Yeah, I was gonna comment that when they can mix H&M's computer-generated models with Realdoll and some robotics, there will be quite a few guys who won't even *try* to get a date:p
In the long run, this may result in significant changes to the gene pool as they remove themselves from it and society once again turns to polygamy out of a shortage of males who are interested in non-robotic women. Granted, they may by then have robotic men who are good enough to cause some women to go down the same road, but overall I would expect more men than women to go for a robotic companion.
According to every source I've been able to locate, the heaviest MM got was 140, but that wasn't her normal weight. It was the result of an eating binge resulting from depression before making "Some Like It Hot." She got back down to her normal weight (115-120) for filming, and her weight at death was 118. She was 5-5 and 1/2. 115 - 120 pounds is a normal weight for a woman of her height and age. By way of comparison, my wife is 5-2/105 and is actually slightly overweight (belly fat) but that tends to come with age (40). She doesn't weigh what she did when she was 21. OTOH, when she was 21 she only weighed 100, so 5 pounds over almost 20 years and three kids bothers me not at all - she has a great body and doesn't really even need to work much at maintaining it:-)
Depends. My wife is 5 foot 2 and weighs 105. If she weighed 120, she would most certainly be not just overweight, but downright chubby. Even at 105, she has some belly fat, but that kinda goes with being (almost) 40. Not many women who have three kids under 10 can claim to weigh only 5 pounds more than they did when they were 21, but it's true about her.
I'm not complaining about the belly fat by any means - she still has an absolutely hot body overall and you get a little of that when you're 40; anyway, she has less of it than I do - but saying a 120 pound woman isn't overweight unless she's a midget is just plain wrong. A guy who is 5-2 and 120 is OK is not overweight. Or could be: when I was 16 I weighed 125 and am 5'9. I wasn't what you'd call skinny, I was really average. A guy 7 inches shorter than me who weighed almost as much would have been a bit on the stocky side.
A lot of Chinese stuff still is just the lowest-quality garbage you'd ever not want to see, but yeah, some of it is pretty good. More than a little of the Taiwanese electronics industry has re-outsourced to the Chinese mainland and the quality is good. I expect China to move toward quality in more markets in the coming decade.
My mother - who is in her 80s - has some kitchen appliances that belonged to her mother and were made in the 1920s or 1930s. They still work and she still uses them.
I doubt our own mixer - a Kitchen-Aid that was over $200 - will last that long, although it might surprise me. I bet my mom's mixer will still be working when I'm in my 80s. Will probably pass it down to one of my kids. That wasn't some hugely expensive mixer, either. My maternal grandmother came from a lower-middle class family, only a generation or two removed from the immigrant generation. She could speak some German that she learned when she was little.
Why aren't there software engineers' unions? IIRC there is (or was?) a small IT workers union that was always trying to gain traction but never could, for one simple reason: hardly anyone wanted to join it. I do not perceive being a member of a union as something that would improve my income, my well-being, my prospects, or my job satisfaction. I perceive being in a union as something that would have me going along in convoy with everyone else and getting nominal raises and promotions based on seniority, not merit. Ultimately, it would send my job overseas. That last thing could conceivably happen anyway, but I'm quite sure being in a union would both increase its likelihood and hasten its occurrence.
My mother - who is 81 - has and uses a couple of appliances (a mixer and some other one) that belonged to *her* mother. They date back at least to the nineteen-thirties. She has some pots and pans that old or more, too. She thinks some of it is closing in on 100 years.
With all due respect, the coffee you get at Starbucks (or better, Peet's or other Favorite Local Store) is not the coffee you get at a diner or lunch counter. That stuff is the same crap it's always been. What Starbucks did is to offer significantly better coffee than that stuff, plus some coffee-based drinks that people like, good ambiance and (usually) much better service, and they found that people would pay a premium for that.
Note that I'm not arguing that Starbucks is necessarily good, just that it's much better than the usual crap. I didn't start to experience truly good coffee until I started buying coffee roasted by small, local custom roasters. From there, I went on to home roasting my own coffee. It's much cheaper (5 - 7 dollars a pound for great quality green beans), really interesting, gives me full control over the entire roasting process, and let's me drink the freshest possible coffee. My co-workers love it whenever I bring in some of my home roast for our team coffee machine.
The diner coffee is probably still cheap, but you get what you pay for. I had no idea how coffee should taste, or how good it can be, until I started drinking locally roasted and home roasted coffee, brewed in a French press.
I could see banning hardballs. Even when I was in primary school (seventies) they weren't allowed. Anything else was fine, including bringing your own bat for playing softball at lunch and recess, something many of us did. They were better than the school bats.
Actually, we know that it works perfectly well. It's going swimmingly even in countries that are still nominally communist.
What capitalism requires, however, is that you get your ass out and work hard at something, instead of hanging around in a park all day, living in a tent, banging drums, trashing businesses that actually employ people, chanting "Hey hey, ho ho" and whining that people who worked for what they have shouldn't be allowed to have it and some should be taken away and given to you.
In the Occupy version of the story about the grasshopper and the ant, I can see the grasshopper being turned into some kind of oppressed hero, held down by the evil ant, rather than being the victim of his own stupid choices. Ain't communism grand?
In the late nineties when I joined/. I was a sysadmin. I had both a pager and a cell phone it was pretty hard for even both of them to wake me when I was on call:p Fortunately, I stopped being a sysadmin just about the time I got married, and that made the problem go away. My wife would not be amused to be awoken in the middle of the night by my pager while I slept on, oblivious.
Since the early 2000s, I've been in email (more recently, web) security and never have to be on call. I did love being an SA and sometimes still miss it, but sure don't miss the pager.
That wouldn't work on my wife. She's an extremely light sleeper and once woken, finds in difficult to wake up. I on the other hand, could sleep right through just about anything intended to wake me (good thing my job doesn't require on-call hours). The best way to wake me up would be to page my wife and tell her to wake me up, but that wouldn't go over too well with her
The Tea Party (which is nothing you say it is, and I'm calling you out as a liar) has had nothing but crap from the mainstream left-tilted media that stands up and lies through its teeth about being objective.
The Occupy movement - which seems to have no agenda other than "People shouldn't be allowed to be rich, no matter how hard-working, smart, and successful they are" - and is definitely the 1% of extreme leftists and totally out of step with the 99% of normal people - has had mostly favorable coverage from that same media.
The Tea Party is about maximum liberty and minimum government. The Occupy fringe is the exact opposite - they are about maximum government and minimum liberty.
Since when do you have a First Amendment right to camp in a public park?
I'd love to be able to do that, too. Beats the heck out of the cost, hassle, and driving involved to go to a campground, and if it rains or the kids get scared, I could be home in 5 minutes, but guess what? Camping in city parks is illegal and I'd get ticketed for it, or arrested if I failed to leave.
Those 1% Occupy types (1% because that's about how many Americans are communist like them) can protest as much as they want, and screw over local businesses to the point of bankruptcy (Hi from the SF Bay area!) but they have to go home at night like everybody else.
They might want to consider, I dunno, actually working for a living instead of having "Confiscate the wealth and give it to us!" as a business model.
Electric commuter cars are not cheaper than gasoline-powered alternatives and the cost of a rental car on a long trip is really high because of the mileage charges. That's no solution for him.
In my case, I have a few 500-miles-in-a-day trips every year, in a mini-van that is also used as a daily driver, so I need an Odyssey that can go 500 freeway miles on a charge, or at worst, with a single 30-minute recharge stop along the may (but single-charge is preferable). I love the idea of having an electric vehicle, and this new breakthrough gives me hope that by the time my Odyssey is ready for replacement in 10 years or so that there will be an EV minivan available that meets my requirements.
I've driven that far in a day once. It didn't take me anywhere near 15 hours but it was a long haul, and I only stopped when I needed gas. Get some food, fill the car's tank, empty mine, and back on the road.
Totally with you that an EV needs to be able to make that journey before I can buy one. This new breakthrough may make that possible: my bar for purchase is an electric (or EV + generator) Honda Odyssey that can go from Silicon Valley to San Diego on a single charge, and quickly recharge at least enough to go a couple hundred miles more if necessary.
The one thing in that model that I don't like is that I would have to lease the battery. I'd be more open to a model in which I pay only for the charge. After all, in my current vehicle, I don't lease the gas tank from a gas station. With an electric vehicle, most of the time I would be charging it at home or at work (if my workplace had charging stations, anyway), which would make leasing a battery a large and pointless expense. It is this fact that also makes me think that business model is doomed.
This new technology discussed in the original article makes me think it's even more doomed, because it will make possible the target that can get me into an electric vehicle: a Honda Odyssey (or other similar-sized mini-van, but I really like Odysseys) that can go 500 freeway miles or more on a charge and re-charge in an hour; if not fully, at least enough to go another 200 or 300 miles. A 500 mile range will get me as much as I typically ever drive in a day on vacation. If said vehicle also had a small fuel engine that drove a generator sufficient to keep the vehicle going at highway speeds and maybe even charge the battery simultaneously, the range would be practically limitless.
Today's hybrids don't strike me as a solution. They offer minimal mileage increases over the best gasoline-only cars in their size class, at a substantial cost increase. There may never be a cost payoff for most hybrid owners. Even if I could get a hybrid Odyssey, I wouldn't buy one. The cost/benefit analysis doesn't stack up. It would have to be all electric or all electric + backup generator, with the kind of range this new battery breakthrough makes possible.
Fine, treat it as a public park. You're not allowed - generally - to camp in public parks. While they were doing so, they were not only breaking the law, they were preventing other people's use of the park. I don't know what the lay of the land is at OWS, but out here in California, Occupy Oakland was also screwing over every small business owner in the area because no one wanted to go anywhere near the place. It was filthy, it was attracting vermin (both two- and four-legged), there was crime and drug dealing, and the capper was when one of the protestors was murdered last week, possibly by other protestors who then fled.
They can protest all day long if it's what floats their boat, but then they have to go home at night like everybody else.
This is the only place I've heard the claim that the police are/were doing that, and even here no source is cited for that claim. I'll be reaching for my salt shaker now...
I know. Anyone with any background in linguistics or education, or even just anyone with kids who have reached school age, knows this is true. Unless there is something novel that they've done and TFA doesn't go into, it sounds like they're really late to the party.
Re:Only "troubled" if you're not Lockheed Martin
on
The F-35 Story
·
· Score: 1
However, military salaries are really low compared to the civil "servant" civilian government employees and their fatter pensions and very fat salaries. Base pay for an O6 with 25 years of service appears to be in the low six figures, and how many of those are there? Not a lot, really.
Compare that to civilian government employees. In San Jose, California, the public list of employees and salaries has about 6,000 names on it. I went through about 1/3 of the list without finding anyone who made less than $100,000 last year. THAT is where we have a problem; not with paying for military pensions.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I was gonna comment that when they can mix H&M's computer-generated models with Realdoll and some robotics, there will be quite a few guys who won't even *try* to get a date :p
In the long run, this may result in significant changes to the gene pool as they remove themselves from it and society once again turns to polygamy out of a shortage of males who are interested in non-robotic women. Granted, they may by then have robotic men who are good enough to cause some women to go down the same road, but overall I would expect more men than women to go for a robotic companion.
According to every source I've been able to locate, the heaviest MM got was 140, but that wasn't her normal weight. It was the result of an eating binge resulting from depression before making "Some Like It Hot." She got back down to her normal weight (115-120) for filming, and her weight at death was 118. She was 5-5 and 1/2. 115 - 120 pounds is a normal weight for a woman of her height and age. By way of comparison, my wife is 5-2/105 and is actually slightly overweight (belly fat) but that tends to come with age (40). She doesn't weigh what she did when she was 21. OTOH, when she was 21 she only weighed 100, so 5 pounds over almost 20 years and three kids bothers me not at all - she has a great body and doesn't really even need to work much at maintaining it :-)
Depends. My wife is 5 foot 2 and weighs 105. If she weighed 120, she would most certainly be not just overweight, but downright chubby. Even at 105, she has some belly fat, but that kinda goes with being (almost) 40. Not many women who have three kids under 10 can claim to weigh only 5 pounds more than they did when they were 21, but it's true about her.
I'm not complaining about the belly fat by any means - she still has an absolutely hot body overall and you get a little of that when you're 40; anyway, she has less of it than I do - but saying a 120 pound woman isn't overweight unless she's a midget is just plain wrong. A guy who is 5-2 and 120 is OK is not overweight. Or could be: when I was 16 I weighed 125 and am 5'9. I wasn't what you'd call skinny, I was really average. A guy 7 inches shorter than me who weighed almost as much would have been a bit on the stocky side.
I had to scroll down this far to find a Vger reference?!?!
These young whippersnappers!
My younger brother, one of our friends, and I ditched school to see first Star Trek movie on opening day. Amazingly, none of us got caught.
A lot of Chinese stuff still is just the lowest-quality garbage you'd ever not want to see, but yeah, some of it is pretty good. More than a little of the Taiwanese electronics industry has re-outsourced to the Chinese mainland and the quality is good. I expect China to move toward quality in more markets in the coming decade.
My mother - who is in her 80s - has some kitchen appliances that belonged to her mother and were made in the 1920s or 1930s. They still work and she still uses them.
I doubt our own mixer - a Kitchen-Aid that was over $200 - will last that long, although it might surprise me. I bet my mom's mixer will still be working when I'm in my 80s. Will probably pass it down to one of my kids. That wasn't some hugely expensive mixer, either. My maternal grandmother came from a lower-middle class family, only a generation or two removed from the immigrant generation. She could speak some German that she learned when she was little.
Why aren't there software engineers' unions? IIRC there is (or was?) a small IT workers union that was always trying to gain traction but never could, for one simple reason: hardly anyone wanted to join it. I do not perceive being a member of a union as something that would improve my income, my well-being, my prospects, or my job satisfaction. I perceive being in a union as something that would have me going along in convoy with everyone else and getting nominal raises and promotions based on seniority, not merit. Ultimately, it would send my job overseas. That last thing could conceivably happen anyway, but I'm quite sure being in a union would both increase its likelihood and hasten its occurrence.
My mother - who is 81 - has and uses a couple of appliances (a mixer and some other one) that belonged to *her* mother. They date back at least to the nineteen-thirties. She has some pots and pans that old or more, too. She thinks some of it is closing in on 100 years.
With all due respect, the coffee you get at Starbucks (or better, Peet's or other Favorite Local Store) is not the coffee you get at a diner or lunch counter. That stuff is the same crap it's always been. What Starbucks did is to offer significantly better coffee than that stuff, plus some coffee-based drinks that people like, good ambiance and (usually) much better service, and they found that people would pay a premium for that.
Note that I'm not arguing that Starbucks is necessarily good, just that it's much better than the usual crap. I didn't start to experience truly good coffee until I started buying coffee roasted by small, local custom roasters. From there, I went on to home roasting my own coffee. It's much cheaper (5 - 7 dollars a pound for great quality green beans), really interesting, gives me full control over the entire roasting process, and let's me drink the freshest possible coffee. My co-workers love it whenever I bring in some of my home roast for our team coffee machine.
The diner coffee is probably still cheap, but you get what you pay for. I had no idea how coffee should taste, or how good it can be, until I started drinking locally roasted and home roasted coffee, brewed in a French press.
I could see banning hardballs. Even when I was in primary school (seventies) they weren't allowed. Anything else was fine, including bringing your own bat for playing softball at lunch and recess, something many of us did. They were better than the school bats.
Actually, we know that it works perfectly well. It's going swimmingly even in countries that are still nominally communist.
What capitalism requires, however, is that you get your ass out and work hard at something, instead of hanging around in a park all day, living in a tent, banging drums, trashing businesses that actually employ people, chanting "Hey hey, ho ho" and whining that people who worked for what they have shouldn't be allowed to have it and some should be taken away and given to you.
In the Occupy version of the story about the grasshopper and the ant, I can see the grasshopper being turned into some kind of oppressed hero, held down by the evil ant, rather than being the victim of his own stupid choices. Ain't communism grand?
Socialism paints itself in a shitty light without any help.
I've had one of those at the base of my thumb for about 35 years. Graphite in the body is pretty durable, it seems.
In the late nineties when I joined /. I was a sysadmin. I had both a pager and a cell phone it was pretty hard for even both of them to wake me when I was on call :p Fortunately, I stopped being a sysadmin just about the time I got married, and that made the problem go away. My wife would not be amused to be awoken in the middle of the night by my pager while I slept on, oblivious.
Since the early 2000s, I've been in email (more recently, web) security and never have to be on call. I did love being an SA and sometimes still miss it, but sure don't miss the pager.
That wouldn't work on my wife. She's an extremely light sleeper and once woken, finds in difficult to wake up. I on the other hand, could sleep right through just about anything intended to wake me (good thing my job doesn't require on-call hours). The best way to wake me up would be to page my wife and tell her to wake me up, but that wouldn't go over too well with her
What a load of crap.
The Tea Party (which is nothing you say it is, and I'm calling you out as a liar) has had nothing but crap from the mainstream left-tilted media that stands up and lies through its teeth about being objective.
The Occupy movement - which seems to have no agenda other than "People shouldn't be allowed to be rich, no matter how hard-working, smart, and successful they are" - and is definitely the 1% of extreme leftists and totally out of step with the 99% of normal people - has had mostly favorable coverage from that same media.
The Tea Party is about maximum liberty and minimum government. The Occupy fringe is the exact opposite - they are about maximum government and minimum liberty.
Since when do you have a First Amendment right to camp in a public park?
I'd love to be able to do that, too. Beats the heck out of the cost, hassle, and driving involved to go to a campground, and if it rains or the kids get scared, I could be home in 5 minutes, but guess what? Camping in city parks is illegal and I'd get ticketed for it, or arrested if I failed to leave.
Those 1% Occupy types (1% because that's about how many Americans are communist like them) can protest as much as they want, and screw over local businesses to the point of bankruptcy (Hi from the SF Bay area!) but they have to go home at night like everybody else.
They might want to consider, I dunno, actually working for a living instead of having "Confiscate the wealth and give it to us!" as a business model.
They sure screwed the (immediately) local economy here in Oakland, and they seemed to have the crime part covered, too, including a murder last week.
I'm glad they're finally gone. May they never return.
Electric commuter cars are not cheaper than gasoline-powered alternatives and the cost of a rental car on a long trip is really high because of the mileage charges. That's no solution for him.
In my case, I have a few 500-miles-in-a-day trips every year, in a mini-van that is also used as a daily driver, so I need an Odyssey that can go 500 freeway miles on a charge, or at worst, with a single 30-minute recharge stop along the may (but single-charge is preferable). I love the idea of having an electric vehicle, and this new breakthrough gives me hope that by the time my Odyssey is ready for replacement in 10 years or so that there will be an EV minivan available that meets my requirements.
I've driven that far in a day once. It didn't take me anywhere near 15 hours but it was a long haul, and I only stopped when I needed gas. Get some food, fill the car's tank, empty mine, and back on the road.
Totally with you that an EV needs to be able to make that journey before I can buy one. This new breakthrough may make that possible: my bar for purchase is an electric (or EV + generator) Honda Odyssey that can go from Silicon Valley to San Diego on a single charge, and quickly recharge at least enough to go a couple hundred miles more if necessary.
The one thing in that model that I don't like is that I would have to lease the battery. I'd be more open to a model in which I pay only for the charge. After all, in my current vehicle, I don't lease the gas tank from a gas station. With an electric vehicle, most of the time I would be charging it at home or at work (if my workplace had charging stations, anyway), which would make leasing a battery a large and pointless expense. It is this fact that also makes me think that business model is doomed.
This new technology discussed in the original article makes me think it's even more doomed, because it will make possible the target that can get me into an electric vehicle: a Honda Odyssey (or other similar-sized mini-van, but I really like Odysseys) that can go 500 freeway miles or more on a charge and re-charge in an hour; if not fully, at least enough to go another 200 or 300 miles. A 500 mile range will get me as much as I typically ever drive in a day on vacation. If said vehicle also had a small fuel engine that drove a generator sufficient to keep the vehicle going at highway speeds and maybe even charge the battery simultaneously, the range would be practically limitless.
Today's hybrids don't strike me as a solution. They offer minimal mileage increases over the best gasoline-only cars in their size class, at a substantial cost increase. There may never be a cost payoff for most hybrid owners. Even if I could get a hybrid Odyssey, I wouldn't buy one. The cost/benefit analysis doesn't stack up. It would have to be all electric or all electric + backup generator, with the kind of range this new battery breakthrough makes possible.
Fine, treat it as a public park. You're not allowed - generally - to camp in public parks. While they were doing so, they were not only breaking the law, they were preventing other people's use of the park. I don't know what the lay of the land is at OWS, but out here in California, Occupy Oakland was also screwing over every small business owner in the area because no one wanted to go anywhere near the place. It was filthy, it was attracting vermin (both two- and four-legged), there was crime and drug dealing, and the capper was when one of the protestors was murdered last week, possibly by other protestors who then fled.
They can protest all day long if it's what floats their boat, but then they have to go home at night like everybody else.
This is the only place I've heard the claim that the police are/were doing that, and even here no source is cited for that claim. I'll be reaching for my salt shaker now...
I know. Anyone with any background in linguistics or education, or even just anyone with kids who have reached school age, knows this is true. Unless there is something novel that they've done and TFA doesn't go into, it sounds like they're really late to the party.
However, military salaries are really low compared to the civil "servant" civilian government employees and their fatter pensions and very fat salaries. Base pay for an O6 with 25 years of service appears to be in the low six figures, and how many of those are there? Not a lot, really.
Compare that to civilian government employees. In San Jose, California, the public list of employees and salaries has about 6,000 names on it. I went through about 1/3 of the list without finding anyone who made less than $100,000 last year. THAT is where we have a problem; not with paying for military pensions.