Why argue against a useful communication tool? The common usage of [sic] is to communicate to the reader that the writer is aware of the misspelling/odd spelling etc. but that it is correctly quoted. If one just leave the error (or unusual spelling, word etc.) then the reader have to assume the writer did a correct quote or that the writer did a mistake while quoting.
TL;DR doing that would reduce the information bandwidth with one bit per potential wrongly quoted word.
Except nobody forces the private company to say anything?!? They don't have to allow reviews however IF they do it is reasonable to demand that they DO show the reviews that people write (except spam and obvious crap posting). If not they don't actually allow reviews, they just allow endorsement of their products. If a company want to show endorsements on their website it is obviously 100% okay however it shouldn't be called reviews and they should make sure that consumers are fully aware that the ones shown are selected to paint the product as perfect.
Anything else is allowing companies to lie. Consumers that are lied to can't be expected to be informed.
Bullshit! RoHS isn't silly, it wouldn't apply to spacecraft and you "bible" doesn't negate the actual research that is done on solder alloys after it was printed!
You obviously don't understand alloys and that proportions of different components plus the choice of the components makes a huge difference. You don't understand the reasoning (and research) behind the RoHS and you think an old book triumphs modern research...
It is easy to list things that changes the properties of solders, one example is that bismuth shouldn't be used in standard leaded solder as it can drastically reduce melt temperatures, in a lead free formulation there are not such problems (though an excess of bismuth will make joints fragile).
You can't be serious?!? First whiskers is much less of a problem than those ranting about non-leaded solder, second it is possible to use techniques to reduce* the risk of whiskers etc. that can be done for some extra expense and third critical infrastructure etc. like spacecraft are exempt from the RoHs demands!
(* using leaded solder also only reduce risks of whisker formation)
The original meaning? Which of them? That some people are hacks?
Words can have multiple meanings and commonly do. Words also change meaning (or accumulate more meanings). There is no problem accepting people can be hacks, that there are many elegant hardware hacks, that some people are excellent hackers and that some people are hacking into other peoples computers. Not for me anyway, YMMV.
Comparing a syringe with a very easy to use auto-injector is dishonest and AFAIK the drug costs more. Still I have to agree that it is way too expensive, $20 should be enough for two injectors and even give a small profit.
Every language goes through this fad phase. It gets used for 20 years, then everyone forgets about for the next 20, then everyone jumps on the bandwagon when retro is hip again.
You see this all the time.
i.e. Hyperlink had been (re) invented two times PRIOR to Timothy Lee Burner butchering it.
Butchering? Bullshit. And do you really think it is interesting that others have had the same (kind of) ideas before? Are your completely ignorant of history in general and technical history in particular?
The reality is that the goal of making ever thinner machines is easier to do if the machine isn't made to be opened for service, glue is an excellent way to reliably fit things together.
IMHO: Someone robbing a place at gunpoint should be sentenced to attempted murder, OTOH I think people that attempt to kill someone should be sentenced as if they succeeded.
Actually, the chemical imbalance theory is on shaky ground at best. It's convenient for marketing antidepressants to be taken for life, but that's about all it has going for it. Otherwise, why would side effects hit as soon as you start taking the drug, but the benefits lag by about 6 weeks?
There are plenty of reasons why that may be. The chemical imbalance is the best theory given the data available (yes people do research on that from time to time).
I'm not saying there are no benefits, just that correcting a simple chemical imbalance doesn't seem likely to be the mechanism.
As for fixing what is making people unhappy, just because a pill can correct it doesn't mean the origin of the problem is internal. Consider, an NSAID can help with the pain and swelling of a strained back. Does that mean the problem is an inherited imbalance in my back rather than my mistaken belief that I can move that fallen tree by myself?
Of course people can be unhappy from external causes, that is just natural. Depression is marked with differences in thought patterns and behavior that makes it much less likely to resolve by itself even if any external causes are resolved. While I realize that the side-effects can be severe for some TCA (tricyclic antidepressants) and ECT (electro-convulsive therapy) helped me when severely depressed. I still try to inform people that ECT is a safe and extremely effective treatment that helps in some cases where antidepressants have no effect.
Schizophrenia shows all signs of being controlled by genetics though there is some evidence that external conditions can hasten or delay onset. Susceptibility to depression may also be genetic, but there is significant evidence that it can be brought on or sent into remission through external influences only. For example, seasonal affective disorder.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the problem is some combination of being always on, multitasking, poor sleep hygiene, and poor financial security. The constant IV drip of fear from the media and our "fearless" leaders isn't helpful either.
Plenty of people get depressed without external reasons. Postpartum depression can be extremely severe even if the child is wanted and the life situation is perfect. People that "have it all" can suddenly get depressed and kill themselves without anybody (including themselves) knowing why. People that have starting to get depressed can suddenly treat small things like someone not greeting them loudly enough (even it they were greeted with a smile etc.) probably meant that someone was insulted and/or irritated by the depressed person - had to explain once that I didn't despise a depressed fellow in exactly that situation.
Now if there would only be a drug that made you less of a know-it-all (your journal and tag line are irritating from someone that should understand things aren't black and white).
Speak for yourself. Depressed people in general doesn't want to take anybody down, not even themselves. There's a reason being suicidal is counted as (partially) separate from the depression itself - and there are mentally ill people that are suicidal and not depressed.
So you think the employees was given the devices in question before they were (forcibly) sent to a third party (the charity)? Why do you think such an unlikely scenario would be even possible?
Nationalist? Well yes if you squint enough but no if you actually try to understand naming: Americium was created in America (USA - during the Manhattan project), Scandium was found in Sweden (Scandinavia), Francium was detected in France etc. Neither Hitler nor Castro were scientists, those that have elements named after them are scientists that have made significant contributions - with Nobelium being the exception.
Slashdot Mirror
You should be ashamed! However I did smile... :)
Why argue against a useful communication tool? The common usage of [sic] is to communicate to the reader that the writer is aware of the misspelling/odd spelling etc. but that it is correctly quoted. If one just leave the error (or unusual spelling, word etc.) then the reader have to assume the writer did a correct quote or that the writer did a mistake while quoting.
TL;DR doing that would reduce the information bandwidth with one bit per potential wrongly quoted word.
Except nobody forces the private company to say anything?!? They don't have to allow reviews however IF they do it is reasonable to demand that they DO show the reviews that people write (except spam and obvious crap posting). If not they don't actually allow reviews, they just allow endorsement of their products.
If a company want to show endorsements on their website it is obviously 100% okay however it shouldn't be called reviews and they should make sure that consumers are fully aware that the ones shown are selected to paint the product as perfect.
Anything else is allowing companies to lie. Consumers that are lied to can't be expected to be informed.
If so then use a real-time GC algorithm.
Bullshit! RoHS isn't silly, it wouldn't apply to spacecraft and you "bible" doesn't negate the actual research that is done on solder alloys after it was printed!
You obviously don't understand alloys and that proportions of different components plus the choice of the components makes a huge difference. You don't understand the reasoning (and research) behind the RoHS and you think an old book triumphs modern research...
It is easy to list things that changes the properties of solders, one example is that bismuth shouldn't be used in standard leaded solder as it can drastically reduce melt temperatures, in a lead free formulation there are not such problems (though an excess of bismuth will make joints fragile).
You can't be serious?!? First whiskers is much less of a problem than those ranting about non-leaded solder, second it is possible to use techniques to reduce* the risk of whiskers etc. that can be done for some extra expense and third critical infrastructure etc. like spacecraft are exempt from the RoHs demands!
(* using leaded solder also only reduce risks of whisker formation)
The original meaning? Which of them? That some people are hacks?
Words can have multiple meanings and commonly do. Words also change meaning (or accumulate more meanings). There is no problem accepting people can be hacks, that there are many elegant hardware hacks, that some people are excellent hackers and that some people are hacking into other peoples computers. Not for me anyway, YMMV.
Probably the last one. I'm finally beginning to accept that most people including technical people can't do simple logic...
This. Actually wanting to make that point was the only reason I clicked on this story in the first place...
IOW assume everything is compromised.
Reread the article then as you are wrong...
Comparing a syringe with a very easy to use auto-injector is dishonest and AFAIK the drug costs more. Still I have to agree that it is way too expensive, $20 should be enough for two injectors and even give a small profit.
Autoinjectors aren't new and they all work the same: remove the safety mechanism and jam the active end into a large muscle.
No, just Silver Bullets (TM).
Every language goes through this fad phase. It gets used for 20 years, then everyone forgets about for the next 20, then everyone jumps on the bandwagon when retro is hip again.
You see this all the time.
i.e. Hyperlink had been (re) invented two times PRIOR to Timothy Lee Burner butchering it.
Butchering? Bullshit. And do you really think it is interesting that others have had the same (kind of) ideas before? Are your completely ignorant of history in general and technical history in particular?
Then the prevailing wisdom isn't backed up with verifiable facts. Give us that if you want reasonable people to believe your version.
Fine thank you, just a hint of cyanide.
The reality is that the goal of making ever thinner machines is easier to do if the machine isn't made to be opened for service, glue is an excellent way to reliably fit things together.
IMHO: Someone robbing a place at gunpoint should be sentenced to attempted murder, OTOH I think people that attempt to kill someone should be sentenced as if they succeeded.
Actually, the chemical imbalance theory is on shaky ground at best. It's convenient for marketing antidepressants to be taken for life, but that's about all it has going for it. Otherwise, why would side effects hit as soon as you start taking the drug, but the benefits lag by about 6 weeks?
There are plenty of reasons why that may be. The chemical imbalance is the best theory given the data available (yes people do research on that from time to time).
I'm not saying there are no benefits, just that correcting a simple chemical imbalance doesn't seem likely to be the mechanism.
As for fixing what is making people unhappy, just because a pill can correct it doesn't mean the origin of the problem is internal. Consider, an NSAID can help with the pain and swelling of a strained back. Does that mean the problem is an inherited imbalance in my back rather than my mistaken belief that I can move that fallen tree by myself?
Of course people can be unhappy from external causes, that is just natural. Depression is marked with differences in thought patterns and behavior that makes it much less likely to resolve by itself even if any external causes are resolved. While I realize that the side-effects can be severe for some TCA (tricyclic antidepressants) and ECT (electro-convulsive therapy) helped me when severely depressed. I still try to inform people that ECT is a safe and extremely effective treatment that helps in some cases where antidepressants have no effect.
Schizophrenia shows all signs of being controlled by genetics though there is some evidence that external conditions can hasten or delay onset. Susceptibility to depression may also be genetic, but there is significant evidence that it can be brought on or sent into remission through external influences only. For example, seasonal affective disorder.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the problem is some combination of being always on, multitasking, poor sleep hygiene, and poor financial security. The constant IV drip of fear from the media and our "fearless" leaders isn't helpful either.
Plenty of people get depressed without external reasons. Postpartum depression can be extremely severe even if the child is wanted and the life situation is perfect. People that "have it all" can suddenly get depressed and kill themselves without anybody (including themselves) knowing why. People that have starting to get depressed can suddenly treat small things like someone not greeting them loudly enough (even it they were greeted with a smile etc.) probably meant that someone was insulted and/or irritated by the depressed person - had to explain once that I didn't despise a depressed fellow in exactly that situation.
Life is complicated. Make lemonade.
Now if there would only be a drug that made you less of a know-it-all (your journal and tag line are irritating from someone that should understand things aren't black and white).
Speak for yourself. Depressed people in general doesn't want to take anybody down, not even themselves. There's a reason being suicidal is counted as (partially) separate from the depression itself - and there are mentally ill people that are suicidal and not depressed.
They didn't complain about simple infections either - they just died.
So you think the employees was given the devices in question before they were (forcibly) sent to a third party (the charity)? Why do you think such an unlikely scenario would be even possible?
Nationalist? Well yes if you squint enough but no if you actually try to understand naming: Americium was created in America (USA - during the Manhattan project), Scandium was found in Sweden (Scandinavia), Francium was detected in France etc. Neither Hitler nor Castro were scientists, those that have elements named after them are scientists that have made significant contributions - with Nobelium being the exception.
No it isn't obvious - and the poster you replied to never claimed it was. Those are similar though as both are anti-science, easy to disprove etc.
Yes. Plasma speakers may be a bit harder to hack though...