The school district is thinking that expulsion and suspension do more harm than good when students are left unsupervised, so they are switching to more in school retention. The trailers are going to be used for that.
Ahhh... Getting them ready for the industrial-prison complex early, huh?
I love it when atheists say that Jesus is fictional.
Yes, it's probably more accurate to say that Jesus is mythical - there was a man named Jesus who lived in the mid-east around the beginning of the Common Era and had a bunch of followers. And people who came after him did quite a literary number on him, attributing to him miracles, divinity, and other graces. In a way, it's just like Arthur - who also had a bunch of followers and who's legend was similarly embellished, although not quite to the same level.
Note that over-protection is exaggeration of a positive trait. Try exaggerating a negative attribute in that situation and watch the firestorm erupt. The sitcom "Bad Teacher" can get away with it because the female lead there isn't a mother (just a teacher), but just try doing it with an actual mother character. The intergenerational comedy "Mom" can get away with it because the "bad mother" in this case only has adult children. But exaggerating a real negative attribute that moms can have (addiction, irresponsibility, etc.) and incorporating it into a sitcom? Man, you have got to have balls of steel and flameproof underwear to propose that. When I see a sitcom with the feel of "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia", but starring a dysfunctional mom, a semi-functional dad, and non-grown children, that's when I know the barrier is broken.
Cutting to the chase, having kids is fine as long as you're willing to make the sacrifices necessary to raise and support them. So is not having kids. So is waiting to have kids. So is adopting. So is marrying someone who has already had kids and becoming a (hopefully non-evil) stepparent.
What surprises me is the number of people here who feel that they have some right to criticize others' choices on this particular issue (although the choice of taking unruly kids onto planes and into theaters probably is OK to criticize). What surprises me more is the defensiveness that some people have around their choices, even to the point where folks are seeing posts on different choices as attacks on their choices. Just because someone makes a different choice than you, it doesn't invalidate your decision. Yes, I know that you who don't have kids like to gloat about your freedom. I'm glad you have it, but no one likes an smug asshole. I know you who have kids like to tout your responsibility and the joys you get from parenting and your oh-so-excellent child-rearing skills. I'm glad you have those, but, again, no one likes a smug asshole. So just lighten the fuck up, OK?
I had kids. I have friends who didn't. I respect their choices, they respect mine. There are advantages and disadvantages to each choice. That's the way life is. Now STFU and enjoy the life you've chosen and let others enjoy theirs.
Why does this discussion remind me of a vi/emacs war?
Not to mention televising it as a reality TV show - let the producers pick fifteen contestants, whittling them down to five as they're trained. Then comes the moment of truth! The five secretly vote for someone other than themselves. The votes are counted and the person with the most votes is given a gun with a blank, while everyone else has a bullet in their gun. The execution is carried out. Afterwards, the person with the blank is revealed and has to go home. The remaining four split a $5M prize and get to be paraded as NRA heroes for the rest of their media life.
Money making (because the ratings would be off the charts) and tasteful!
Can or does? Does this count overtime? Newspapers often like to point out a few highly-paid government employees (out of thousands) trying to make the point that all government workers (or all of one type of government worker) are overpaid. Conservatives like to trumpet these stories (that often have facts like "The average policeman only makes $75K/yr." buried deep in the last paragraphs of the article) to make their case.
I have no love for cops, but if you look at any large organization, you'll find outliers like these just on a statistical basis.
noone [sic] ever gets pulled over for speeding in large cities because it is a waste of time.
Tell that to the two or three speeders I see pulled over every morning on the outskirts of my large city. It happens everywhere. The forces? Economic and legal. We've talked about the economic. Legally? For the cops, it's another potential charge for an asshat that misbehaves vehicularly.
Please explain how one gets from broken plastic clips on a vanity mirror to "rolling sarcophagus" in a way that wouldn't make any other engineer's (let along lawyer's) eyes roll.
Yes, engineers can become short-sighted, over-exaggerate and sometimes use immoderate language, but in general, I think you'd find less of that in engineering ranks than in any other department in the company.
...maybe decent people inside BT that are of the opinion that child pr0n is vile and shouldn't exist thought that filtering might be a way to keep vile people from accessing this material easily. Even for-profit companies engage in activities not directly related to profit,...
Yes and when BT saw that it would cost them a smaller percentage of their profits to set up and maintain a filter like this than it would cost their competitors, of course they pushed for it, This decreased their competitors' margins when compared to theirs. With respect to corporations, there is a corollary to the saying "Never attribute to malice that which can easily be explained by stupidity,": Never attribute to altruism that which can be explained by greed.
That's barely enough to satisfy British demand, let alone that of the civilized world. And we haven't even figured in energy needs for beer production, yet.
The PP didn't say a damn thing about criminals. What about acts not committed by criminals? Are there ever kids in the house? How about their friends? Do you have a friend who might get inebriated and shoot himself accidentally? How about his mistaking someone else in the the house for a burglar?
Guns are dangerous tools. The notion that they are only ever used for defending oneself against invaders is a dangerous and foolish one.
And, yes, you can be held responsible if your weapon is insufficiently secured and someone causes an "accident" with it. Depending on the severity of said accident, a gun owner could be looking at a manslaughter charge. At the very least, those who leave unsecured and loaded weapons around that are involved in accidents deserve to have their asses sued off in a civil proceeding.
Can we get a Star Trek like movie but instead of meeting human looking weirdos in outer space, let's meet species that look really weird, yet make friends with us and we commnunicate. Like Octopuses, and Snake-people, [and...]
No. Because biology (even xenobiology) is biology and budgets are budgets. And never shall the twain shall meet (other than via an NSF grant).
Teleportation would be a huge disruption to just about everything. What it would do to everything else would make what it did to ISPs pretty much trivial.
The result of storing too much water in the cloud is called "rain."
Yes! And that's why we're all drowning in a deluge of data. This data distribution downpour must be diverted!
Damn it, Netflix! Why can't you just let Comcast own everything? Then we'll have only have 300 GB of data deluge to deal with each month. Dry as a data desert - baked brown in the wires before coming to a TV near you!
A combination of lack of UI standards and bright shiny object syndrome.
Remember when there were actual UI standards for applications? When people who designed UI's for OS'es understood that there had to be some commonality in applications for people to get used to? That this UI commonality was deemed good for the industry, allowing people to come up to speed on new applications relatively quickly? When this notion was ingrained enough that applications that had non-standard UIs were roundly panned? Well, that doesn't happen any more. Each application is its own special, precious social snowflake whose individualism must be nurtured and cherished. After all, who would ever think that a menuing system might need a common structure. Or that a standard location for a search box might be handly, if one needed to, say... maybe.. search for something? In any case, the web and mobile devices opened a plethora of new non-standards. Now you have to live with it. Have fun!
Next, once the floodgates to random UI crap were flung open, flavors of the day started proliferating - many flavors, none of which were objectively better than the other. But they started getting used and extended. And God forbid that we reuse anything old in this industry. We should just hang up a shingle saying "Wheels re-invented here!" So UI folk have to use the newest, brightest, shiniest thing, because... USABILITY! At least for software developers the "because" for the wheel reinvention was "resume". Somehow I doubt tinting your widgets lime green does much for your career, though it may lead to pontificating blog posts and cushy consulting gigs should you hit the fashonista lottery and lime green turns out to be this year's new black.
No one knows how to spell it. In these threads I've seen Fortran, FORTRAN, ForTran, etc. Who the hell can keep track? That's why C is winning! One letter, upper case, C. No muss no fuss. Not to worry, PL\I had the same issue (Forward or backward slash? Better go look it up!) Same with LISP, LisP, Lisp, (or, these days, scheme, Racket, Clojure).- too many letters, too many ways to misspell them. D avoided falling into this trap, but which would you rather have on a paper? A D or a C? And C++ doesn't even look like a real grade? Python? Are we naming a language or a comedy troupe? Same with Ruby - I don't need a bunch of freaking geologists telling how to use a computer.
Jeez, everyone, C just got it right where it counted - its name. Now can we just all agree to use that and move on?
... although it is certainly faster, the resulting code will be less robust than code output by a modern most modern C compilers.
This is the best you've got? That some how C is more correct than Fortran? Doesn't seem that way to me. Last I checked, there were very few differences in Fortran or C's numeric operations, both mapping almost directly to whatever the underlying architecture wants to do with the operands, both silently ignoring integer over-/underflow. Both have language primitives (or extensions) that allow you to manufacture a raw pointer to anywhere in memory and allow you to write anything to that address. Any language that lets you do those things without great angst cannot be called "robust" in any normal sense of that word. "Adherent to the spec" is about all you can say of it.
Yeah. An easily portable automated kill-zone barrier. I see no reason why a general might want one of those. After all, minefields were just a fad. This works just about as well for a "if you step here we will kill you" sort of thing. Plus, no muss, no fuss cleanup. Just disarm the thing and pack up.
Slashdot Mirror
The school district is thinking that expulsion and suspension do more harm than good when students are left unsupervised, so they are switching to more in school retention. The trailers are going to be used for that.
Ahhh... Getting them ready for the industrial-prison complex early, huh?
I love it when atheists say that Jesus is fictional.
Yes, it's probably more accurate to say that Jesus is mythical - there was a man named Jesus who lived in the mid-east around the beginning of the Common Era and had a bunch of followers. And people who came after him did quite a literary number on him, attributing to him miracles, divinity, and other graces. In a way, it's just like Arthur - who also had a bunch of followers and who's legend was similarly embellished, although not quite to the same level.
So, yes, Jesus is quite mythical.
... it would be hard to make its APIs much worse.
Note that over-protection is exaggeration of a positive trait. Try exaggerating a negative attribute in that situation and watch the firestorm erupt. The sitcom "Bad Teacher" can get away with it because the female lead there isn't a mother (just a teacher), but just try doing it with an actual mother character. The intergenerational comedy "Mom" can get away with it because the "bad mother" in this case only has adult children. But exaggerating a real negative attribute that moms can have (addiction, irresponsibility, etc.) and incorporating it into a sitcom? Man, you have got to have balls of steel and flameproof underwear to propose that. When I see a sitcom with the feel of "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia", but starring a dysfunctional mom, a semi-functional dad, and non-grown children, that's when I know the barrier is broken.
Cutting to the chase, having kids is fine as long as you're willing to make the sacrifices necessary to raise and support them. So is not having kids. So is waiting to have kids. So is adopting. So is marrying someone who has already had kids and becoming a (hopefully non-evil) stepparent.
What surprises me is the number of people here who feel that they have some right to criticize others' choices on this particular issue (although the choice of taking unruly kids onto planes and into theaters probably is OK to criticize). What surprises me more is the defensiveness that some people have around their choices, even to the point where folks are seeing posts on different choices as attacks on their choices. Just because someone makes a different choice than you, it doesn't invalidate your decision. Yes, I know that you who don't have kids like to gloat about your freedom. I'm glad you have it, but no one likes an smug asshole. I know you who have kids like to tout your responsibility and the joys you get from parenting and your oh-so-excellent child-rearing skills. I'm glad you have those, but, again, no one likes a smug asshole. So just lighten the fuck up, OK?
I had kids. I have friends who didn't. I respect their choices, they respect mine. There are advantages and disadvantages to each choice. That's the way life is. Now STFU and enjoy the life you've chosen and let others enjoy theirs.
Why does this discussion remind me of a vi/emacs war?
Just like any other construct - when it makes the code more clean, clear, correct, and/or optimized. These are tradeoffs.
For instance, let's say you have a function having a deeply nested conditional:
This code might be more simply understood as:
Not to mention televising it as a reality TV show - let the producers pick fifteen contestants, whittling them down to five as they're trained. Then comes the moment of truth! The five secretly vote for someone other than themselves. The votes are counted and the person with the most votes is given a gun with a blank, while everyone else has a bullet in their gun. The execution is carried out. Afterwards, the person with the blank is revealed and has to go home. The remaining four split a $5M prize and get to be paraded as NRA heroes for the rest of their media life.
Money making (because the ratings would be off the charts) and tasteful!
Can or does? Does this count overtime? Newspapers often like to point out a few highly-paid government employees (out of thousands) trying to make the point that all government workers (or all of one type of government worker) are overpaid. Conservatives like to trumpet these stories (that often have facts like "The average policeman only makes $75K/yr." buried deep in the last paragraphs of the article) to make their case.
I have no love for cops, but if you look at any large organization, you'll find outliers like these just on a statistical basis.
Stop being innumerate.
noone [sic] ever gets pulled over for speeding in large cities because it is a waste of time.
Tell that to the two or three speeders I see pulled over every morning on the outskirts of my large city. It happens everywhere. The forces? Economic and legal. We've talked about the economic. Legally? For the cops, it's another potential charge for an asshat that misbehaves vehicularly.
Please explain how one gets from broken plastic clips on a vanity mirror to "rolling sarcophagus" in a way that wouldn't make any other engineer's (let along lawyer's) eyes roll.
Yes, engineers can become short-sighted, over-exaggerate and sometimes use immoderate language, but in general, I think you'd find less of that in engineering ranks than in any other department in the company.
...maybe decent people inside BT that are of the opinion that child pr0n is vile and shouldn't exist thought that filtering might be a way to keep vile people from accessing this material easily. Even for-profit companies engage in activities not directly related to profit,...
Yes and when BT saw that it would cost them a smaller percentage of their profits to set up and maintain a filter like this than it would cost their competitors, of course they pushed for it, This decreased their competitors' margins when compared to theirs. With respect to corporations, there is a corollary to the saying "Never attribute to malice that which can easily be explained by stupidity,": Never attribute to altruism that which can be explained by greed.
That's barely enough to satisfy British demand, let alone that of the civilized world. And we haven't even figured in energy needs for beer production, yet.
Sometime in the next few hours, quantum mechanics would predict a particle or two being emitted.
Oh, you want to measure that against background noise? I guess you'll need a bigger flashlight. Maybe try the big six-cell ones.
The PP didn't say a damn thing about criminals. What about acts not committed by criminals? Are there ever kids in the house? How about their friends? Do you have a friend who might get inebriated and shoot himself accidentally? How about his mistaking someone else in the the house for a burglar?
Guns are dangerous tools. The notion that they are only ever used for defending oneself against invaders is a dangerous and foolish one.
And, yes, you can be held responsible if your weapon is insufficiently secured and someone causes an "accident" with it. Depending on the severity of said accident, a gun owner could be looking at a manslaughter charge. At the very least, those who leave unsecured and loaded weapons around that are involved in accidents deserve to have their asses sued off in a civil proceeding.
Can we get a Star Trek like movie but instead of meeting human looking weirdos in outer space, let's meet species that look really weird, yet make friends with us and we commnunicate. Like Octopuses, and Snake-people, [and...]
No. Because biology (even xenobiology) is biology and budgets are budgets. And never shall the twain shall meet (other than via an NSF grant).
I don't get it. I don't understand what this has to do with anything:
There's a Chromium extension replacing all occurences [sic] of "in my butt" by "in my butt". Conveys the same message.
I understand the tautology stated here, but is there some deeper meaning? Can someone please explain?
Teleportation would be a huge disruption to just about everything. What it would do to everything else would make what it did to ISPs pretty much trivial.
The result of storing too much water in the cloud is called "rain."
Yes! And that's why we're all drowning in a deluge of data. This data distribution downpour must be diverted!
Damn it, Netflix! Why can't you just let Comcast own everything? Then we'll have only have 300 GB of data deluge to deal with each month. Dry as a data desert - baked brown in the wires before coming to a TV near you!
Yeah. And don't feed them after midnight.
What the hell happened?
A combination of lack of UI standards and bright shiny object syndrome.
Remember when there were actual UI standards for applications? When people who designed UI's for OS'es understood that there had to be some commonality in applications for people to get used to? That this UI commonality was deemed good for the industry, allowing people to come up to speed on new applications relatively quickly? When this notion was ingrained enough that applications that had non-standard UIs were roundly panned? Well, that doesn't happen any more. Each application is its own special, precious social snowflake whose individualism must be nurtured and cherished. After all, who would ever think that a menuing system might need a common structure. Or that a standard location for a search box might be handly, if one needed to, say... maybe.. search for something? In any case, the web and mobile devices opened a plethora of new non-standards. Now you have to live with it. Have fun!
Next, once the floodgates to random UI crap were flung open, flavors of the day started proliferating - many flavors, none of which were objectively better than the other. But they started getting used and extended. And God forbid that we reuse anything old in this industry. We should just hang up a shingle saying "Wheels re-invented here!" So UI folk have to use the newest, brightest, shiniest thing, because... USABILITY! At least for software developers the "because" for the wheel reinvention was "resume". Somehow I doubt tinting your widgets lime green does much for your career, though it may lead to pontificating blog posts and cushy consulting gigs should you hit the fashonista lottery and lime green turns out to be this year's new black.
No one knows how to spell it. In these threads I've seen Fortran, FORTRAN, ForTran, etc. Who the hell can keep track? That's why C is winning! One letter, upper case, C. No muss no fuss. Not to worry, PL\I had the same issue (Forward or backward slash? Better go look it up!) Same with LISP, LisP, Lisp, (or, these days, scheme, Racket, Clojure).- too many letters, too many ways to misspell them. D avoided falling into this trap, but which would you rather have on a paper? A D or a C? And C++ doesn't even look like a real grade? Python? Are we naming a language or a comedy troupe? Same with Ruby - I don't need a bunch of freaking geologists telling how to use a computer.
Jeez, everyone, C just got it right where it counted - its name. Now can we just all agree to use that and move on?
... although it is certainly faster, the resulting code will be less robust than code output by a modern most modern C compilers.
This is the best you've got? That some how C is more correct than Fortran? Doesn't seem that way to me. Last I checked, there were very few differences in Fortran or C's numeric operations, both mapping almost directly to whatever the underlying architecture wants to do with the operands, both silently ignoring integer over-/underflow. Both have language primitives (or extensions) that allow you to manufacture a raw pointer to anywhere in memory and allow you to write anything to that address. Any language that lets you do those things without great angst cannot be called "robust" in any normal sense of that word. "Adherent to the spec" is about all you can say of it.
Yeah. An easily portable automated kill-zone barrier. I see no reason why a general might want one of those. After all, minefields were just a fad. This works just about as well for a "if you step here we will kill you" sort of thing. Plus, no muss, no fuss cleanup. Just disarm the thing and pack up.
If you don't want to be fucked in the ass it doesn't matter if it is a 10" or 14" dick you are stilling being ass raped.
As my gay friend, Dennis, said, "Oh, trust me, it makes a big difference. You wouldn't believe the difference..."
That's because there's only about three channel's worth of TV worth watching on those 189 channels, spread among the seventeen you watch.