I looked it up and yes, that was the one. I think I was about 16 years old at the time and got distracted from my regular reading time by getting a job.
Count me in. I wore them all the time at university when I had to walk through the area where the business-majors tried to sell things to students who couldn't afford them. Made it a lot more pleasant, even though I too was a bit bothered by the "obnoxious-dude-with-the-headphones-on-in-a-public-space" factor. I'm not proud to say that you do get used to it, but I came to accept it as a legitimate defensive tactic.
Your Democrat governor (and several others) did not see the writing on the wall. He was simply not opposed to the system itself the way some other governors were, and worked to build it at a state level. Other states have governors who fought the program and the result is those living in those states have to deal with the broken federal one.
The "writing on the wall" idea is nonsense. The reactions of governors have been political, not practical, as far as whether to set up state systems. One needs only look at a map of which states are doing what and compare to a map of which party each state's governor comes from to see it. The difference between the two is not particularly large.
This isn't merely a technological barrier but the wrong tool for the job. It sounds like the traditional in-person format is poorly translated into this technology, sure. But that doesn't mean technology is the problem. It probably means the meeting itself is trying to force its traditionally square peg into a round, digital hole.
I can guarantee that I'll start carrying headphones to the store with me if that starts happening. Actually, given those awful televisions running constant ads that some stores have, I should probably already start doing that.
I think more people simply need to cave to the demands of common sense and stop paying for cable television in the first place. Especially when they get broadcasts for free of many if not all of the shows they think they need cable to watch.
It's not simple availability we need. It's either exclusivity, or superior experience. Simple parity will not do the trick. SteamOS might be a good start though.
It's not really about prediction though. It's about manipulation. You can much more easily manipulate the future than predict it with a hands-off approach to its creation.
I'm in the same boat, but worse, since my boss (the owner) hates the incompatibilities but refuses to shell out for MS Office for the new PCs (hence LO being on them instead). Ironically, he's a WordPerfect devotee who hates MS Word and maintains his old desktop to run it, but never boots the thing. He just likes knowing it's there.
Cadillac is nothing BUT a trim level. Long ago, GM stopped being a range of different automotive lines, where a Pontiac had a Pontiac engine, and a Chevrolet had a Chevrolet engine, and a Cadillac had a Cadillac engine. Today, you get more ugly plastic on the body, more chrome strips, more badly designed electrical doodads, and a different fabric covering the seats.
It hasn't always been this way.
Back in the late 60s, when Pontiacs and Cadillacs had their own distinctive engines, it wasn't how things were done. Even the Porsche/VW joint venture on the 914 had the common sense to make legitimate differences between the cars. A 914 base model was basically a sporty VW, but the 914/6 was a true Porsche, with the engine and suspension built more in line with Porsche standards (VW, at the time, was also largely Porsche designs).
I think we're focusing too much here on whether Snowden specifically could have been prevented. The Agency has such a history of paranoia that if every personnel file of workers in such positions were examined, I would be surprised if we did not discover a much higher than expected percentage were found to be similarly blemished for one reason or another.
Once it becomes robot against robot, the battles become meaningless and human deaths will be written off as "accidents". It's like the "major naval battle" concept all over again. By World War 2, it had degenerated into two ships out in the ocean shooting at each other with no apparent goal other than to sink the other. A meaningless duel with little point other than depriving the other navy with a way to lob shells onto land (or with robots, at the humans)...if they could get to the target they wanted to attack.
Submarines and carriers reminded everyone what navies were for, and made quick work of it too. The amount of cargo, men, and ships destroyed as well as the number of men landed on the beaches of the Pacific, Italy, and France ended the battleship's era quite abruptly. Nobody cared how big the shells were when you could drop bombs from the air or torpedoes from beneath the sea.
Not only that, but she also implies that the people need to be told what is necessary, not that they will be a part of any actual discussion of what that amount is, with the understanding that the people will only get to hear what the government thinks "can" be told to them. Why do we let these people operate?
People still use cable because they never got rid of it. It's like how people had land lines long after they stopped giving out their landline number, and an ever-increasing number of people have abandoned them. At this point, I think people don't understand they have alternatives, even for keeping up on those four shows a week that they can't miss. The only thing I can't find on Google Play (as an example) that my inlaws (who have cable) "can't miss" other than sports is Mad Men, which they usually just watch when it reaches Netflix anyway. The rest of their shows put together come out to barely $200 if bought as season passes, compared to the same amount for just a little more than two months of DirecTV after all fees and such are paid. If the demand providers can figure out a way to bring the sports packages like NHL Center Ice, MLB Extra Innings, and whatever the NFL one is called, Cable will die if people simply take the time to do a little math. And on top of it, you ditch the commercials and everything stops being tied to your cable box.
I say this as a certified iOS loather: The earlier Apple connectors have a huge advantage in the way they took over the "attaches to an iPod" devices market. Instead of operating off a simple headphone plug, they also controlled the device on a lot of levels. And it worked great.
The next question is, why is this even reasonable to continue with Bluetooth available and cheap, while allegedly working on most devices (some devices better than others)? Well, that's one I can't answer. I can't see why I'd leave my phone (now an Android) over by the speakers. USB has its own speed limits for adding files to the phone, so that doesn't justify Lightning on its own. Wireless seems just as fast, if not faster, and media docks are pretty much obsolete.
Neither is under any obligation to accept the other's proposal, but in terms of actually passing a budget, all appropriations bills still start in the House. Whether they use or discard the President's requests is irrelevant to that fact. And either way, I have not argued that the President is obligated to accept the House's budget either. They can keep this stalemate going until 2017 if they want to. I'd kind of like to see that, actually. It'd be interesting to see how it would pan out.
Be that as it may, there's no reason they couldn't begin with what they've got and add as they produce more material. I think we've all come to terms with the fact that some things have happened in the past that aren't going to get fixed easily if at all.
The intern system is BS, that much is clear. The real question is, how do we eliminate it? With actual field work. Several of my friends studied geology while I was in college.
One of their degree requirements was "field camp", a couple months or so of actual surveying in the mountains of Utah where they could meaningfully get hands-on with the rock formations they had been studying. All of them found the experience valuable, and they gained hands-on experience in their field alongside some actual geologists in a noncommercial setting without being treated as indentured servants.
Similarly, when I did EMT school, and when I worked at a fire department where we had ambulances, the Paramedic students rode along as part of crews, and were expected to familiarize themselves with the ambulances so they could treat actual patients when calls came. Their performance was reviewed and they were required to complete these ride-outs to become certified, while demonstrating proficiency in their duties.
If nobody can find a legitimate analog to what these geology students and EMT/Paramedic candidates experienced, there's no reason to require an internship.
Why shouldn't they? If I could buy a television license from them here in the States and get nothing but what Britons get for television, I'd be much happier than with what American television broadcasts give me for several times the price.
Meanwhile, as a public service (which the BBC is, believe it or not), I see no particular reason the BBC shouldn't make the entirety of their programming available in a Netflix-style system for the use of all license-holders. I'd be willing to purchase a subscription myself, even as a foreigner.
The W3C's standards are only as binding as we let them be. If the marketplace rejects them, they fail. We see it all the time with other standards. The question is, do you care more about seeing their content, or about refusing the terms they are trying to bundle with that content?
The thing is, a tablet is fundamentally an information and media display device. Most modern usage of that type of device is mind-numbing. It's like any other computing device these days: only as intellectually stimulating as what you use it for.
You must have missed the reports of DHS trying to teach law enforcement that anyone who seems to believe they have civil liberties is a "potential terrorist".
Slashdot Mirror
I looked it up and yes, that was the one. I think I was about 16 years old at the time and got distracted from my regular reading time by getting a job.
Count me in. I wore them all the time at university when I had to walk through the area where the business-majors tried to sell things to students who couldn't afford them. Made it a lot more pleasant, even though I too was a bit bothered by the "obnoxious-dude-with-the-headphones-on-in-a-public-space" factor. I'm not proud to say that you do get used to it, but I came to accept it as a legitimate defensive tactic.
Your Democrat governor (and several others) did not see the writing on the wall. He was simply not opposed to the system itself the way some other governors were, and worked to build it at a state level. Other states have governors who fought the program and the result is those living in those states have to deal with the broken federal one.
The "writing on the wall" idea is nonsense. The reactions of governors have been political, not practical, as far as whether to set up state systems. One needs only look at a map of which states are doing what and compare to a map of which party each state's governor comes from to see it. The difference between the two is not particularly large.
This isn't merely a technological barrier but the wrong tool for the job. It sounds like the traditional in-person format is poorly translated into this technology, sure. But that doesn't mean technology is the problem. It probably means the meeting itself is trying to force its traditionally square peg into a round, digital hole.
I can guarantee that I'll start carrying headphones to the store with me if that starts happening. Actually, given those awful televisions running constant ads that some stores have, I should probably already start doing that.
You appear to have missed the word "most".
I think more people simply need to cave to the demands of common sense and stop paying for cable television in the first place. Especially when they get broadcasts for free of many if not all of the shows they think they need cable to watch.
Mine was a Stephen King as well. It's been so long that I don't even recall which one. I want to say The Stand.
It's not simple availability we need. It's either exclusivity, or superior experience. Simple parity will not do the trick. SteamOS might be a good start though.
It's not really about prediction though. It's about manipulation. You can much more easily manipulate the future than predict it with a hands-off approach to its creation.
I'm in the same boat, but worse, since my boss (the owner) hates the incompatibilities but refuses to shell out for MS Office for the new PCs (hence LO being on them instead). Ironically, he's a WordPerfect devotee who hates MS Word and maintains his old desktop to run it, but never boots the thing. He just likes knowing it's there.
Cadillac is nothing BUT a trim level. Long ago, GM stopped being a range of different automotive lines, where a Pontiac had a Pontiac engine, and a Chevrolet had a Chevrolet engine, and a Cadillac had a Cadillac engine. Today, you get more ugly plastic on the body, more chrome strips, more badly designed electrical doodads, and a different fabric covering the seats.
It hasn't always been this way.
Back in the late 60s, when Pontiacs and Cadillacs had their own distinctive engines, it wasn't how things were done. Even the Porsche/VW joint venture on the 914 had the common sense to make legitimate differences between the cars. A 914 base model was basically a sporty VW, but the 914/6 was a true Porsche, with the engine and suspension built more in line with Porsche standards (VW, at the time, was also largely Porsche designs).
I think we're focusing too much here on whether Snowden specifically could have been prevented. The Agency has such a history of paranoia that if every personnel file of workers in such positions were examined, I would be surprised if we did not discover a much higher than expected percentage were found to be similarly blemished for one reason or another.
Once it becomes robot against robot, the battles become meaningless and human deaths will be written off as "accidents". It's like the "major naval battle" concept all over again. By World War 2, it had degenerated into two ships out in the ocean shooting at each other with no apparent goal other than to sink the other. A meaningless duel with little point other than depriving the other navy with a way to lob shells onto land (or with robots, at the humans)...if they could get to the target they wanted to attack.
Submarines and carriers reminded everyone what navies were for, and made quick work of it too. The amount of cargo, men, and ships destroyed as well as the number of men landed on the beaches of the Pacific, Italy, and France ended the battleship's era quite abruptly. Nobody cared how big the shells were when you could drop bombs from the air or torpedoes from beneath the sea.
Not only that, but she also implies that the people need to be told what is necessary, not that they will be a part of any actual discussion of what that amount is, with the understanding that the people will only get to hear what the government thinks "can" be told to them. Why do we let these people operate?
People still use cable because they never got rid of it. It's like how people had land lines long after they stopped giving out their landline number, and an ever-increasing number of people have abandoned them. At this point, I think people don't understand they have alternatives, even for keeping up on those four shows a week that they can't miss. The only thing I can't find on Google Play (as an example) that my inlaws (who have cable) "can't miss" other than sports is Mad Men, which they usually just watch when it reaches Netflix anyway. The rest of their shows put together come out to barely $200 if bought as season passes, compared to the same amount for just a little more than two months of DirecTV after all fees and such are paid. If the demand providers can figure out a way to bring the sports packages like NHL Center Ice, MLB Extra Innings, and whatever the NFL one is called, Cable will die if people simply take the time to do a little math. And on top of it, you ditch the commercials and everything stops being tied to your cable box.
I say this as a certified iOS loather: The earlier Apple connectors have a huge advantage in the way they took over the "attaches to an iPod" devices market. Instead of operating off a simple headphone plug, they also controlled the device on a lot of levels. And it worked great.
The next question is, why is this even reasonable to continue with Bluetooth available and cheap, while allegedly working on most devices (some devices better than others)? Well, that's one I can't answer. I can't see why I'd leave my phone (now an Android) over by the speakers. USB has its own speed limits for adding files to the phone, so that doesn't justify Lightning on its own. Wireless seems just as fast, if not faster, and media docks are pretty much obsolete.
Neither is under any obligation to accept the other's proposal, but in terms of actually passing a budget, all appropriations bills still start in the House. Whether they use or discard the President's requests is irrelevant to that fact. And either way, I have not argued that the President is obligated to accept the House's budget either. They can keep this stalemate going until 2017 if they want to. I'd kind of like to see that, actually. It'd be interesting to see how it would pan out.
Be that as it may, there's no reason they couldn't begin with what they've got and add as they produce more material. I think we've all come to terms with the fact that some things have happened in the past that aren't going to get fixed easily if at all.
The intern system is BS, that much is clear. The real question is, how do we eliminate it? With actual field work. Several of my friends studied geology while I was in college.
One of their degree requirements was "field camp", a couple months or so of actual surveying in the mountains of Utah where they could meaningfully get hands-on with the rock formations they had been studying. All of them found the experience valuable, and they gained hands-on experience in their field alongside some actual geologists in a noncommercial setting without being treated as indentured servants.
Similarly, when I did EMT school, and when I worked at a fire department where we had ambulances, the Paramedic students rode along as part of crews, and were expected to familiarize themselves with the ambulances so they could treat actual patients when calls came. Their performance was reviewed and they were required to complete these ride-outs to become certified, while demonstrating proficiency in their duties.
If nobody can find a legitimate analog to what these geology students and EMT/Paramedic candidates experienced, there's no reason to require an internship.
This is almost more honest than the approach of other governments.
Why shouldn't they? If I could buy a television license from them here in the States and get nothing but what Britons get for television, I'd be much happier than with what American television broadcasts give me for several times the price.
Meanwhile, as a public service (which the BBC is, believe it or not), I see no particular reason the BBC shouldn't make the entirety of their programming available in a Netflix-style system for the use of all license-holders. I'd be willing to purchase a subscription myself, even as a foreigner.
The W3C's standards are only as binding as we let them be. If the marketplace rejects them, they fail. We see it all the time with other standards. The question is, do you care more about seeing their content, or about refusing the terms they are trying to bundle with that content?
The thing is, a tablet is fundamentally an information and media display device. Most modern usage of that type of device is mind-numbing. It's like any other computing device these days: only as intellectually stimulating as what you use it for.
You must have missed the reports of DHS trying to teach law enforcement that anyone who seems to believe they have civil liberties is a "potential terrorist".