Can someone help me understand why anyone ever thought the 'digitize your mail' thing is a good idea? I mean, if you want to send/receive digital messages, you've already got a cornucopia of options - email, IM, Facebook messages, etc, etc, etc. You can 'scan' stuff yourself by snapping pix with your smartphone, etc. So if you want digital transmission of information you've got that right now, today, without having to go through the extra step of writing/printing it all out on paper and then going to the post office.
Conversely, if I've chosen USPS it's because I don't want stuff digitized. When my young kid makes something Amazingly Awesome for the grandparents I want that physical object delivered to them. Sure, it's an 8.5" x 11" piece of paper with (mostly) scribbles on it, but when the grandparents see that my kid has finally learned how to write their names out it'll melt their hearts, then go straight onto the fridge door.
Even people posting here seem to be mostly talking about ways to remove junk snail mail, not the Incredible Awesomeness of Outbox.
So, remind me again - how is this anything other than a terrible plan that died a well-deserved death?
</rant> Ok, I feel better now:)
But on a serious note - I would really love some insight about why transforming the USPS into the world's largest scanning service seems like a good idea.
"Having visited with me and my wife recently, the girlfriend of an ex-student of mine (now taking an M.Sc. in pure CS) asked me to suggest useful books for her boyfriend: '..
This brings to mind the ever-classic::
Dark Helmet: Before you die there is something you should know about us, Lone Star. Lone Starr: What? Dark Helmet: I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate. Lone Starr: What's that make us? Dark Helmet: Absolutely nothing! Which is what you are about to become. (from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...)
As of right now (12:23pm PST, 4/21/2014) the parent post is showing +2.... Flamebait.
I've been here a while but never seen a negative word attached to a positive score (it's always been +3 Informative, or +4 Insightful, or +2 Funny, or whatever). I don't think that my personal 'score adjusters' would give anything enough points to boost a -1 or 0 up to a +2.
I'm assuming it got mod'd up with a couple different modifiers (one insightful, one interesting, etc), then mod'd down with only Flamebait (and so Flamebait is the most common modifier), but I'm curious (1) if anyone else is seeing this and (2) does anyone have a better explanation about the score/modifier?
I just want to say that while I started this thread/discussion hive in a humorous vein, these posts obsessing about and/or and neither/nor totally made it worth it. We (all) might not be geeking out about technology, but we're definitely, awesomely, geeking out:)
(Yeah, you're probably right (at least, you're making a convincing case that the 'and' is a reasonable choice), but where else can I joke about needing a logical OR instead of a logical AND?)
While I agree that Amazon is actually a really good source of reviews I'm not 100% sure that the four (just 4!) reviews really offers a convincing sample size:)
I'd rather have millions of corporate overlords than 1 government overlord.
Yeah, but those aren't really your options, are they?
The choice you actually get to make it whether you'd prefer a couple number of corporate overlords, each a master of their domain (oil, telecomm, etc) or a small number of government overlords (the military, Federal Justice department, etc).
As someone who's tried this I'm going to say that I'd actually recommend reading something that explains the Bible (either concurrently, before, or even instead). Especially if you haven't read a Bible before. Not only are many passages opaque but the writing style is incredibly concise by modern standards. Not to mention the thousands of years of history since it was written. Having something that will help demystify what each passage means really helps open up the Bible.
Think of it this way - you wouldn't try Emacs / Vim for the first time by digging into source code, instead you'd find a 'tutorial for beginners' Digging into a Bible (not matter which version you choose to read) is way, way more complicated than Emacs or Vim. Smart people have dedicated their lives to understanding it, and some of them have have written orientations for beginners - go read one of those!
Is that actually going to help? Isn't the whole problem that the thieves didn't understand what they'd stolen?
(I guess you better make sure you stencil all sorts of radioactive/biohazard/warning signs over the stuff, too)
(Also - please make sure to mention this post 6 months from now when you AskSlashdot "Why don't women want to date me after the first time that I bring them back to my place?")
In particular, interfaces between two languages that are not C are often difficult to construct
(Yes, I know what they mean. I think they meant to write "In particular, interfaces between two languages (when neither is C) are often difficult to construct".
Still, it amuses me to think about making an interface from C... to C:)
Turns out recording stuff in private without first obtaining active consent from everyone who's being record is illegal in Washington state (RCW 9.73.030). So if the Google Glass guy decided to turn on video recording while enjoying his dinner he wouldn't have just pissed off the owner/other patrons, but also broken WA law, too
I can't believe that the summary writer can actually suggest that "Maybe Faraday cages and anti-surveillance features will become the norm at the restaurants" - I can't think of a single restaurant that wants to spend the vast amounts of cash to prevent wireless communication
Y'know, I was wondering which was going to win out-/.'s general disdain for Formal Education vs./.'s worship of technology. Looks like MOOCs have been around long enough for/.ers to start thinking about them like the rest of Formal Education.
If anyone's interested, we could probably find some open source software to run a betting pool on how/. will break in it's next article on MOOCs (my money's on "back to mindless adoration").
I had a prof in college who explained the whole 'grading on a curve' thing.
He started his explanation by saying that a good exam would have:
* several of no-brainer questions to check if everyone had at least done the minimum and give them a warm-up for the real questions
* several of real questions, to make sure people actually did study, and to produce some differentiation amongst the general population
* one or two incredibly difficult questions. Questions so tough that most people are NOT expected to get them. Questions so tough that if you do get them then you the prof should come talk to you about majoring in the area (the prof taught Freshman/Sophomore level math).
According to him the point of grading on a curve was to be able to put that third category of questions on the exam without destroying the grade of everyone else in the room.
I, personally don't grade on a curve but I thought it was interesting that it can serve a purpose in some situations.
Slashdot Mirror
Can someone help me understand why anyone ever thought the 'digitize your mail' thing is a good idea? I mean, if you want to send/receive digital messages, you've already got a cornucopia of options - email, IM, Facebook messages, etc, etc, etc. You can 'scan' stuff yourself by snapping pix with your smartphone, etc. So if you want digital transmission of information you've got that right now, today, without having to go through the extra step of writing/printing it all out on paper and then going to the post office.
Conversely, if I've chosen USPS it's because I don't want stuff digitized. When my young kid makes something Amazingly Awesome for the grandparents I want that physical object delivered to them. Sure, it's an 8.5" x 11" piece of paper with (mostly) scribbles on it, but when the grandparents see that my kid has finally learned how to write their names out it'll melt their hearts, then go straight onto the fridge door.
Even people posting here seem to be mostly talking about ways to remove junk snail mail, not the Incredible Awesomeness of Outbox.
So, remind me again - how is this anything other than a terrible plan that died a well-deserved death?
</rant> :)
Ok, I feel better now
But on a serious note - I would really love some insight about why transforming the USPS into the world's largest scanning service seems like a good idea.
"Having visited with me and my wife recently, the girlfriend of an ex-student of mine (now taking an M.Sc. in pure CS) asked me to suggest useful books for her boyfriend: '..
This brings to mind the ever-classic::
Dark Helmet: Before you die there is something you should know about us, Lone Star.
Lone Starr: What?
Dark Helmet: I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate.
Lone Starr: What's that make us?
Dark Helmet: Absolutely nothing! Which is what you are about to become.
(from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...)
As of right now (12:23pm PST, 4/21/2014) the parent post is showing +2.... Flamebait.
I've been here a while but never seen a negative word attached to a positive score (it's always been +3 Informative, or +4 Insightful, or +2 Funny, or whatever). I don't think that my personal 'score adjusters' would give anything enough points to boost a -1 or 0 up to a +2.
I'm assuming it got mod'd up with a couple different modifiers (one insightful, one interesting, etc), then mod'd down with only Flamebait (and so Flamebait is the most common modifier), but I'm curious (1) if anyone else is seeing this and (2) does anyone have a better explanation about the score/modifier?
Math is more informative than off-the-cuff assertions. Embrace it.
Mod parent up! The entire post is solid, but this quote is solid gold on top of that!
LOL! Mod parent up - this is hilarious :)
I just want to say that while I started this thread/discussion hive in a humorous vein, these posts obsessing about and/or and neither/nor totally made it worth it. We (all) might not be geeking out about technology, but we're definitely, awesomely, geeking out :)
Whooooooooooosh! :)
(Yeah, you're probably right (at least, you're making a convincing case that the 'and' is a reasonable choice), but where else can I joke about needing a logical OR instead of a logical AND?)
C'mon people - aren't we nerds? Clearly we need an OR here, not an AND!
LOL. There's 4 reviews there (4/7/2014, 2pm PST).
:)
While I agree that Amazon is actually a really good source of reviews I'm not 100% sure that the four (just 4!) reviews really offers a convincing sample size
Greed
I'd rather have millions of corporate overlords than 1 government overlord.
Yeah, but those aren't really your options, are they?
The choice you actually get to make it whether you'd prefer a couple number of corporate overlords, each a master of their domain (oil, telecomm, etc) or a small number of government overlords (the military, Federal Justice department, etc).
"online subscribers" was exactly the weasel-word the needed defining, and parent did an awesome job of patching up the summary!
At least, I think I did. Where is the UID listed on this new version of Slashdot? :)
As someone who's tried this I'm going to say that I'd actually recommend reading something that explains the Bible (either concurrently, before, or even instead). Especially if you haven't read a Bible before. Not only are many passages opaque but the writing style is incredibly concise by modern standards. Not to mention the thousands of years of history since it was written. Having something that will help demystify what each passage means really helps open up the Bible.
Think of it this way - you wouldn't try Emacs / Vim for the first time by digging into source code, instead you'd find a 'tutorial for beginners' Digging into a Bible (not matter which version you choose to read) is way, way more complicated than Emacs or Vim. Smart people have dedicated their lives to understanding it, and some of them have have written orientations for beginners - go read one of those!
Is that actually going to help? Isn't the whole problem that the thieves didn't understand what they'd stolen? (I guess you better make sure you stencil all sorts of radioactive/biohazard/warning signs over the stuff, too) (Also - please make sure to mention this post 6 months from now when you AskSlashdot "Why don't women want to date me after the first time that I bring them back to my place?")
In particular, interfaces between two languages that are not C are often difficult to construct
(Yes, I know what they mean. I think they meant to write "In particular, interfaces between two languages (when neither is C) are often difficult to construct". :)
Still, it amuses me to think about making an interface from C... to C
Turns out recording stuff in private without first obtaining active consent from everyone who's being record is illegal in Washington state (RCW 9.73.030). So if the Google Glass guy decided to turn on video recording while enjoying his dinner he wouldn't have just pissed off the owner/other patrons, but also broken WA law, too
I can't believe that the summary writer can actually suggest that "Maybe Faraday cages and anti-surveillance features will become the norm at the restaurants" - I can't think of a single restaurant that wants to spend the vast amounts of cash to prevent wireless communication
and (my) parent post has been down-modded yet. :)
if it was geek oriented it would be "some uncanny suggestions", like the Uncanny X-Men! Amirite?
that this is not a complete sentence:
:)
"Although carbon nanotube based processors are showing promise [...]."
Go, speed-editor, go!
Y'know, I was wondering which was going to win out- /.'s general disdain for Formal Education vs. /.'s worship of technology. Looks like MOOCs have been around long enough for /.ers to start thinking about them like the rest of Formal Education.
/. will break in it's next article on MOOCs (my money's on "back to mindless adoration").
If anyone's interested, we could probably find some open source software to run a betting pool on how
*cough* that's just "several", not "several of". I should have just stuck with " a couple of", as defined by XKCD: http://xkcd.com/1070/
I had a prof in college who explained the whole 'grading on a curve' thing.
He started his explanation by saying that a good exam would have:
* several of no-brainer questions to check if everyone had at least done the minimum and give them a warm-up for the real questions
* several of real questions, to make sure people actually did study, and to produce some differentiation amongst the general population
* one or two incredibly difficult questions. Questions so tough that most people are NOT expected to get them. Questions so tough that if you do get them then you the prof should come talk to you about majoring in the area (the prof taught Freshman/Sophomore level math).
According to him the point of grading on a curve was to be able to put that third category of questions on the exam without destroying the grade of everyone else in the room.
I, personally don't grade on a curve but I thought it was interesting that it can serve a purpose in some situations.
Based on your rule, shouldn't it be
:)
"instead I got an unicorn"?
A unicorn sounds right to me, your rule seems right to me, but I can't quite reconcile them. Ah, cognitive dissonance