a good-looking guy asks 100 Americans and 200 European females if they want to have sex with him. I think he may have gotten ZERO in America and 2 in Europe but one was a prostitute.
Because women are looking for different things in a partner to a man. We want physical beauty, and will happily sleep with someone based purely on appearances, but most women prefer a charming personality over looks (within reason). So this 'experiment' is flawed.
I've had friends that picked up every single time they went out. I'm talking multiple times per week for years on end. The formula was the gift of the gab, being confident, funny and interesting, and having no standards of physical appearance. Not once did they ever walk up to a girl and ask for sex straight up. The female libido simply doesn't work that way.
Nuclear accident = uninhabitable area
Coal under normal use = uninhabitable planet
I'm not pretending Nuclear is perfect but given the choice, I vote for Nuclear.
They have the right reaction, they're just aimed in the wrong direction. If your business is based on a technical solution, then your decisions must have a technical basis. If you're making what is technically the wrong decisions for "business reasons", then either your business or your reasoning is suspect.
Yes, but equally, there's a lot of technical people who think they know what's good for the business, but really don't. Cloud services are a prime example, there's so much irrational hate out there, but all the FUD has been debunked. Ultimately it comes down to risk, and both cloud and on-prem come with risk, the cloud option however generally is easier to define and insure against, which is why business is a big fan of it.
Good point. Pretty much the same debunking as with the Apple/Foxconn suicides. Suicide makes a great headline, but under scrutiny very rarely turns out to be much different from the rate for the general population.
With almost 40 million members, if we discount the kids, the prison inmates, the elderly etc it's almost one member in every marriage.
That's why you should never use real names on the Internet.
And then discount the fake accounts, curious accounts (non paying) and the prostitutes who used it as an advertising platform you end up with probably just a few million real customers, all male and not necessarily married ( I only know one person who had an account and that is a single guy).
Why do millions continue to put faith in something that proves over and over again to be untrustworthy?
That is the real question.
This!
It's worth noting that Win10 is effectively spyware that tracks everything you do, same goes for Google and Facebook. Anyone who engages is questionable behaviour on such platforms should have no expectation of privacy.
Dont get me wrong, as a homosexual I'm not at all condoning the death of a person for their sexuality.
I'm trying to work out why a gay person would be on a site for married people? Surely the customers are all hetero, or did AM cater for people in the closet?
Maybe it's about time to open up the conversation on why we find one physical activity with another person to be taboo, but not another (like say tennis).
Monogamy is a ridiculous concept and I have no other explanation other than like religion, it's been around so long that people just automatically assume it must be true. Social monogamy has it's benefits, but I see no reason to restrict ourselves to sexual monogamy. Sex with new partners is fun, and as long as we accept the encounter as purely physical enjoyment, I see no reason why married people shouldn't be able to fool around with others.
At 150 kW output (and substantially more input) it's not clear to me whether the birds would be instantly killed or merely blinded, badly burned, and left to suffer and die on the ground. But I bet even this village-scale heliostat system will suffer from this problem.
Not sure about this installation, but one I read about in Australia was in the desert, where there are no birds.
Having worked my way up through every level, the biggest thing I've learned is "correct" is a massively subjective concept, based on value statements people at other levels don't see.
This pretty much sums up most Slashdot comments whenever the word management is used. Worker-bees are simply unaware of the complexities and conflicting demands that someone with responsibility faces. Instead of thinking hey that decision doesn't make sense, there most be more to it that I don't understand, the general reaction is, there's a decision I don't understand, that guy is a moron.
The ironic part is that by calling out the decision as stupid they are merely highlighting their own stupidity that they've failed to grasp the full nature of the problem.
TLDR Stupid people are usually too stupid to realise that they're stupid.
I mean, ask your friends.
"You guys putting things in the cloud?"
"Yeah."
"Why?"
"Management said we had to."
"Why?"
"Man, shut up. You already owe me a beer."
They know. You know. "Cloud" is just another fad.
Maybe instead of asking your friends, you should get advice from someone who knows what they're talking about?
Cloud Services offer a value proposition for certain types of applications and services. eg, got a Web App you want to release, but don't want to spend hundreds of thousands on hardware, computer room, resiliency etc? (Yes hundreds of thousands, because that's how much it costs to build a pair of fully fitted out 24/7 resilient computer rooms).
Companies like AWS offer you all that for a few dollars a month. If the app takes off I can scale up on the fly effortlessly only paying for what I use. Business costs are now purely a cost I can manage, without headaches of dealing with socially incompetent sysadmins and their childish demands.
Under your model I'd have to hire floor space and staff simply to manage a whole bunch for boxes for no real benefit to the business.
. The cloud stuff isn't cheaper unless you are avoiding paying for idle hardware.
Er, that is the whole point of AWS. It is charged by load, so you scale up and down as required, therefore never paying for idle hardware. The AWS model wins because they extract 100% of every piece of hardware, while most on-prem shops would be lucky to get 10%.
AWS is going to take over the world. You heard it here first.
Office, AD, Group Policy, Exchange, SQL, Server and Desktop integration.
Sure it is possible that these categories exist on other OSes, but none match the full feature offering you get with the MS suite overall. Most people who use MS don't like it, they use it because they've looked for alternatives and always come up short. Like it or not MS is the best of breed in this particular space.
This is the interesting challenge for the auto industry. As cars become more tech and less mechanical, so to will their methodologies need to shift from manufacturing to software development. You'd have to wonder if the traditional auto companies can change quickly enough to survive, or if Tesla, Google, Apple etc will simply swallow them up with their expertise in this space?
For a company that has demonstrated zero respect for your privacy, then using their device, which every single piece of data flows through, wouldn't be such a prudent decision.
Slashdot Mirror
a good-looking guy asks 100 Americans and 200 European females if they want to have sex with him. I think he may have gotten ZERO in America and 2 in Europe but one was a prostitute.
Because women are looking for different things in a partner to a man. We want physical beauty, and will happily sleep with someone based purely on appearances, but most women prefer a charming personality over looks (within reason). So this 'experiment' is flawed.
I've had friends that picked up every single time they went out. I'm talking multiple times per week for years on end. The formula was the gift of the gab, being confident, funny and interesting, and having no standards of physical appearance. Not once did they ever walk up to a girl and ask for sex straight up. The female libido simply doesn't work that way.
Nuclear accident = uninhabitable area
Coal under normal use = uninhabitable planet
I'm not pretending Nuclear is perfect but given the choice, I vote for Nuclear.
Ejaculating more than once per day also increases the risk of Prostrate Cancer (according to something I read once but can't remember the source).
They have the right reaction, they're just aimed in the wrong direction. If your business is based on a technical solution, then your decisions must have a technical basis. If you're making what is technically the wrong decisions for "business reasons", then either your business or your reasoning is suspect.
Yes, but equally, there's a lot of technical people who think they know what's good for the business, but really don't. Cloud services are a prime example, there's so much irrational hate out there, but all the FUD has been debunked. Ultimately it comes down to risk, and both cloud and on-prem come with risk, the cloud option however generally is easier to define and insure against, which is why business is a big fan of it.
Good point. Pretty much the same debunking as with the Apple/Foxconn suicides. Suicide makes a great headline, but under scrutiny very rarely turns out to be much different from the rate for the general population.
With almost 40 million members, if we discount the kids, the prison inmates, the elderly etc it's almost one member in every marriage.
That's why you should never use real names on the Internet.
And then discount the fake accounts, curious accounts (non paying) and the prostitutes who used it as an advertising platform you end up with probably just a few million real customers, all male and not necessarily married ( I only know one person who had an account and that is a single guy).
Why do millions continue to put faith in something that proves over and over again to be untrustworthy? That is the real question.
This!
It's worth noting that Win10 is effectively spyware that tracks everything you do, same goes for Google and Facebook. Anyone who engages is questionable behaviour on such platforms should have no expectation of privacy.
Dont get me wrong, as a homosexual I'm not at all condoning the death of a person for their sexuality.
I'm trying to work out why a gay person would be on a site for married people? Surely the customers are all hetero, or did AM cater for people in the closet?
Uh, nope, sorry. The site advertises itself as a place for people wanting to cheat on their spouses to do so.
The key word there being 'advertises'. Like most advertising, you shouldn't read too much into the sales pitch.
The moral compass being touted here is the moral compass of millions of people who do not do such things.
There is data that implies that many more millions of people do do such things, so you need to be careful deciding which behaviour is the most normal.
Actually, some of us do. For instance, those of us who try to follow Christ...
The same ones that fuck children? Give us a break from your hypocritical shit....
Maybe it's about time to open up the conversation on why we find one physical activity with another person to be taboo, but not another (like say tennis).
Monogamy is a ridiculous concept and I have no other explanation other than like religion, it's been around so long that people just automatically assume it must be true. Social monogamy has it's benefits, but I see no reason to restrict ourselves to sexual monogamy. Sex with new partners is fun, and as long as we accept the encounter as purely physical enjoyment, I see no reason why married people shouldn't be able to fool around with others.
So he chose to move to a country where the behaviour he enjoys is punishable by death? Sympathy meter is approaching zero...
At 150 kW output (and substantially more input) it's not clear to me whether the birds would be instantly killed or merely blinded, badly burned, and left to suffer and die on the ground. But I bet even this village-scale heliostat system will suffer from this problem.
Not sure about this installation, but one I read about in Australia was in the desert, where there are no birds.
Having worked my way up through every level, the biggest thing I've learned is "correct" is a massively subjective concept, based on value statements people at other levels don't see.
This pretty much sums up most Slashdot comments whenever the word management is used. Worker-bees are simply unaware of the complexities and conflicting demands that someone with responsibility faces. Instead of thinking hey that decision doesn't make sense, there most be more to it that I don't understand, the general reaction is, there's a decision I don't understand, that guy is a moron.
The ironic part is that by calling out the decision as stupid they are merely highlighting their own stupidity that they've failed to grasp the full nature of the problem.
TLDR Stupid people are usually too stupid to realise that they're stupid.
I mean, ask your friends. "You guys putting things in the cloud?" "Yeah." "Why?" "Management said we had to." "Why?" "Man, shut up. You already owe me a beer."
They know. You know. "Cloud" is just another fad.
Maybe instead of asking your friends, you should get advice from someone who knows what they're talking about?
Cloud Services offer a value proposition for certain types of applications and services. eg, got a Web App you want to release, but don't want to spend hundreds of thousands on hardware, computer room, resiliency etc? (Yes hundreds of thousands, because that's how much it costs to build a pair of fully fitted out 24/7 resilient computer rooms).
Companies like AWS offer you all that for a few dollars a month. If the app takes off I can scale up on the fly effortlessly only paying for what I use. Business costs are now purely a cost I can manage, without headaches of dealing with socially incompetent sysadmins and their childish demands.
Under your model I'd have to hire floor space and staff simply to manage a whole bunch for boxes for no real benefit to the business.
. The cloud stuff isn't cheaper unless you are avoiding paying for idle hardware.
Er, that is the whole point of AWS. It is charged by load, so you scale up and down as required, therefore never paying for idle hardware. The AWS model wins because they extract 100% of every piece of hardware, while most on-prem shops would be lucky to get 10%. AWS is going to take over the world. You heard it here first.
Tell people that instead of saying "in the cloud" they say "on somebody else's computer" and see how that goes--
Do your internal staff also clean the toilets? Do you grow all your own food? I mean where does the paranoia end?
Yeah sure, but physical parts are 19th century tech, Agile Software Development is 21st century. One of those is much better placed to eat the other.
Office, AD, Group Policy, Exchange, SQL, Server and Desktop integration.
Sure it is possible that these categories exist on other OSes, but none match the full feature offering you get with the MS suite overall. Most people who use MS don't like it, they use it because they've looked for alternatives and always come up short. Like it or not MS is the best of breed in this particular space.
An 18"+ iPad that runs MacOS instead of IOS? Probably getting too close to Surface Pro territory...
Perhaps I am an evil socio-path but what you have described is a given for EVERYTHING in life. Everything you do is done on a risk vs reward analysis.
Yep and there's even a theory that describes it quite nicely...
This is the interesting challenge for the auto industry. As cars become more tech and less mechanical, so to will their methodologies need to shift from manufacturing to software development. You'd have to wonder if the traditional auto companies can change quickly enough to survive, or if Tesla, Google, Apple etc will simply swallow them up with their expertise in this space?
For a company that has demonstrated zero respect for your privacy, then using their device, which every single piece of data flows through, wouldn't be such a prudent decision.
He just did. Just the same you admitted you're a prude without explicitly saying so.
How exactly?