Youtube. G+ is downright DANGEROUS to privacy if you care about that.
I don't need that shit in my life, and if Google insists on it, I don't need Google in my life either.
While I didn't use it to the extent you did, I used it as my "common home page" across the several computers I use. Having access to bookmarks and other localized stuff, notes, and so on was very useful. I switched over to a company called Netvibes that has a free tool that is very similar to iGoogle. It's slower of course, and a little harder to use, but it's still there.
Many municipalities are too spread out for economic home-runs even for fiber.
My personal preference, having lived in 4 different areas, is for telecommunications to be handled by a local cooperative, otherwise known as a 'customer owned business'.
I've received utilities from commercial companies, government and employee owned, as well as cooperatives. The Coops have always had the best customer service, price vs performance, etc...
Yes, this is very true.
In the US, the "last mile" tends to be "the last 14 miles" People forget that the average country is a fraction of the size of the US, heck, some states are bigger than the majority of other countries.
Basically, the US would bump up against the edges of ALL OF EUROPE if laid over the top.
The comparisons, from the get go, are just plain stupid if they neglect these facts.
Locally, there has been huge inroads in fiber penetration into all sorts of places that were data deserts in the last two or three years. Only now, it's one trenching crew for one company, then another from another company, and then a year later, a third.
Municipalities get tired of it, and people get tired of it. Which leads to resistance at the local board and ultimately, a lack of competition.
There IS fiber going in all over, but there are a lot of restricting factors. There was a guy in the neighborhood where I worked that shared a bunch of information over a few beers. The guy makes considerably more than me as an IT guy, like six digits. His crew cost the electric company he was working quite a bit. He was constantly getting offers to move all over the US to work. People that could do what he was doing (read: several years experience running a tunneling device) are a little hard to get right now.
The fiber will come, it just is going to take longer in the US.
"In 2000 there were thousands of email/web hosting businesses. In 2013 not much has changed. To get my email/web/webmail/domain/VOIP/public-key/XMPP/VPN hosting I have to deal with five different service providers. Where are the complete hosting providers? The absence of competition in this area drives many to Google, making data siphoning easy for the NSA. Why has hosting not advanced in the last 10 years? Where are the hosting providers that make end-to-end encrypted email/web/VOIP/XMPP easy and automatic for all my clients?"
I'll tell ya where they are.
They got out competed by companies that could afford good spam filtering. Hand holding the spam filter is a full time job for a small email host.
Then, you get the idiots that jump ship for fifteen cents less per box per month, that drives the price down well below what it's worth doing unless the whole mess is completely automated. Or, the customers that said they would set it up themselves whine about how much work entering forty email addresses really is.
And, as things got more sophisticated, now you have to host PHP full of security holes, be an expert at every goddamn widget in WordPress, teach the web tard that a fourteen meg background bitmap image won't be a good choice for his web page, and troubleshoot a borked database... all on three operating systems.
Now, a small group "doing hosting" needs to have deep expertise in about 100 different subjects when they have time to learn five of them, and each "customer" will leave when they stumble upon one of those non expert areas. All the while not lifting a finger to help themselves.
Oh, and the customers don't want to pay more than $5 per month for it.
The days of sticking up a server, setting up an account and knowing the guy buying services knows what he is doing is LOOOONG gone. And, that in turn caused the market to collapse into the big players that can gain from having an expert in every subject around and still make a profit.
I'll tell ya what the issue is, that your assumption that in TEN YEARS the industry didn't change drastically didn't set off alarm bells in your head when you typed it out for the summary. THAT's the problem. Thinking that in TEN YEARS the market won't change. In the COMPUTER industry no less.
Unfortunately you can't just legislate it away. That doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work.
Well, it works very well in Europe. So while this particular case is example of police idiocy, the law in UK is not crazy. But I agree that it would be extremely hard to do in USA.
Doesn't stop them from trying, though.
I'm not going to get into it beyond that though - I'm not an expert, but it doesn't take an expert to recognize that something is broken. I really don't think just taking them away is the answer. As other incidents have spotlit, the act will not change, only the tools. Children (and adults too) committing violence against their peers and authority figures is the symptom, the gun (or knife etc) is just the vehicle, and the real problem is something else that I can't really identify personally. People are losing hope, getting restless, frustrated, and angry. We need to determine (and fix) the cause of that, not the results. But good luck with that, because the people in charge only care about looking like they are fixing things. Which only compounds the problem.
With that logic every kind of weapon should be legalised. Why bother banning nerve gas and explosives ? After all this will only change tools, not the act itself.
Read the Wake Forest Law Review document "Imagining Gun Control In America" that goes into depth about why "just ban them" won't work.
One would think though that a bunch of people saying "we'll kill you if you try" running around would be enough to make it clear it won't work. Here in the US, trying to ban them, is essentially starting a war. Which is a good thing in my opinion.
They are doing this now because soon there will be well enough established drone networks that will make attaching something to the vehicle irrelevant.
No need for a search warrant if your movements are in plain sight in public. They don't need a warrant to follow you in a car either.
With good cameras, and some good processing, they'll be able to spot, track, and follow many vehicles at once with an automated system. Parts of it will be on the ground with plate readers and cameras, and parts of it will be in the air.
And it'll be in real time constant basis, without the large or minor lag time issues (for periodic checking of the data or dial-in process).
they have essentially announced that they have the necessary computer skills and intent to simultaneously release the code publicly and conceal their role in that act.
I wasn't aware that capability implied intent. I suppose everyone who owns a gun now should just surrender their 4th amendment rights, since they have the ability to kill people. Someone find out where this judge is; let's put his name here and on as many web pages as possible so anytime anyone googles his name, they can point to this as a reason to have their case retried by a different judge who doesn't hate America.
Aye.
Every woman possessing a vagina on the street is a whore.
Every man on the street with a penis is a rapist.
Criminalize everyone and you can control everyone.
It's the articles that cited the BBC one and exaggerated the claims without including that disclaimer that're at fault. It's hard to see the NIF's press officers making any difference. If they'd ignored that part of the BBC article, they'd ignore that part of the press release and any protestations from NIF too.
Not really.
It's people thinking they know science and who can't read or won't bother to that blow things out of proportion.
This, pile of crap of an article, should be bashing the ignorance of 99% of people instead. The people that understood it wrong are in the same class of folks that need to be reminded that "contents may be hot" after microwaving food. If you are THAT stupid, one article isn't going to get you to catch up to what is actually being talked about.
There are different ways to break-even.
Scientific break-even means the energy you've provided to the fuel's environment is less than the energy the reaction liberates. This is what is claimed here, although even then they're squinting a bit by only counting the light absorbed by the fuel pellet.
Engineering break-even accounts for the inefficiency in providing energy to the reaction (losses in laser beam generation and transmission, in this case) and inefficiency in converting the reaction energy into electricity (or other useful form.) Once you've reached engineering break-even, you have a facility which, provided with fuel, will provide you with electricity.
Economic break-even is when the amount of electricity generated is sufficient to pay for the capital, consumables and maintenance (and perhaps waste disposal and decommissioning) cost of the facility.
Incidentally, I thought magnetic confinement fusion reactors had reached scientific break-even a decade or two ago. I haven't found any support for this belief in a quick web search, so maybe I'm delusional.
And what happens when there is very little non-EME content? What happens when your bank uses it, the.gov sites require it and you must use it to buy things?
We do something else for entertainment. We do something else to work with the bank. (Like switch to a credit union. And LOL at you thinking the banks would force something like that.) Obama's government can't web-site themselves out of a fucking crisis in bengazi let alone implement something as sweeping as this.
Not a big fucking deal.
The internet routes around damage, and what people do routes around what other people force them to do.
After 12 or so years, BitTorrent is still alive and well. There's actual, real, actual MONEY to be made there and they can't stop it. Your fantasies about someone who has no real solid monetary reason for doing this stuff are just dumb.
This stupid shit will fucking fail, and nobody will bother with it. What the WC3 thinks is going to happen means nothing. Those drooling retards haven't been able to get CSS3 going yet, a far simpler, easier, and actually _wanted_ change.
It might help if you understood how the government works before throwing stones at it. It is written into law which parts of government stay open and which close. Claiming some arbitrary website staying open won't cost the government much is entirely beside the point. Yes, you say, but then the law are not very good. Yes, I say, but no matter how you sliced it, some things you think are inessential are considered essential to others and vice versa. Hence we have legislators write them for us because having 300 million people *helping* to write laws is silly.
Ah. So it's political grandstanding written into law.
A better way to be prepared would be to own and be able to ride a horse. Only fuel it needs is grass, hay, and water(and if there isn't enough water for both you and a horse where you are, you are probably screwed anyway), and when it eventually breaks down at least you can eat it. Best option would be 2 horses that you can switch out to avoid tiring them out. Can go places vehicles can't (you can ride along comfortably on the median or shoulder of a road, right past all those people trapped in a traffic jam or out of gas), and, in the case of zombies, a canter or even a slow trot will easily get you past any somewhat mobile rotting corpses. Plus the skittish nature of horses would serve as a warning system to any dangers while traveling through the woods or camped out at night. It would be cheaper than this truck, more useful, and would certainly last a lot longer.
Uh. No. Horses will do two three;
- Drive you much closer to financial ruin, a much more common and harder to deal with disaster than zombies
- Will get you in associating with actual, real life crazy people.
- Give you a false sense of security when using them in an emergency, because they are skittish and noisy, and greatly increase the need to scavenge water, food, and time for maintenance over walking, biking or driving. Plus, "that guy on the horse" will be easy to follow and you are advertising half a ton of fresh meat for them to take from you.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't overlook the fact that "30 years of experience" is partly valuable on what they can teach the other staff members.
Working remotely is going to have less of an impact on what the other workers know. (If any at all.)
Why pay for "30 years", when "5 years and can share some of that with others" will do the job?
JUST MAYBE BECAUSE THE fellow lives in the bush out in the Aleutian peninsula and generates his electricity burning whale oil? OR maybe his internet by satellite is not fast enough to respond to the job offers in time? Could be all sorts of legitimate reasons why insisting on working remotely is causing employers to overlook his job inquiries. How many times have you had the dream of turning into a hermit when working on a .NET project. OR moving to Alaska.
It doesn't matter why he wants to work remotely. He could be Skynet for all people care.
Remote workers are not as productive as "there" workers on a number of levels guaranteed, and also quite possibly on actual measurable work performance too.
This is all about the perception the company has of him, not the other way around. "But he has XYZ" is completely irrelevant.
You must be one of the "everybody gets a trophy" generation. "Give me something (because of self-inflicted hardship)!" "I am an XYZ type person, give me something because of it!" Meh. Nobody wants that type around when the company might fail if the project fails.
Sorry, you are competing with a bunch of young guys who while not nearly as good, nor efficient, but will show up in the town and then the office and be there for the management to see. They can do this because they rent, don't have entrenched families, and aren't tied to where they are.. and probably got there a year or two ago anyway.
Management like to do stuff like walk around the building looking for who's there and who's not, and of who's there, who is working. Maybe not as enforcement, but as "gee I am a great manager look at all my guys working" type of thing.
Remote workers often disappear to other companies because this entrenched commitment is not present. Remotely working lets them jump ship for fewer reasons faster. (The company I work for has been burned by this repeatedly.)
Plus, getting someone involved in a complicated project remotely sucks ass, and is a drain on everybody else, having to produce a bunch more documentation that a conversation in a hallway could accomplish, remote desktop sharing sessions, etc. Sometimes I work on complicated stuff with others in my company, and it always sucks to have that one guy that can only see one computer screen and only hear what's going on. Unless it's pure program coding or graphics or something, they never pull their own weight.
Start looking hard for LOCAL jobs where you don't have to be "remote". Use your experience to branch out into new areas that widens your skill set to the point you can find a local job. Or, move to where the jobs are temporarily. Just don't say "I will only work for you remotely" because companies do deliberately pass that up because they've already had bad experiences with that.
One last point, the economy is still pretty bad. Nobody is getting a lot of jobs right now. The government is lying to you about it, or the job growth isn't in my state, NOBODY I know is doing "gosh I got this great new job" it's all "I haven't gotten a raise in 5 years and there are no worthwhile job prospects elsewhere". If there is a good economy, it's in China or something. You might consider lowering your expectations a bit. If you really want to work, you gotta compete with other guys that really need to work. From here, it sounds like you aren't on several levels.
I should add, all sarcasm aside: I really do love museums and I really do think they're valuable and educational. But these claimed results are a little hard to swallow.
I have no doubt art is valuable. Just not to the folks who "win" something and then choose to not go to a field trip.
The kids who are smart, driven, and interested in stuff have.... wait for it... parents who are smart, driven, and interested in stuff. Those parents, are ALSO more likely to approve a field trip.
They need to be looking at the kids who "won" but didn't go. THOSE are going to be a pile of nigh-dregs of society, because their parents are, and the results of the study will be necessarily skewed the way they wanted, and found.
If you make a payout if SETI finds alien life, you suddenly give a financial motive to finding it. It could taint the results. Next Wow Signal we find and suddenly you'll have people who paid into it saying it's proof, and scientists saying it isn't. Lawyers will become involved.
Too messy if you ask me.
OR, more likely, the guy in the government who won't leak stuff for political reasons will leak that aliens have been here for half a century or more already and that our government covered it up.
The hype for this book was huge, with people claiming that it revolutionize the way we would cook and introduce a whole new "scientific" approach to cooking. That was complete nonsense -- it's more about fancy technology and fancy ingredients, with lots of fun pictures. If you like $600 coffee-table books, by all means, get a copy... or maybe get the photos for a steal in an $80 iPad app.
That's already been done.
The guy's name is "Alton Brown".
We don't need this arrogant asshole patent troll to do it. It's been done. (and probably better, I might add)
Also note, the energy available for things like tearing cars and bodies apart is much higher at higher speeds.
At 40 MPH there is X amount of energy in the system. At 80 MPH there is FOUR TIMES the energy in the system.
Even a difference between 65 and 75 mph makes a significant difference in the availability of energy to do bad stuff to things insurance companies have to pay for.
Slamming the brakes also assumes the person behind you isn't too close and is paying attention, and the guy behind him, the guy behind him, so on and so forth. Even if you avoid the pile up you just caused a traffic jam. If you can avoid the collision by temporarily speeding up it's much safer to do so.
Also, driving period has the potential to become dangerous. Delcaring passing a slower driver as a dangerous manuever is absurd.
The general point remains. These devices lack situational context, and a design by committee formula for what consistutes safe based on this data is likely to be stupendously flawed. I tend to equate it to the absurdity that IT regulations tend to produce such as the hidden essid requirement of PCI-DSS.
No. The guy behind caused a traffic jam by following too closely.
The point of the gap is to reduce the severity of the maneuvers you are forced to execute by things happening around you. It gives you options.
Make a gap, keep the gap, be safer. The gap allows you to accelerate fast too if you need to. Otherwise, you are forced to brake hard if something enters your driving space because "get behind the threat" is the only option you have left if you didn't leave a decent gap.
Grow up, learn how to drive.
From one perspective some of us do care - they do make stuff that works reasonably well.
But my suspicion is that there's more to this than just abandoning Cisco. In many cases it's a lot cheaper to set up a router based on a PC and Linux, which probably is what happens in "emerging markets".
As for the NSA - they could probably do a lot better for the economy if they did put their effort into tracking down and nuking scammers, spammers and other internet pests - and their karma would be better. And they better use the CIA and others to really "take care" of those problems.
Yup. NSA knows where all the child porn distributors are, what they are using to do it, and who the people are.
But do nothing about it.
Yes.
Say more with less.
Don't let the details in YOUR head confuse what you need to put in some OTHER head.
Simple and quick sentences. No semi-colons. Small words. Emails that point to documentation instead of putting the documentation in the email.
While highly annoying, there is a significant percentage of people in the world that cannot parse written word more complicated than "stop" or "yield" or "merge left".... and you can guess some not even that.
I'm not a big fan of legislation forcing people to make changes like this though. What would probably be smart is if some landlords got a clue and voluntarily made properties very energy efficient, and then used that as a selling point when advertising the property for rent. I don't think I've ever seen this done yet, which strikes me as a little bit odd.
In a good portion of cities, it's a landlord's market.
Around here, if you do not apply the moment you find and find acceptable (not ideal, just "can deal with this") place it'll get snapped up from under you.
Units stay on the market and "toured" for about three or four days, maybe longer if the landlord is slow about booking appointments. They don't need to advertise much if at all beyond a simple sign out front, or maybe Craigs list.
"Better advertising" from "but but they are efficient" would only be needed on new, highly over-priced or poorly located units.
It's almost impossible to find any >1080p monitors with better than 60 Hz. Some overclockable Korean monitors have it, but it's arguable whether the panel can keep up. Many gamers forego higher resolution in order to get higher refresh rates.
This guy may actually have a point (haven't RTFA). If a graphics card can display consistent 60 fps on 2560x1600 or 144 fps on 1920x1080, then there's nothing better to do (pending 4K, which will be reasonably priced soon enough)
Make them run cooler
Make them smaller
Make them less expensive
Make better drivers for more operating systems (imagine acceleration in a virtual machine so good we can cross-hardware and operating systems easily)
Make the drivers less important by putting more of it on the card
Yes, GPUs have come a long way, but making them run faster with more pixels and more surfaces and lighting isn't the only thing in play.
Use checktls.com to verify that outlook.com, hotmail.com, live.com, yahoo.com, etc. do not have SSL. Any messages sent to or from theses systems cross the wires in plain text for NSA to capture. This is reason enough to not use any of these services. At least gmail offers SSL/TLS with PFS algorithm on their SMTP servers.
NSA can get copies of the certificates used.
MOST email providers don't run SMTP securely. How would those services communicate with the run of the mill ISP if they forced secured mode.
Look, ya moron, email isn't secure, it never was, and won't be, unless you are personally trading private keys with the people you correspond with.
The insistence on using real names was what turned me completely off on G+
It was an obvious attempt to monetize my information to the point that they were getting more out of it than I would. Heck, Facebook while basically a cesspool at least uses "enticement" to get the information instead of "forced". While they gather what they can, they don't force me to participate. (I have massive ad-block capabilities so I don't worry about Facebook much.
That, and Google hooked it up with Youtube, forever linking what you watch and what you post with your real name, you CANNOT dissasociate them once Google has done that. And now you've got a company handing over your real name to the company that decides to have a copyright shit fit over the background music that happened to be playing on the radio while I filmed my cat getting it's head stuck in a watermelon and uploaded it to Youtube. G+ is downright DANGEROUS to privacy if you care about that.
I don't need that shit in my life, and if Google insists on it, I don't need Google in my life either.
While I didn't use it to the extent you did, I used it as my "common home page" across the several computers I use. Having access to bookmarks and other localized stuff, notes, and so on was very useful. I switched over to a company called Netvibes that has a free tool that is very similar to iGoogle. It's slower of course, and a little harder to use, but it's still there.
Many municipalities are too spread out for economic home-runs even for fiber.
My personal preference, having lived in 4 different areas, is for telecommunications to be handled by a local cooperative, otherwise known as a 'customer owned business'.
I've received utilities from commercial companies, government and employee owned, as well as cooperatives. The Coops have always had the best customer service, price vs performance, etc...
Yes, this is very true.
In the US, the "last mile" tends to be "the last 14 miles" People forget that the average country is a fraction of the size of the US, heck, some states are bigger than the majority of other countries.
Basically, the US would bump up against the edges of ALL OF EUROPE if laid over the top.
The comparisons, from the get go, are just plain stupid if they neglect these facts.
Locally, there has been huge inroads in fiber penetration into all sorts of places that were data deserts in the last two or three years. Only now, it's one trenching crew for one company, then another from another company, and then a year later, a third.
Municipalities get tired of it, and people get tired of it. Which leads to resistance at the local board and ultimately, a lack of competition.
There IS fiber going in all over, but there are a lot of restricting factors. There was a guy in the neighborhood where I worked that shared a bunch of information over a few beers. The guy makes considerably more than me as an IT guy, like six digits. His crew cost the electric company he was working quite a bit. He was constantly getting offers to move all over the US to work. People that could do what he was doing (read: several years experience running a tunneling device) are a little hard to get right now.
The fiber will come, it just is going to take longer in the US.
"In 2000 there were thousands of email/web hosting businesses. In 2013 not much has changed. To get my email/web/webmail/domain/VOIP/public-key/XMPP/VPN hosting I have to deal with five different service providers. Where are the complete hosting providers? The absence of competition in this area drives many to Google, making data siphoning easy for the NSA. Why has hosting not advanced in the last 10 years? Where are the hosting providers that make end-to-end encrypted email/web/VOIP/XMPP easy and automatic for all my clients?"
I'll tell ya where they are.
They got out competed by companies that could afford good spam filtering. Hand holding the spam filter is a full time job for a small email host.
Then, you get the idiots that jump ship for fifteen cents less per box per month, that drives the price down well below what it's worth doing unless the whole mess is completely automated. Or, the customers that said they would set it up themselves whine about how much work entering forty email addresses really is.
And, as things got more sophisticated, now you have to host PHP full of security holes, be an expert at every goddamn widget in WordPress, teach the web tard that a fourteen meg background bitmap image won't be a good choice for his web page, and troubleshoot a borked database... all on three operating systems.
Now, a small group "doing hosting" needs to have deep expertise in about 100 different subjects when they have time to learn five of them, and each "customer" will leave when they stumble upon one of those non expert areas. All the while not lifting a finger to help themselves.
Oh, and the customers don't want to pay more than $5 per month for it.
The days of sticking up a server, setting up an account and knowing the guy buying services knows what he is doing is LOOOONG gone. And, that in turn caused the market to collapse into the big players that can gain from having an expert in every subject around and still make a profit.
I'll tell ya what the issue is, that your assumption that in TEN YEARS the industry didn't change drastically didn't set off alarm bells in your head when you typed it out for the summary. THAT's the problem. Thinking that in TEN YEARS the market won't change. In the COMPUTER industry no less.
Unfortunately you can't just legislate it away. That doesn't work, has never worked, and will never work.
Well, it works very well in Europe. So while this particular case is example of police idiocy, the law in UK is not crazy. But I agree that it would be extremely hard to do in USA.
Doesn't stop them from trying, though.
I'm not going to get into it beyond that though - I'm not an expert, but it doesn't take an expert to recognize that something is broken. I really don't think just taking them away is the answer. As other incidents have spotlit, the act will not change, only the tools. Children (and adults too) committing violence against their peers and authority figures is the symptom, the gun (or knife etc) is just the vehicle, and the real problem is something else that I can't really identify personally. People are losing hope, getting restless, frustrated, and angry. We need to determine (and fix) the cause of that, not the results. But good luck with that, because the people in charge only care about looking like they are fixing things. Which only compounds the problem.
With that logic every kind of weapon should be legalised. Why bother banning nerve gas and explosives ? After all this will only change tools, not the act itself.
Read the Wake Forest Law Review document "Imagining Gun Control In America" that goes into depth about why "just ban them" won't work.
Here is the link if you want it: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1326743
One would think though that a bunch of people saying "we'll kill you if you try" running around would be enough to make it clear it won't work. Here in the US, trying to ban them, is essentially starting a war. Which is a good thing in my opinion.
They are doing this now because soon there will be well enough established drone networks that will make attaching something to the vehicle irrelevant.
No need for a search warrant if your movements are in plain sight in public. They don't need a warrant to follow you in a car either.
With good cameras, and some good processing, they'll be able to spot, track, and follow many vehicles at once with an automated system. Parts of it will be on the ground with plate readers and cameras, and parts of it will be in the air.
And it'll be in real time constant basis, without the large or minor lag time issues (for periodic checking of the data or dial-in process).
they have essentially announced that they have the necessary computer skills and intent to simultaneously release the code publicly and conceal their role in that act.
I wasn't aware that capability implied intent. I suppose everyone who owns a gun now should just surrender their 4th amendment rights, since they have the ability to kill people. Someone find out where this judge is; let's put his name here and on as many web pages as possible so anytime anyone googles his name, they can point to this as a reason to have their case retried by a different judge who doesn't hate America.
Aye.
Every woman possessing a vagina on the street is a whore.
Every man on the street with a penis is a rapist.
Criminalize everyone and you can control everyone.
It's the articles that cited the BBC one and exaggerated the claims without including that disclaimer that're at fault. It's hard to see the NIF's press officers making any difference. If they'd ignored that part of the BBC article, they'd ignore that part of the press release and any protestations from NIF too.
Not really.
It's people thinking they know science and who can't read or won't bother to that blow things out of proportion.
This, pile of crap of an article, should be bashing the ignorance of 99% of people instead. The people that understood it wrong are in the same class of folks that need to be reminded that "contents may be hot" after microwaving food. If you are THAT stupid, one article isn't going to get you to catch up to what is actually being talked about.
There are different ways to break-even. Scientific break-even means the energy you've provided to the fuel's environment is less than the energy the reaction liberates. This is what is claimed here, although even then they're squinting a bit by only counting the light absorbed by the fuel pellet.
Engineering break-even accounts for the inefficiency in providing energy to the reaction (losses in laser beam generation and transmission, in this case) and inefficiency in converting the reaction energy into electricity (or other useful form.) Once you've reached engineering break-even, you have a facility which, provided with fuel, will provide you with electricity.
Economic break-even is when the amount of electricity generated is sufficient to pay for the capital, consumables and maintenance (and perhaps waste disposal and decommissioning) cost of the facility.
Incidentally, I thought magnetic confinement fusion reactors had reached scientific break-even a decade or two ago. I haven't found any support for this belief in a quick web search, so maybe I'm delusional.
Cooper: "Of course."
Hofstadter: "Cool!"
Wolowitz: "Meh"
Koothrappali: "Wuht?"
Clearer now?
And what happens when there is very little non-EME content? What happens when your bank uses it, the .gov sites require it and you must use it to buy things?
We do something else for entertainment. We do something else to work with the bank. (Like switch to a credit union. And LOL at you thinking the banks would force something like that.) Obama's government can't web-site themselves out of a fucking crisis in bengazi let alone implement something as sweeping as this.
Not a big fucking deal.
The internet routes around damage, and what people do routes around what other people force them to do.
After 12 or so years, BitTorrent is still alive and well. There's actual, real, actual MONEY to be made there and they can't stop it. Your fantasies about someone who has no real solid monetary reason for doing this stuff are just dumb.
This stupid shit will fucking fail, and nobody will bother with it. What the WC3 thinks is going to happen means nothing. Those drooling retards haven't been able to get CSS3 going yet, a far simpler, easier, and actually _wanted_ change.
It might help if you understood how the government works before throwing stones at it. It is written into law which parts of government stay open and which close. Claiming some arbitrary website staying open won't cost the government much is entirely beside the point. Yes, you say, but then the law are not very good. Yes, I say, but no matter how you sliced it, some things you think are inessential are considered essential to others and vice versa. Hence we have legislators write them for us because having 300 million people *helping* to write laws is silly.
Ah. So it's political grandstanding written into law.
Amazingly large difference there. {rolls eyes}
A better way to be prepared would be to own and be able to ride a horse. Only fuel it needs is grass, hay, and water(and if there isn't enough water for both you and a horse where you are, you are probably screwed anyway), and when it eventually breaks down at least you can eat it. Best option would be 2 horses that you can switch out to avoid tiring them out. Can go places vehicles can't (you can ride along comfortably on the median or shoulder of a road, right past all those people trapped in a traffic jam or out of gas), and, in the case of zombies, a canter or even a slow trot will easily get you past any somewhat mobile rotting corpses. Plus the skittish nature of horses would serve as a warning system to any dangers while traveling through the woods or camped out at night. It would be cheaper than this truck, more useful, and would certainly last a lot longer.
Uh. No. Horses will do two three;
- Drive you much closer to financial ruin, a much more common and harder to deal with disaster than zombies
- Will get you in associating with actual, real life crazy people.
- Give you a false sense of security when using them in an emergency, because they are skittish and noisy, and greatly increase the need to scavenge water, food, and time for maintenance over walking, biking or driving. Plus, "that guy on the horse" will be easy to follow and you are advertising half a ton of fresh meat for them to take from you.
Horses are a poor choice in most places.