Points to you for actually answering the question.
Speaking as someone who switched from Windows to Linux, after realizing that there were more games on Linux than I would ever have a chance to play anyway... I can only imagine that it's peer-pressure convincing his kid that he needs Windows. ("No! You need to play *this* game, specifically.") One solution is for the kid to get better friends, this is the best solution.
Another solution is to run Windows virtualized on Linux (as such.). This can be a pain in the ass, but it gets you everything you want.
Nature doesn't care about countries. If you're going to go that route, then basing your measurements on countries is no good. You can either look at global emissions and nothing else, and hope that everyone together will recognize that they're too high and somehow fix it while singing kumbayaa or something. I guess that's one approach.
Or you can measure per-person, and realize that some people are polluting a whole lot more than others. Those high-polluters seem to congregate geographically...
More mile per gallon doesn't necessarily mean less pollution.
It pretty much does mean that. As other people have pointed out: more pollution per pound of vehicle and more pollution per gallon of gas aren't particularly valuable metrics. What matters is what you can transport and how far you can transport it, relative to pollution.
If you're burning significantly more gas over the same distance, you're not going to make up for that with slightly more efficient combustion. Barring some extreme edge cases.
I shouldn't have phrased it that way. It's not really about lending money, but the point remains that you need someone who disagrees with you to the extent that they're willing to make the opposite bet.
In order to short something you need to be able to find someone who is willing to lend you a lot of money on the belief that you are wrong. You could maybe find such a person for a short-term short of bitcoin, but very few people are willing to bet that bitcoin is going to stick around for a long time.
Android has several excellent per-application firewalls available, which I recommend to anyone who will listen (very few people). AFWall+ is great and very simple to use, but requires root. I haven't used NetGuard, but I'm told that it's good for people who don't have rooted devices.
This seems like the most effective approach if you want to make sure that things like the Facbook app aren't reporting home about you. Facebook is far from the only culprit here.
"It was decided?" From your link: "The decision has been widely regarded as a form of retaliation in response to the newsroom's vote last week to unionize with the Writers Guild of America, East."
It doesn't include cheese because that's not an exhaustive list. If you read what it says, Bush did not propose applying a tariff where there had not been one previously, he was proposing tripling the tariff from 100% to 300%.
apply a 20% vat on everything esp imported goods/parts/services
You're describing a universal tariff right here, and we have tons of tariffs already. Ever wonder why cheese is so expensive in the US? 100% tariff on foreign cheese, to "protect" the American cheese industry. The new steel tariffs are killing automobile production in the US and making all the cars that we buy significantly more expensive.
The universal tariff that you're suggesting is a little different than these per-product tariffs, easier to manage and less abusable. So that's something. But it would still raise the cost of goods and make us poorer in aggregate. It's also a regressive tax, just like all consumption taxes.
So... Look, I don't expect a carefully considered response to every criticism, but just saying "You obviously haven't read the document if you don't agree with me." is pathetic. Aside from the parent's inflammatory (and very poorly considered) slight against engineers, it's basically spot-on: DaMore's document made some sweeping and polarizing claims and failed to defend them. Not all of the claims were cited, and what citations were there were mostly pretty weak. A single study or a wikipedia entry or something.
It's sad, because the negative part of Demore's document is basically just the middle section where he makes all of these claims about how women be like this, while men be like this, and they're totally unnecessary. His suggestions for what to do differently are mostly not so bad, if he had just cut out the middle bit this whole thing probably would have been fine.
Regarding the grandparent though, this claim: "he said there are differences to how men and women approach topics and Google's workplace tended to be more accommodating to men than women" is some bizarre shit. Unless that's just a typo or something. Did the grandparent mean "more accommodating to women than men"? I'm going to assume that's what the grandparent meant.
Well. That was a surprisingly good talk. I'd hate to think that that seemingly reasonable position would have deteriorated into two camps, "We need to enforce the GPL." and "We need to make it clear to people that copyleft isn't something to be afraid of." as though those positions were mutually incompatible. Both of those things are important, obviously.
Hm. Something about that seems familiar... As though I've seen it before, many many times...
The only discussion of this case that I can find is the one on the SFC website, linked in the summary. The petition itself is a bland claim of likelihood of confusion.
By publicly protesting their victimhood the SFC is asking for us to support them, but there just isn't anything to go on here.
Now, they're making the claim that this is completely out of the blue, so maybe that's the point? Is the idea that they don't know anything about this either?
Nothing here says anything about what this guy actually did. The law may be bad, the prosecutor may be bad, but neither of those things mean that this guy is good.
I guess I can't blame the guy for trying to drum up some support, he's got nothing better to do in prison, but Attacking this Rein woman is pretty inexcusable. Is hacking her email supposed to make us sympathetic? Is that an example of the sort of thing that put him in prison in the first place?
You can't just look at individual incomes for this, you need to look at households. Median income for a dual-income household is $67,000.
I find it odd that the IRS doesn't pay out additional money if you don't qualify for more than your tax burden though. Why should it matter what you owe? This seems strangely structured. Maybe it's something about preventing abuse?
There's a chance we might avoid this. We've already fallen into that pit with phones, and we seem to be slowly crawling our way out of it. Games consoles would fit that model perfectly, except... no, I can't come up with anything. They would fit that model perfectly. Why hasn't this happened?
I want nothing. It says that they're seceding because of the slave thing. This does not mean that slavery is the objective. Is that clear? I don't know how I can say this any other way: slavery is not a goal, it is a means.
Bleh, it's already annoyingly verbose. I'm not sure what you're expecting them to add though: "We're doing this because you won't let us have slaves. But having slaves isn't the point, of course, it's all of the money that we make from slaves that we really want. But you're not letting us have that, because you're not letting us have slaves. So we're seceding. Not because we really want slaves, you understand, but because we really want money. And it's not really the money either - it's all of the things that you can buy with money. And it's not really the things either - it's the happiness that we feel from owning things. Let's make that clear so that in the future Captain Splendid won't misunderstand what we're saying here."
Replying to myself (because I don't like misleading statistics):
That said, the parent's claim that "Slavery was already on its way out due to automation and industrialization." is false. Slavery, in number of slaves, was at its peak just prior to the civil war. In percentage of total population slavery had been declining over time, but this was due to large numbers of European immigrants, not due to any decline in slavery.
This is a misrepresentation of what the parent said. Slaves are not an end, slaves are a means. The confederacy had a culture and lifestyle which was dependent on slavery to exist, but which was not about slavery.
They did feel that keeping slaves, and thus preserving their lifestyle, were worth seceding over, but this certainly does not mean that the war or the slaves existed for the sake of slavery.
It's a proof of concept. There's arguably no point in mining bitcoin even with ASICs, but it works fine as an example of what upcycled phones can do. These are presumably a lot more flexible in their workload as well.
she found it easier to hire her own IT consultant, have a server built and managed on her own dime, and have to tell everyone she worked with her email was not hrc@state,gov but instead Hillary@hrc45.com?
... Look, without taking sides here (I have an opinion, I'm just not expressing it): Yes. Of course.
Frankly, your argument is weird. Of course it's easier to keep using the email that you've got than to start giving out a new one and get everyone to switch over. You should know this, everyone who has ever used email knows this.
Your own wealth is difficult to asses, on a global and historical level. We tend to compare ourselves to those around us or to those who are exceptional, which can produce wildly different conclusions. I've sometimes thought that something closer to a measure of absolute wealth is how strongly people as a group adhere to the notion of property rights. That is: the concept of ownership of property, and whether that is a right and good way of allocating resources.
When wars are started on behalf of the wealthy, it is usually over the notion that strong property rights are important (i.e.: taxes are bad). This was the case for the English Civil War, the American Revolutionary War, etc. And when wars are started on behalf of the poor it's (usually?) the other way around. French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Bolshevik (maybe, I don't know much about that one), etc.
Anyway, I'm basically agreeing with you: poor people in the US still have stuff, for the most part they aren't utterly destitute, and they cling to that stuff as jealously as a millionaire to his wealth. So support for property rights remains strong. That support is eroding, but we're nowhere near the point where people en masse are ready to reconsider the notion of property.
Slashdot Mirror
Points to you for actually answering the question.
Speaking as someone who switched from Windows to Linux, after realizing that there were more games on Linux than I would ever have a chance to play anyway... I can only imagine that it's peer-pressure convincing his kid that he needs Windows. ("No! You need to play *this* game, specifically.") One solution is for the kid to get better friends, this is the best solution.
Another solution is to run Windows virtualized on Linux (as such.). This can be a pain in the ass, but it gets you everything you want.
Nature doesn't care about countries. If you're going to go that route, then basing your measurements on countries is no good. You can either look at global emissions and nothing else, and hope that everyone together will recognize that they're too high and somehow fix it while singing kumbayaa or something. I guess that's one approach.
Or you can measure per-person, and realize that some people are polluting a whole lot more than others. Those high-polluters seem to congregate geographically...
More mile per gallon doesn't necessarily mean less pollution.
It pretty much does mean that. As other people have pointed out: more pollution per pound of vehicle and more pollution per gallon of gas aren't particularly valuable metrics. What matters is what you can transport and how far you can transport it, relative to pollution.
If you're burning significantly more gas over the same distance, you're not going to make up for that with slightly more efficient combustion. Barring some extreme edge cases.
I shouldn't have phrased it that way. It's not really about lending money, but the point remains that you need someone who disagrees with you to the extent that they're willing to make the opposite bet.
In order to short something you need to be able to find someone who is willing to lend you a lot of money on the belief that you are wrong. You could maybe find such a person for a short-term short of bitcoin, but very few people are willing to bet that bitcoin is going to stick around for a long time.
Or they're just, you know, not Americans. Europe has been doing pretty well with this stuff lately.
Android has several excellent per-application firewalls available, which I recommend to anyone who will listen (very few people). AFWall+ is great and very simple to use, but requires root. I haven't used NetGuard, but I'm told that it's good for people who don't have rooted devices.
This seems like the most effective approach if you want to make sure that things like the Facbook app aren't reporting home about you. Facebook is far from the only culprit here.
Competition? They had to keep up with their rival, I assume. Same reason Google and Samsung have dropped the headphone jacks from their phones.
Established. Man, what? Why did I say decided? I don't know, sorry.
"It was decided?" From your link: "The decision has been widely regarded as a form of retaliation in response to the newsroom's vote last week to unionize with the Writers Guild of America, East."
It doesn't include cheese because that's not an exhaustive list. If you read what it says, Bush did not propose applying a tariff where there had not been one previously, he was proposing tripling the tariff from 100% to 300%.
apply a 20% vat on everything esp imported goods/parts/services
You're describing a universal tariff right here, and we have tons of tariffs already. Ever wonder why cheese is so expensive in the US? 100% tariff on foreign cheese, to "protect" the American cheese industry. The new steel tariffs are killing automobile production in the US and making all the cars that we buy significantly more expensive.
The universal tariff that you're suggesting is a little different than these per-product tariffs, easier to manage and less abusable. So that's something. But it would still raise the cost of goods and make us poorer in aggregate. It's also a regressive tax, just like all consumption taxes.
So... Look, I don't expect a carefully considered response to every criticism, but just saying "You obviously haven't read the document if you don't agree with me." is pathetic. Aside from the parent's inflammatory (and very poorly considered) slight against engineers, it's basically spot-on: DaMore's document made some sweeping and polarizing claims and failed to defend them. Not all of the claims were cited, and what citations were there were mostly pretty weak. A single study or a wikipedia entry or something.
It's sad, because the negative part of Demore's document is basically just the middle section where he makes all of these claims about how women be like this, while men be like this, and they're totally unnecessary. His suggestions for what to do differently are mostly not so bad, if he had just cut out the middle bit this whole thing probably would have been fine.
Regarding the grandparent though, this claim: "he said there are differences to how men and women approach topics and Google's workplace tended to be more accommodating to men than women" is some bizarre shit. Unless that's just a typo or something. Did the grandparent mean "more accommodating to women than men"? I'm going to assume that's what the grandparent meant.
Well. That was a surprisingly good talk. I'd hate to think that that seemingly reasonable position would have deteriorated into two camps, "We need to enforce the GPL." and "We need to make it clear to people that copyleft isn't something to be afraid of." as though those positions were mutually incompatible. Both of those things are important, obviously.
Hm. Something about that seems familiar... As though I've seen it before, many many times...
The only discussion of this case that I can find is the one on the SFC website, linked in the summary. The petition itself is a bland claim of likelihood of confusion.
By publicly protesting their victimhood the SFC is asking for us to support them, but there just isn't anything to go on here.
Now, they're making the claim that this is completely out of the blue, so maybe that's the point? Is the idea that they don't know anything about this either?
Nothing here says anything about what this guy actually did. The law may be bad, the prosecutor may be bad, but neither of those things mean that this guy is good.
I guess I can't blame the guy for trying to drum up some support, he's got nothing better to do in prison, but Attacking this Rein woman is pretty inexcusable. Is hacking her email supposed to make us sympathetic? Is that an example of the sort of thing that put him in prison in the first place?
You can't just look at individual incomes for this, you need to look at households. Median income for a dual-income household is $67,000.
I find it odd that the IRS doesn't pay out additional money if you don't qualify for more than your tax burden though. Why should it matter what you owe? This seems strangely structured. Maybe it's something about preventing abuse?
There's a chance we might avoid this. We've already fallen into that pit with phones, and we seem to be slowly crawling our way out of it. Games consoles would fit that model perfectly, except ... no, I can't come up with anything. They would fit that model perfectly. Why hasn't this happened?
I want nothing. It says that they're seceding because of the slave thing. This does not mean that slavery is the objective. Is that clear? I don't know how I can say this any other way: slavery is not a goal, it is a means.
Bleh, it's already annoyingly verbose. I'm not sure what you're expecting them to add though: "We're doing this because you won't let us have slaves. But having slaves isn't the point, of course, it's all of the money that we make from slaves that we really want. But you're not letting us have that, because you're not letting us have slaves. So we're seceding. Not because we really want slaves, you understand, but because we really want money. And it's not really the money either - it's all of the things that you can buy with money. And it's not really the things either - it's the happiness that we feel from owning things. Let's make that clear so that in the future Captain Splendid won't misunderstand what we're saying here."
Replying to myself (because I don't like misleading statistics):
That said, the parent's claim that "Slavery was already on its way out due to automation and industrialization." is false. Slavery, in number of slaves, was at its peak just prior to the civil war. In percentage of total population slavery had been declining over time, but this was due to large numbers of European immigrants, not due to any decline in slavery.
This is a misrepresentation of what the parent said. Slaves are not an end, slaves are a means. The confederacy had a culture and lifestyle which was dependent on slavery to exist, but which was not about slavery.
They did feel that keeping slaves, and thus preserving their lifestyle, were worth seceding over, but this certainly does not mean that the war or the slaves existed for the sake of slavery.
It's a proof of concept. There's arguably no point in mining bitcoin even with ASICs, but it works fine as an example of what upcycled phones can do. These are presumably a lot more flexible in their workload as well.
she found it easier to hire her own IT consultant, have a server built and managed on her own dime, and have to tell everyone she worked with her email was not hrc@state,gov but instead Hillary@hrc45.com?
... Look, without taking sides here (I have an opinion, I'm just not expressing it): Yes. Of course.
Frankly, your argument is weird. Of course it's easier to keep using the email that you've got than to start giving out a new one and get everyone to switch over. You should know this, everyone who has ever used email knows this.
Your own wealth is difficult to asses, on a global and historical level. We tend to compare ourselves to those around us or to those who are exceptional, which can produce wildly different conclusions. I've sometimes thought that something closer to a measure of absolute wealth is how strongly people as a group adhere to the notion of property rights. That is: the concept of ownership of property, and whether that is a right and good way of allocating resources.
When wars are started on behalf of the wealthy, it is usually over the notion that strong property rights are important (i.e.: taxes are bad). This was the case for the English Civil War, the American Revolutionary War, etc. And when wars are started on behalf of the poor it's (usually?) the other way around. French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Bolshevik (maybe, I don't know much about that one), etc.
Anyway, I'm basically agreeing with you: poor people in the US still have stuff, for the most part they aren't utterly destitute, and they cling to that stuff as jealously as a millionaire to his wealth. So support for property rights remains strong. That support is eroding, but we're nowhere near the point where people en masse are ready to reconsider the notion of property.