In my experience, most schools in the US are actually pretty well funded, but they're horribly mismanaged. In the intercity areas, these daycare programs and such are immensely helpful - but for those that live in better off areas but perform average, this wouldn't help nearly as much, as poverty is not as much an issue. I would think that we could improve schools in those areas without introducing all of this, and instead focusing on spending the money they receive more effectively. For example, personal anecdote here: I once worked with a school in California, a well ranked one in the Thousand Oaks area that had received state recognition, and yet the teaching was awful and the scores decidedly average. Every year, they made a huge push for fundraisers and donations, and every year, they held these huge socials and parties and whatnot with some very elaborate decorations. They also offered some insanely good benefits for Hispanics (never mind that most Hispanics in this area weren't immigrants, but rather successful natives who were born in the US and owned successful businesses, and hence never used the free daycare). If they had instead spent that money on paying their teachers more than $50,000k per year, or had spent it to fix up some of the buildings, or used it to buy better schoolbooks, I think the school would have done far better at actually teaching kids, and I think most of the schools in the US sit with that dilemma.
It's one of those rarely encountered situations in this world where you can completely tear something and someone done without fear of being torn down yourself. Saying bad things about Hitler and the Nazis does not get yourself any kind of criticism, except from the very rare complete wackjobs out there. He was a white racist who committed major atrocities. Saying bad things about Hitler and the Nazis brings you universal cheers whereas saying even the slightest thing in defense or niceness about them will get you completely condemned as being no better than a Nazi. And since Germany has completely pushed them away, you don't even have to worry about Nationalist thoughts fighting you.
Most other historic bad guys this isn't the case. Stalin helped defeat the Nazis, so you need to be careful how far you go. Mao is still revered by many in China, again, only go so far. We still have statues of Lenin all over the world, ignoring the atrocities he pushed for.
So when you have this sort of opportunity, go for it full on. Everyone loves to hear about Hitler or the Nazis being knocked down some more. Just writing something like this brands me a potential Nazi.:-)
This is actually something I've been wondering myself. Don't get me wrong; the Nazis were horrible people, and deserved far, far worse than what they got. However, nobody ever speaks much about the horrible attrocities the other countries commited during the war: namely, Stalin and his whole regime, the horrific things some of the Japanese scientists did, the awful tactics of the Chinese that slaughtered millions of their own citizens, the American Malmedy Massacre, and countless more war crimes from all sides. I don't think it's really fair for countries to peg Germany for WW2, when it happened so long ago that almost no one is left who was even born then (let alone remembers it), and it's rather frustrating no one is willing to talk about any of the others. The war was a terrible time and we all did terrible things; I don't see why we can't all just forget it and move on, nor why something someone's great-grandfather did should reflect on them today.
That's purely arbitrary and relative if not malicious as to what's good. Modpoint abuse in downmods with nothing behind them happen here a lot.
There plenty of us (myself included) who cruise at 0 in order to promote the good stuff, and honestly speaking, most of what's at 0 is pretty crap. The good stuff inevitably rises up to at least 2, and often times to 3+. Adopting your system, there is no way to easily screen out the garbage, since now everybody is at the same level.
Furthermore, although this isn't a problem for me personally, allowing people to both mod and post simply opens of too much room for abuse. I don't earn that many compared to site owners or people with old accounts, but I posses more than the average Slashdot reader probably has, and I'd have the ability to mod down entire discussions so that my own sits higher. I appreciate the sentiment though - it's always frustrating to be reading to get some background info before forming one's opinion, only to realize the mind has been absentmindedly modding the whole time:-)
Shot him and make sure all the victims cannot have children. There are already too many stupid people in this world.
Alright, so please tell me, when is your appointment with sterilization clinic?
I'm sure you very quickly see the problem with your faulty logic. Frankly speaking here, you are just as mistaken as these people - maybe not gullible enough to engage in an email scam, but most certainly gullible enough to think yourself the arbiter.
Why not just have a charge-back system where every email that gets flagged as Spam costs the sender a penny. Until you pay the fine, you're not allowed to send to more than 100 additional emails before your sending ability is frozen.
Legitimate businesses will hardly ever receive more than 100 Spam flags if they offer an opt-out method that actually works. ISPs that continue to host personal domains that don't comply with the charge-back run the risk of being flagged as Open-Relay mail systems and their emails refused.
20 million emails flagged as Spam would incur a $200,000 fine, payable before the next batch of Spam emails could be sent. End of profitability.
--
And who exactly decides and administers these charges? Is a Credit Card number now compulsory for an email account? Do we tie all of the world's email services under a single company responsible for this? What about spam web pages?
DUI means driving while under the influence of alcohol as measured by your blood alcohol content. It is alcohol in your blood that impairs your ability to drive. It doesn't matter how it got there. Whether you drink, take too much cough medicine, or have a medical condition that causes you to produce alcohol, it's still in your blood and impairing your ability to drive. Now, if it's a first offense, and the defendant didn't know they had the disease, I can see letting them off with a warning, but if the defendant knew about the condition then they have no business driving. Some medical conditions make it unsafe to drive. Blind people, for instance, can't drive. It sucks, but it happens.
Except that, if you'd actually read the article (or god forbid, the summary), she showed absolutely no symptoms of it at all until it reached ~0.30, which would be enough to kill most of us. If she suffers no ill effects from it, and it didn't change anything, why not give her a waiver for it? The judge made a reasonable ruling, which is rare for a newstory, especially here. And even though it doesn't seem to have an effect, she put herself on a no sugar, no alcohol, extremely low carb diet to help cut it back a little bit. For once, a news story that doesn't involve negative drama!
I expect Mrs. Clinton to win this year, but serve only one term, and become the first president in a while to do so. Most likely, either Bernie or Trump will reappear in 2020.
I expect that cybersecurity will become a very lucrative industry over the next couple of years.
And I expect that over the next 10 years, there will be an increasing trend of moving jobs back to the US. With larger companies dominating aome industries as heavily aas they do, there will become space for smaller ones who target specific niches, especially with the upper class. In doing so, they save on shipping, can get products to the market sooner, work natively with their customers, take advantage of the term "Made in America", and hire fewer but far better trained and equipped employees than in China or Vietnam.
As for this year, I think their might be another terrorist attack, but I don't know where to say. Potentially at the Olympic Games, or somewhere in Germany, those would be my guesses. Other than that, I don't think too much will change this year, just another year of advancement from what 2015 was...
I also predict that one or more of the above predictions are incorrect:-)
My primary reform would be to get rid of AC posting entirely. Our screen names already give us all the anonymity we need, with a continuity of posting record that automatically screens out trash. As an example, if Space Nutter Troll had to go back to having one posting record as Quantum Apostrophe, he would either have to engage us with rational arguments or we could just get rid of the account in its entirety, as other sites have done.
The moderation system just needs some work. Instead of having to choose between moderating in the commentary for one article or posting in it, change the granularity to the subthread level. We could moderate and post in the same article, just not in the same exact thread.
The mobile app is totally broken and needs to be replaced by something that works.
The problem with this is that they'll just keep creating new user accounts, and if the IP ban comes into effect, they'll just use something like tor to get around it. At least with the current system, Anonymous comments always start out as 0, so you can just set your limit at 1 (or 2), and let the good anons rise up.
The real sin is the decision of the foss community to pick a side, and in so doing, remove that choice from other people, by choosing to make systemd a hard requirement, solely for their own convenience.
Did you just try to make writing software to scratch your own itch sound like a bad thing? If Poettering wants to write systemd-only software, nobody's going to stop him. Nobody should be able to stop him. Nobody's going to force him to create or maintain SysV init scripts either. And if other projects find that depending on systemd is convenient, so can they. Open source is not a democracy. Developers do what developers want, regardless of what their users think and by users I mean everybody from other projects to distro packagers to system administrators to end users. The conflict was lost when systemd was voted in as the default, trying to bend the Debian system to force developers to preserve the old ways was a fool's errand. If it had passed, all that would have happened is that Debian would have lost them. Nobody can make that kind of committee decision stick.
I am a little suprised that someone with your UUID would have such a philosophy about the Debian project, but fair enough. I'd like to refer you to the Debian Manifesto, a document that was written when the Debian project was first founded. In particular, I'd like to refer you to section A.3:
thus, a distribution is created based on the needs and wants of the users rather than the needs and wants of the constructor.
, with "constructor" referring to the creator.
To be very clear, I am not advocating that Poettering shouldn't be programming what he pleases, nor that all work should be productive. However, I am saying that at least for the Debian project, the focus (used to be) on the users, and making a solid operating system useful to everyone. There's been a large resurgence in the "developers first" attitude the last couple years, and while it lends itself well to hobbyists, these kinds of people should not be working on a large and collaborative project with the goal of being useful to everyone - because, as you've made very clear, the center of that philosophy is all about your wants and needs, something which is directly contrary to the main goal of the Debian Project (and really, any large open source project whose goal is to be useful to more than the developers).
The FAA is a federal agency. Aren't all federal databases open and online? Airplane registrations are; radio licenses are.
Well, one difference is that radios and airplanes don't tend to be owned by kids. So lets say your kid is a popular Youtuber or Viner. Your phone number is unlisted, so various viewers including pedophiles and whatnot cannot easily find him/her based on name. Now your kid flies his drone in a video. All of a sudden, several of his/her "fans" look up his/her name and street address in the federal database. Most likely no one will show up at your doorstep, but it takes only one crazy stalker. There are serious privacy and safety implications here.
Given that a vast majority of rapes are comitted by a family member or someone he knows, what have you done to stop the kid's uncle? What protections are in place to stop his mother from violently violating him? How are you restraining his best friend whose only desire and purpose in life is to insert himself into the boy's rear? If you think about those, you'd say it's silly, but there's an 82% chance this would happen and not some stranger. I really don't get this irrational paranora, since people never look at the facts involved, nor the exceedingly low chance it's some random stranger...
However, that being said, some precautions are prudent. Some you register yourself in his place, and their you go. Although, you probably don't mind handing out your phone number, and with that they can easily find out your name and street address......
In all seriousness, I suppose I'll take a look at it. I'm guessing, however, that Perl 6 is not going to be widely used or liked; it's simply been too long, and Perl isn't even used that much anymore either. That may not impact the dev team directly, but it does mean they're not going to get the support they did with Perl 4 and 5, although I am curious in what they improved during these 15 years.
I'm struck that so many predictions of the future embody two simplistic and misguided assumptions. 1) That the future will progress in a straight line as an extension of the present and 2) that new technology is unquestionably an improvement.
One would think that with the current speed of development we would have developed some degree of immunity to the hypnotic allure of techno-pizzazz for its own sake.
THIS. Unfortunatly, I am all out of mod points, but Mr. AC here speaks the truth. Predictions in the past, that we'd have all diseases cured by 2000, were absolutly ridiculous because they assumed that the rate of drug development would increase linearly. No, we'd just picked the easy fruit, and then it slowed down. For those here who are really old, thry might remember back in the 70's when everybody was told that nuclear power was the way of the future. After all, it was obviously superior to every alternative, how could it lose? And yet, it did, because of the fear over a nuclear fallout (something I personally think was a somewhat silly fear, but I'll keep my opinion out of this).
We're all terrible at predicting the future in advance, and that's not necessarily a bad thing or a good one, but I really wish peope kept it more in mind. Seeing these vague future predictions just makes me facepalm, especially because the articld doesn't even really say why we would need sensors in anything (nor the rather significant cost and saftey hazards of doing so). I would be much more interested of the future two years from now, in the very beginning of 2018. Two and half years ago, the world didn't even know about PRISM, might I remind you.
What I legitimately don't understand is why everyone is so sensitive about these people. They're religious wackos and mentally damaged, and and they do horrible acts. It's true. And yet, they're all the way to the east, and should one live in the United States, they're half the world away. We know our societies and ideas are superior to theirs, and in modern day society we all strive to have free lives. All these people do (to us, anyway) is make videos, and we know our ideas are moral while theirs are not, so... What's the reaction for? Shouldn't society ignore them, the same way the Americans do for the Klu Klux Klan, or the Germans do for the Neonazis (these horrible people, and not for the others? Why does our society collectively feel so insecure about these people, and make the situation worse by legitimizing their cause with ineffective actions, as opposed to those other groups?
I would suggest first shaving the beard off of your neck. I find it fascinating that email is important enough for you to require this much thought and consideration. Get a Office 365 account and be done with it.
I find it fascinating you don't consider email to be important. If you want to live in 365, great, but some of us need a little more.
Though actually, what most amuses me is your insecurity about it. Somebody uses pine, therefore they're a neckbeard and should switch to something you can understand? For somebody with a sig about facing wolves and not being a sheep, you're not exactly living up to that, if I may point out.
Is it a secret? Or is it just too fucking hard to add what state this particular city of Tacoma is in?
While accommodations for those not familiar with the United States is something I certainly agree with, Tacoma is definitely one of the better known cities among the crowd here, and it took you longer to write that than to look up the state info. For anyone interested, it's located in the Northwestern region, Washington (State, not DC). Can't say I've lived there, but Seattle was a beautiful city, cool with lots of rain. I'd expect Tacoma to share at least some of those features, although I've certainly open to correction on that point, given that that's only an educated guess:)
For all of you falling for the "think of the children" narrative, you are misled by corporate propagande. What the lobbyists want has nothing to do with children, no one really cares about that. The rule change is largely just a declaration of intent, and a measure to make sure that all member states at least have a minimum age defined. If you read closely, the member states are still free to choose their own standard, the age 16 requirement only applies if nothing else is defined
The real reason why the propaganda machine is running on full steam is the other provisions in the law, which would mean that it would become illegal to not disclose data breaches, hiding those would become a felony, and that companies could be charged with up to 4% of their total revenue for any data breaches. That is what the lobbyists are fighting against this draft law.
The data breaches part is especially interesting to me, and I highly hope this gets passed. 4% revenue is also a decent punishment, as that can add up to a substantial amount, and hopefully enough to actually be a deterrent to large and wealthy corporations for whom it's otherwise cheaper to just break the law and pay a measly €300 fine.
Asia considers Europe as a bunch of dinosaurs, soon to be extinct.
I must agree.
Seriously.
Imagine that this WILL come true and our kids will be banned from the 'net till 16.
What will be the effects of competitiveness and innovation - not to the kids but for the Europe itself?
We will deprive our next generation from the ability to learn and develop, whereas other continents encourage their youth to go forth and change the world.
The Chinese and the Japanese hold a great respect for the various European civilizations, and I stronglysuggest you don't put words into their mouths.
This article specifically mentions social media, not the internet in general, so you apparently think Facebook == the entire internet, and if that's the case you wouldn't have gained anything from it anyway. Or, perhaps, you didn't bother to read even the summary before writing that slew on nonsense? I disagree with it too, but at least make a well-reasoned argument. They should be allowed to do so because a 14 year old can freely talk to anyone on the street, and there's no difference speaking with strangers in real life than online. Furthermore, it deprives them of the chance to meet people from far away, which people never did before without traveling themselves (unless you were one the few who had a "pen pal" and it actually worked out). Your argument is simply an emotional appeal to inertia, and you do realize 40 years ago they were complaining about how setting a minimum age for smoking would heavily cripple the United States of America's youth?
The European youth needs discipline and direction. They are the heirs of the greatest civilization that has ever existed and will ever exist, after all. Obedience and a sense of purpose are important values.
Aside from the fact there is no "European" civilization (different parts of Europe are incredibly different, and you should know that), you are severely underestimating the east. Japan has more cultural wealth to it than most give it credit for, and has lasted (in a fairly contiguous form) for well over 2000 years. China's been around for over 10000. Korea has a history of almost 6000 years. All of them have a deep and complex culture, easily at the same level of Western civilization, and they've made many very important contributions. Native American tribes are among the oldest in the world, with many stories passed down through many thousands of years, and an immensely unique (if difficult) language. Africa falls into much of that too, with the world's very first humans having come from here, along with a wealth of natural resources. The Middle East has an almost as long ago history, with the world's very first civilization being founded here, and is filled with historic artifacts (or should I say, was). So yes, there is much more to the world than the little strip of land up north, and I say this as someone who is half from there.
And really, this is all irrelevant anyway, because there is no greatest civilization. You cannot objectively measure the greatness of a society, only its relative impact on the world, and that changes according to the viewpoint. I don't see why we have to get into arguments with labeling: it is stupid to think yourself better than someone else merely because yours has more inventions, and about the only thing that's useful for is measuring the level of someone's worldly ignorance.
> This is actually a method that a (partially) top-secret government installation used back in the 1980s.
Yeah right. Cool story. Now where is the proof?
Oh yeah, "partially top-secret."
Proof that you, Mr. Anon, have no experience with governmental projects. It's rather common to have compartmented access, and for the project to have different parts in varying degrees of secrecy. He doesn't need proof, it's an anecdote, and you're perfectly welcome to throw it away.
But, this sounds like... Emm... A security technique I could... easily forsee such a place using. It's certainly a good one, if rather stressful on your data lines...
We were fortold to grow vital organs in the 90's. We would have a cure for death itself and become immortal by 2000. We were forcasted to all work in robotic lifting suites and fly in jetpacks and have self-flying cars decades ago.
There's no doubt the cybersecurity breaches will become more and more common. To say you have an exact figure though is ridiculous. Maybe more, maybe less, but there's no way we can possibly predict what'll happen 20, 30 years down the road. people far overestimate the changes in 20 years and far underestimate the changes in 2.
And lastly, I'd like to finish with this little bit...
Elderly patients and patients convalescing with mobility issues, in particular, will find an advantage in using virtual doctor visits so that they won't be forced to commute to and from healthcare facilities.
We were supposed to have this universally in the 70's, I don't know why people still beat this dead horse. Many places already have it, and it's not some lofty goal that's difficult to implement. It's a guy in a laboratory coat on Skype (or more realistically, some proprietary health application, but you get the idea).
"We have become masters in the art of manipulating genes, but our understanding of their function and interaction is far more limited."
No we haven't. Human genetic science is still in the very early stages, and we've only begun to understand complex DNAs in a very, very general fashion. In another couple decades, we'll probably still be working away at it. It does rise to an interesting question though; If we learn to alter our DNA, and somehow do make ourselves immortal (which I heavily doubt), would it really be in our best interest? We have problems with population as it is, and at the rate we go, we'd exhaust the remainder of Earth's resources very quickly. Better work on that space technology...
Also, I wonder if humans were meant to get this far? We evolved from basic primates to this level through millions of years. If you take an intelligent lifeform, is it possible that given enough time, it will always find a way to self-modify itself? Questions we might want to start asking ourselves, because we'll certainly want the protocol figured out before we actually get to immortality...
Well, remember, what exactly is considered profound is up to each person. For some people, they may not consider the statement itself to hold any wisdom, but the vagueness might prompt themselves into a philosophical state, and so they associate that with the phrase itself. And honestly, at the end of the day, this whole article is really talking about imagination, is it not? Look at children, for those of you who have any: they can go on adventures with nothing but a few sticks and a rock. Likewise, I am sure that for some people, their minds can evolve meaning even out of nonsensical words. I don't think having an active imagination is really all that much of a vice, as they tend to be people who can come up with some very creative solutions and answers that most would dismiss as impossible.
That being said, going with the article's thesis, I agree. I could totally see them being more likely to believe in a religion for precisely the reason stated above, to see a pattern out of unrelated events, and once you believe there's an all powerful god, it becomes much easier to believe in the others listed. Ultimately though, we all have our vices, and I don't think naivety is all that bad of one to have in the grand scheme.
20 years is a long time in our world. Many readers here had just gotten their first jobs, and many weren't even born yet (or so behavior hints to me). Windows 95 had just come out, 9.5 times better than what we have today. Emacs vs VIM was all the rage, and a year later came out a fledgling desktop environment known as KDE. Java was something you drank, your printer probably made this awful, "SCRRRRRRRRRRR" sound as it punched your pages with ink ribbons, and your CIA/BND/M15/whatever were still cool guys in suits (nowadays they're just guys in suits).
Adobe's held this name for a really long time, and it's a huge shame they're going to dump the name on its deathbed. We all know what "Animate CC" still is, and it's not a C compiler. Least they could have done would have been to let Flash die with dignity...
Slashdot Mirror
In my experience, most schools in the US are actually pretty well funded, but they're horribly mismanaged. In the intercity areas, these daycare programs and such are immensely helpful - but for those that live in better off areas but perform average, this wouldn't help nearly as much, as poverty is not as much an issue. I would think that we could improve schools in those areas without introducing all of this, and instead focusing on spending the money they receive more effectively. For example, personal anecdote here: I once worked with a school in California, a well ranked one in the Thousand Oaks area that had received state recognition, and yet the teaching was awful and the scores decidedly average. Every year, they made a huge push for fundraisers and donations, and every year, they held these huge socials and parties and whatnot with some very elaborate decorations. They also offered some insanely good benefits for Hispanics (never mind that most Hispanics in this area weren't immigrants, but rather successful natives who were born in the US and owned successful businesses, and hence never used the free daycare). If they had instead spent that money on paying their teachers more than $50,000k per year, or had spent it to fix up some of the buildings, or used it to buy better schoolbooks, I think the school would have done far better at actually teaching kids, and I think most of the schools in the US sit with that dilemma.
It's one of those rarely encountered situations in this world where you can completely tear something and someone done without fear of being torn down yourself. Saying bad things about Hitler and the Nazis does not get yourself any kind of criticism, except from the very rare complete wackjobs out there. He was a white racist who committed major atrocities. Saying bad things about Hitler and the Nazis brings you universal cheers whereas saying even the slightest thing in defense or niceness about them will get you completely condemned as being no better than a Nazi. And since Germany has completely pushed them away, you don't even have to worry about Nationalist thoughts fighting you.
Most other historic bad guys this isn't the case. Stalin helped defeat the Nazis, so you need to be careful how far you go. Mao is still revered by many in China, again, only go so far. We still have statues of Lenin all over the world, ignoring the atrocities he pushed for.
So when you have this sort of opportunity, go for it full on. Everyone loves to hear about Hitler or the Nazis being knocked down some more. Just writing something like this brands me a potential Nazi. :-)
This is actually something I've been wondering myself. Don't get me wrong; the Nazis were horrible people, and deserved far, far worse than what they got. However, nobody ever speaks much about the horrible attrocities the other countries commited during the war: namely, Stalin and his whole regime, the horrific things some of the Japanese scientists did, the awful tactics of the Chinese that slaughtered millions of their own citizens, the American Malmedy Massacre, and countless more war crimes from all sides. I don't think it's really fair for countries to peg Germany for WW2, when it happened so long ago that almost no one is left who was even born then (let alone remembers it), and it's rather frustrating no one is willing to talk about any of the others. The war was a terrible time and we all did terrible things; I don't see why we can't all just forget it and move on, nor why something someone's great-grandfather did should reflect on them today.
That's purely arbitrary and relative if not malicious as to what's good. Modpoint abuse in downmods with nothing behind them happen here a lot.
There plenty of us (myself included) who cruise at 0 in order to promote the good stuff, and honestly speaking, most of what's at 0 is pretty crap. The good stuff inevitably rises up to at least 2, and often times to 3+. Adopting your system, there is no way to easily screen out the garbage, since now everybody is at the same level.
Furthermore, although this isn't a problem for me personally, allowing people to both mod and post simply opens of too much room for abuse. I don't earn that many compared to site owners or people with old accounts, but I posses more than the average Slashdot reader probably has, and I'd have the ability to mod down entire discussions so that my own sits higher. I appreciate the sentiment though - it's always frustrating to be reading to get some background info before forming one's opinion, only to realize the mind has been absentmindedly modding the whole time :-)
Shot him and make sure all the victims cannot have children. There are already too many stupid people in this world.
Alright, so please tell me, when is your appointment with sterilization clinic?
I'm sure you very quickly see the problem with your faulty logic. Frankly speaking here, you are just as mistaken as these people - maybe not gullible enough to engage in an email scam, but most certainly gullible enough to think yourself the arbiter.
Why not just have a charge-back system where every email that gets flagged as Spam costs the sender a penny. Until you pay the fine, you're not allowed to send to more than 100 additional emails before your sending ability is frozen. Legitimate businesses will hardly ever receive more than 100 Spam flags if they offer an opt-out method that actually works. ISPs that continue to host personal domains that don't comply with the charge-back run the risk of being flagged as Open-Relay mail systems and their emails refused. 20 million emails flagged as Spam would incur a $200,000 fine, payable before the next batch of Spam emails could be sent. End of profitability. --
And who exactly decides and administers these charges? Is a Credit Card number now compulsory for an email account? Do we tie all of the world's email services under a single company responsible for this? What about spam web pages?
DUI means driving while under the influence of alcohol as measured by your blood alcohol content. It is alcohol in your blood that impairs your ability to drive. It doesn't matter how it got there. Whether you drink, take too much cough medicine, or have a medical condition that causes you to produce alcohol, it's still in your blood and impairing your ability to drive. Now, if it's a first offense, and the defendant didn't know they had the disease, I can see letting them off with a warning, but if the defendant knew about the condition then they have no business driving. Some medical conditions make it unsafe to drive. Blind people, for instance, can't drive. It sucks, but it happens.
Except that, if you'd actually read the article (or god forbid, the summary), she showed absolutely no symptoms of it at all until it reached ~0.30, which would be enough to kill most of us. If she suffers no ill effects from it, and it didn't change anything, why not give her a waiver for it? The judge made a reasonable ruling, which is rare for a newstory, especially here. And even though it doesn't seem to have an effect, she put herself on a no sugar, no alcohol, extremely low carb diet to help cut it back a little bit. For once, a news story that doesn't involve negative drama!
I expect Mrs. Clinton to win this year, but serve only one term, and become the first president in a while to do so. Most likely, either Bernie or Trump will reappear in 2020.
I expect that cybersecurity will become a very lucrative industry over the next couple of years.
And I expect that over the next 10 years, there will be an increasing trend of moving jobs back to the US. With larger companies dominating aome industries as heavily aas they do, there will become space for smaller ones who target specific niches, especially with the upper class. In doing so, they save on shipping, can get products to the market sooner, work natively with their customers, take advantage of the term "Made in America", and hire fewer but far better trained and equipped employees than in China or Vietnam.
As for this year, I think their might be another terrorist attack, but I don't know where to say. Potentially at the Olympic Games, or somewhere in Germany, those would be my guesses. Other than that, I don't think too much will change this year, just another year of advancement from what 2015 was...
I also predict that one or more of the above predictions are incorrect :-)
My primary reform would be to get rid of AC posting entirely. Our screen names already give us all the anonymity we need, with a continuity of posting record that automatically screens out trash. As an example, if Space Nutter Troll had to go back to having one posting record as Quantum Apostrophe, he would either have to engage us with rational arguments or we could just get rid of the account in its entirety, as other sites have done.
The moderation system just needs some work. Instead of having to choose between moderating in the commentary for one article or posting in it, change the granularity to the subthread level. We could moderate and post in the same article, just not in the same exact thread.
The mobile app is totally broken and needs to be replaced by something that works.
The problem with this is that they'll just keep creating new user accounts, and if the IP ban comes into effect, they'll just use something like tor to get around it. At least with the current system, Anonymous comments always start out as 0, so you can just set your limit at 1 (or 2), and let the good anons rise up.
The real sin is the decision of the foss community to pick a side, and in so doing, remove that choice from other people, by choosing to make systemd a hard requirement, solely for their own convenience.
Did you just try to make writing software to scratch your own itch sound like a bad thing? If Poettering wants to write systemd-only software, nobody's going to stop him. Nobody should be able to stop him. Nobody's going to force him to create or maintain SysV init scripts either. And if other projects find that depending on systemd is convenient, so can they. Open source is not a democracy. Developers do what developers want, regardless of what their users think and by users I mean everybody from other projects to distro packagers to system administrators to end users. The conflict was lost when systemd was voted in as the default, trying to bend the Debian system to force developers to preserve the old ways was a fool's errand. If it had passed, all that would have happened is that Debian would have lost them. Nobody can make that kind of committee decision stick.
I am a little suprised that someone with your UUID would have such a philosophy about the Debian project, but fair enough. I'd like to refer you to the Debian Manifesto, a document that was written when the Debian project was first founded. In particular, I'd like to refer you to section A.3:
thus, a distribution is created based on the needs and wants of the users rather than the needs and wants of the constructor.
, with "constructor" referring to the creator.
To be very clear, I am not advocating that Poettering shouldn't be programming what he pleases, nor that all work should be productive. However, I am saying that at least for the Debian project, the focus (used to be) on the users, and making a solid operating system useful to everyone. There's been a large resurgence in the "developers first" attitude the last couple years, and while it lends itself well to hobbyists, these kinds of people should not be working on a large and collaborative project with the goal of being useful to everyone - because, as you've made very clear, the center of that philosophy is all about your wants and needs, something which is directly contrary to the main goal of the Debian Project (and really, any large open source project whose goal is to be useful to more than the developers).
The FAA is a federal agency. Aren't all federal databases open and online? Airplane registrations are; radio licenses are.
Well, one difference is that radios and airplanes don't tend to be owned by kids. So lets say your kid is a popular Youtuber or Viner. Your phone number is unlisted, so various viewers including pedophiles and whatnot cannot easily find him/her based on name. Now your kid flies his drone in a video. All of a sudden, several of his/her "fans" look up his/her name and street address in the federal database. Most likely no one will show up at your doorstep, but it takes only one crazy stalker. There are serious privacy and safety implications here.
Given that a vast majority of rapes are comitted by a family member or someone he knows, what have you done to stop the kid's uncle? What protections are in place to stop his mother from violently violating him? How are you restraining his best friend whose only desire and purpose in life is to insert himself into the boy's rear? If you think about those, you'd say it's silly, but there's an 82% chance this would happen and not some stranger. I really don't get this irrational paranora, since people never look at the facts involved, nor the exceedingly low chance it's some random stranger...
However, that being said, some precautions are prudent. Some you register yourself in his place, and their you go. Although, you probably don't mind handing out your phone number, and with that they can easily find out your name and street address......
In all seriousness, I suppose I'll take a look at it. I'm guessing, however, that Perl 6 is not going to be widely used or liked; it's simply been too long, and Perl isn't even used that much anymore either. That may not impact the dev team directly, but it does mean they're not going to get the support they did with Perl 4 and 5, although I am curious in what they improved during these 15 years.
It's April Fools already! The older I get, the faster time flies by, I swear...
I'm struck that so many predictions of the future embody two simplistic and misguided assumptions. 1) That the future will progress in a straight line as an extension of the present and 2) that new technology is unquestionably an improvement.
One would think that with the current speed of development we would have developed some degree of immunity to the hypnotic allure of techno-pizzazz for its own sake.
THIS. Unfortunatly, I am all out of mod points, but Mr. AC here speaks the truth. Predictions in the past, that we'd have all diseases cured by 2000, were absolutly ridiculous because they assumed that the rate of drug development would increase linearly. No, we'd just picked the easy fruit, and then it slowed down. For those here who are really old, thry might remember back in the 70's when everybody was told that nuclear power was the way of the future. After all, it was obviously superior to every alternative, how could it lose? And yet, it did, because of the fear over a nuclear fallout (something I personally think was a somewhat silly fear, but I'll keep my opinion out of this).
We're all terrible at predicting the future in advance, and that's not necessarily a bad thing or a good one, but I really wish peope kept it more in mind. Seeing these vague future predictions just makes me facepalm, especially because the articld doesn't even really say why we would need sensors in anything (nor the rather significant cost and saftey hazards of doing so). I would be much more interested of the future two years from now, in the very beginning of 2018. Two and half years ago, the world didn't even know about PRISM, might I remind you.
What I legitimately don't understand is why everyone is so sensitive about these people. They're religious wackos and mentally damaged, and and they do horrible acts. It's true. And yet, they're all the way to the east, and should one live in the United States, they're half the world away. We know our societies and ideas are superior to theirs, and in modern day society we all strive to have free lives. All these people do (to us, anyway) is make videos, and we know our ideas are moral while theirs are not, so... What's the reaction for? Shouldn't society ignore them, the same way the Americans do for the Klu Klux Klan, or the Germans do for the Neonazis (these horrible people, and not for the others? Why does our society collectively feel so insecure about these people, and make the situation worse by legitimizing their cause with ineffective actions, as opposed to those other groups?
I would suggest first shaving the beard off of your neck. I find it fascinating that email is important enough for you to require this much thought and consideration. Get a Office 365 account and be done with it.
I find it fascinating you don't consider email to be important. If you want to live in 365, great, but some of us need a little more.
Though actually, what most amuses me is your insecurity about it. Somebody uses pine, therefore they're a neckbeard and should switch to something you can understand? For somebody with a sig about facing wolves and not being a sheep, you're not exactly living up to that, if I may point out.
This just looks like a routine security patch. Is the news supposed to be they weren't doing it this whole time???
Is it a secret? Or is it just too fucking hard to add what state this particular city of Tacoma is in?
While accommodations for those not familiar with the United States is something I certainly agree with, Tacoma is definitely one of the better known cities among the crowd here, and it took you longer to write that than to look up the state info. For anyone interested, it's located in the Northwestern region, Washington (State, not DC). Can't say I've lived there, but Seattle was a beautiful city, cool with lots of rain. I'd expect Tacoma to share at least some of those features, although I've certainly open to correction on that point, given that that's only an educated guess :)
For all of you falling for the "think of the children" narrative, you are misled by corporate propagande. What the lobbyists want has nothing to do with children, no one really cares about that. The rule change is largely just a declaration of intent, and a measure to make sure that all member states at least have a minimum age defined. If you read closely, the member states are still free to choose their own standard, the age 16 requirement only applies if nothing else is defined
The real reason why the propaganda machine is running on full steam is the other provisions in the law, which would mean that it would become illegal to not disclose data breaches, hiding those would become a felony, and that companies could be charged with up to 4% of their total revenue for any data breaches. That is what the lobbyists are fighting against this draft law.
The data breaches part is especially interesting to me, and I highly hope this gets passed. 4% revenue is also a decent punishment, as that can add up to a substantial amount, and hopefully enough to actually be a deterrent to large and wealthy corporations for whom it's otherwise cheaper to just break the law and pay a measly €300 fine.
Asia considers Europe as a bunch of dinosaurs, soon to be extinct. I must agree. Seriously. Imagine that this WILL come true and our kids will be banned from the 'net till 16. What will be the effects of competitiveness and innovation - not to the kids but for the Europe itself? We will deprive our next generation from the ability to learn and develop, whereas other continents encourage their youth to go forth and change the world.
The Chinese and the Japanese hold a great respect for the various European civilizations, and I stronglysuggest you don't put words into their mouths.
This article specifically mentions social media, not the internet in general, so you apparently think Facebook == the entire internet, and if that's the case you wouldn't have gained anything from it anyway. Or, perhaps, you didn't bother to read even the summary before writing that slew on nonsense? I disagree with it too, but at least make a well-reasoned argument. They should be allowed to do so because a 14 year old can freely talk to anyone on the street, and there's no difference speaking with strangers in real life than online. Furthermore, it deprives them of the chance to meet people from far away, which people never did before without traveling themselves (unless you were one the few who had a "pen pal" and it actually worked out). Your argument is simply an emotional appeal to inertia, and you do realize 40 years ago they were complaining about how setting a minimum age for smoking would heavily cripple the United States of America's youth?
The European youth needs discipline and direction. They are the heirs of the greatest civilization that has ever existed and will ever exist, after all. Obedience and a sense of purpose are important values.
Aside from the fact there is no "European" civilization (different parts of Europe are incredibly different, and you should know that), you are severely underestimating the east. Japan has more cultural wealth to it than most give it credit for, and has lasted (in a fairly contiguous form) for well over 2000 years. China's been around for over 10000. Korea has a history of almost 6000 years. All of them have a deep and complex culture, easily at the same level of Western civilization, and they've made many very important contributions. Native American tribes are among the oldest in the world, with many stories passed down through many thousands of years, and an immensely unique (if difficult) language. Africa falls into much of that too, with the world's very first humans having come from here, along with a wealth of natural resources. The Middle East has an almost as long ago history, with the world's very first civilization being founded here, and is filled with historic artifacts (or should I say, was). So yes, there is much more to the world than the little strip of land up north, and I say this as someone who is half from there.
And really, this is all irrelevant anyway, because there is no greatest civilization. You cannot objectively measure the greatness of a society, only its relative impact on the world, and that changes according to the viewpoint. I don't see why we have to get into arguments with labeling: it is stupid to think yourself better than someone else merely because yours has more inventions, and about the only thing that's useful for is measuring the level of someone's worldly ignorance.
> This is actually a method that a (partially) top-secret government installation used back in the 1980s.
Yeah right. Cool story. Now where is the proof?
Oh yeah, "partially top-secret."
Proof that you, Mr. Anon, have no experience with governmental projects. It's rather common to have compartmented access, and for the project to have different parts in varying degrees of secrecy. He doesn't need proof, it's an anecdote, and you're perfectly welcome to throw it away.
But, this sounds like... Emm... A security technique I could... easily forsee such a place using. It's certainly a good one, if rather stressful on your data lines...
We were fortold to grow vital organs in the 90's. We would have a cure for death itself and become immortal by 2000. We were forcasted to all work in robotic lifting suites and fly in jetpacks and have self-flying cars decades ago.
There's no doubt the cybersecurity breaches will become more and more common. To say you have an exact figure though is ridiculous. Maybe more, maybe less, but there's no way we can possibly predict what'll happen 20, 30 years down the road. people far overestimate the changes in 20 years and far underestimate the changes in 2.
And lastly, I'd like to finish with this little bit...
Elderly patients and patients convalescing with mobility issues, in particular, will find an advantage in using virtual doctor visits so that they won't be forced to commute to and from healthcare facilities.
We were supposed to have this universally in the 70's, I don't know why people still beat this dead horse. Many places already have it, and it's not some lofty goal that's difficult to implement. It's a guy in a laboratory coat on Skype (or more realistically, some proprietary health application, but you get the idea).
"We have become masters in the art of manipulating genes, but our understanding of their function and interaction is far more limited."
No we haven't. Human genetic science is still in the very early stages, and we've only begun to understand complex DNAs in a very, very general fashion. In another couple decades, we'll probably still be working away at it. It does rise to an interesting question though; If we learn to alter our DNA, and somehow do make ourselves immortal (which I heavily doubt), would it really be in our best interest? We have problems with population as it is, and at the rate we go, we'd exhaust the remainder of Earth's resources very quickly. Better work on that space technology...
Also, I wonder if humans were meant to get this far? We evolved from basic primates to this level through millions of years. If you take an intelligent lifeform, is it possible that given enough time, it will always find a way to self-modify itself? Questions we might want to start asking ourselves, because we'll certainly want the protocol figured out before we actually get to immortality...
Well, remember, what exactly is considered profound is up to each person. For some people, they may not consider the statement itself to hold any wisdom, but the vagueness might prompt themselves into a philosophical state, and so they associate that with the phrase itself. And honestly, at the end of the day, this whole article is really talking about imagination, is it not? Look at children, for those of you who have any: they can go on adventures with nothing but a few sticks and a rock. Likewise, I am sure that for some people, their minds can evolve meaning even out of nonsensical words. I don't think having an active imagination is really all that much of a vice, as they tend to be people who can come up with some very creative solutions and answers that most would dismiss as impossible.
That being said, going with the article's thesis, I agree. I could totally see them being more likely to believe in a religion for precisely the reason stated above, to see a pattern out of unrelated events, and once you believe there's an all powerful god, it becomes much easier to believe in the others listed. Ultimately though, we all have our vices, and I don't think naivety is all that bad of one to have in the grand scheme.
20 years is a long time in our world. Many readers here had just gotten their first jobs, and many weren't even born yet (or so behavior hints to me). Windows 95 had just come out, 9.5 times better than what we have today. Emacs vs VIM was all the rage, and a year later came out a fledgling desktop environment known as KDE. Java was something you drank, your printer probably made this awful, "SCRRRRRRRRRRR" sound as it punched your pages with ink ribbons, and your CIA/BND/M15/whatever were still cool guys in suits (nowadays they're just guys in suits).
Adobe's held this name for a really long time, and it's a huge shame they're going to dump the name on its deathbed. We all know what "Animate CC" still is, and it's not a C compiler. Least they could have done would have been to let Flash die with dignity...