We're no strangers to love You know the rules and so do I A full committiment's what I'm thinking of You just wouldn't get this from any other guy I just want to tell you how I'm feeling Gotta make you understand
Never gonna give you up, Never gonna let you down Never gonna run around, and desert you Never gonna make you cry, Never gonna say goodbye Never gonna tell a lie, and hurt you
The elephant in the room is efficiency. For example, if we increased our efficiency 2X then our energy sources would go twice as far. Increasing efficiency would mean changing our lifestyles to consume less.
Unfortunately, increasing our efficiency 2X is not always possible.
Changing lifestyles for greater efficiency would include: Turn the AC a few degrees more toward the ambient temps.
This is not an efficiency increase. This is a tradeoff of comfort for energy usage.
Ride a bike or walk vs drive a 2 ton car.
More efficient, but obviously there are tradeoffs as well.
Public transportation such as trains or buses.
Buses are typically less efficient than cars on an amortized basis.
Drive a car that gets 50+MPG vs 25MPG.
There are none available in the US. And outside the US they're running diesel, so it's not a valid comparison.
Urban planning for reducing the distance between work and home.
I'm not so sure reworking the entire urban (and suburban) landscape to achieve that goal, and necessarily centrally planning it in the process, is going to be all that efficient.
This proposal fails to account for deals cut in smoke-filled back rooms (smoke-free back rooms for younger Democrats). Since most of what matters in government happens in such places, and they can't be replaced with teleconferencing for various reasons, this proposal won't work.
Why is it that whenever the subject of an article is a woman in the tech industry, the misogynists show up in droves?
Welcome to the Internet. Back when digital porn was ASCII drawings, the Internet was for trolls, and they're still here.
Those of you calling her a bitch and making disparaging remarks about feminism are doing well to convince me that when I graduate not so near in the future I should steer clear of tech jobs.
I wouldn't call her a "bitch", because that's playing right into her hands. However, if you sympathize with her, I agree; you should steer clear of tech jobs. We don't need the grief. Nobody likes to be in a situation where they have to walk on eggshells for fear someone will complain and ruin their life.
So Nokia apparently has some trash "routing data from one network to another ON A MOBILE DEVICE" patent, and Florian Mueller is breathless about it. What's new?
Yes! Ban Shakespeare! What a stupid and immature writer he was!
Wait, you mean a nunnery isn't just a convent? And country matters aren't just rural (or national) matters? And a petard is something other than a small explosive? You don't mean that "thy stones with lime and hair knit up in thee" refers to anything but a stone wall mortared with horsehair plaster, do you? And kissing the wall's hole? Oh dear.
Oh well, it helps to have hundreds of years of language drift to conceal the double entendres.
I think what he's saying is he's too much of a wimp to handle APL, Forth, OCaml, or Haskell. Unless he writes exclusively with templates, none of those Algol-likes are more than middling difficult.
The whole brogrammer thing is a hoax (and an obvious one; the concept is that there's a whole subculture of nerds who act like stereotypical frat boys except that they also write code) that the tech press has picked up on as a real "thing". It's actually pretty funny that some radicals who constantly decry male geeks as the most misogynistic cusses on earth have picked up on it as a real thing.
This is about a group of people who wish to impose their code of conduct -- which is basically "no talking or doing anything related to sex, ever, especially if you're male" -- on others. I think they're picking on geeks partially because they see geeks as a soft target; we know we're not in the social mainstream, so when these people proclaim a radical code of conduct we're supposed to follow and claim it's merely "professional standards", we might actually believe them.
Of course, this is bullshit. Their code of conduct is not what other professionals follow either. People who put on a suit every day still make dick jokes. Lawyers, doctors, bankers... all of them. Well, I'm not sure about accountants. And then there's salespeople. Maybe these people wouldn't make such jokes at a formal staff meeting (and maybe they would), but a conference isn't such a formal occasion; there's a strong social as well as professional element to them, which these radicals want to excise.
Sadly, Pycon has, for whatever reason (perhaps legal, perhaps harassment from the radicals), bought into this agenda with their code of conduct which forbids "sexualized" anything. That's reason enough not to go.
Part of the problem with this whole thing lies in the power dynamic. As white males (well, at least I am - and I suspect a large number of others here are too), we are rarely put in situations where we are not in power.
I'm a white male and am in situations where I am not in power all the time. The way the corporate world works puts engineers at the bottom of the org chart.
On the other hand I imagine that some women in the tech industry feel about as comfortable as I would if I were walking through Harlem alone at night.
Except in Harlem at night, particularly if you chose to walk through the grounds of a housing project, you might actually run across persons who not only feel you do not belong in their neighborhood, but are perfectly willing to enforce their preferences with violence. And you will have no one who will back you up, during or after the fact. Comparing geeks to gangbangers is ridiculous.
If you believe that women have a right to be in the workplace, then I think you should believe that they have a right to feel as safe and respected as we do
How they feel is largely up to them. If they're going to feel disrespected because someone somewhere made a dick joke, or unsafe because there's a lot of guys around, that's not something anyone needs to cater to.
Also, "but mommy, she was doing it too!" didn't work when we were kids, and it doesn't work now either.
You don't see a problem with a person trying to establish a standard and punish another person for violating it, when she herself does not follow said standard? There's a related legal principle called "unclean hands"... sometimes "she did it too" does apply.
(I was going to say that some of this was the woman's fault, but her tweet wasn't really seeking attention - just asking for help - so I feel like it's less her fault than others')
Naa, that's BS. Did you read her whole mock-heroic (though I think the 'mock' was unintentional) description of her rationale?
I'm not trying to conflate off colour comments with rape - but they are all part of the same spectrum (opposite ends) which says men can impose their sexuality on women in whatever form they want at whatever time they want and if a woman complains she's at fault, humourless or contributed to provoking the men to act that way in the first place.
Right, because men are never automatically assumed guilty by accusation in a rape case.
well. the blurb is implying actually that the question is actually if killing unarmed enemy soldiers in cold blood would be ok or not(armed with a rifle vs. unarmed).
In a war? Unarmed enemy soldiers are fair game unless they've surrendered.
...attempting to make me feel bad for being male, for being a geek, and for being a male geek. Not going to fly, Ms. Richards. You want to make it "us" vs "them"? Well, OK, but given the relative numbers I don't think you're going to win that one.
However, the researcher studying the safety of lawn darts was unavailable for comment; reports indicate he was last seen being loaded into an ambulance...
Do not stare at lawn dart hung up in tree.
If you ignore this advice, at least move when it starts to get bigger.
Freedom of the press is important to balance corrupting influences like meddling by the administration of the day in the flow of information that might expose their flaws. However, as always, with freedom comes responsibility. Quite clearly there was a systematic, widespread failure to live up to those responsibilities within the media industry, a flagrant abuse of the freedoms they enjoyed. I, for one, won't shed any tears when those who apparently can't be trusted to act responsibly and with respect for others gets their freedoms curtailed.
So what you are saying is that when freedom is being abused, it's the job of government to move to limit it?
And that failure of the government to enforce specific laws against abuse of certain freedoms is good justification for government to make general laws taking away the freedoms being abused.
As copying has gotten easier and easier, the mere social contract between publisher and community, which essentially says that the latter will not copy it without permission, effectively granting the publisher a form of distributive control, has started to break down.
Nice try. But the DMCA came before Napster, and DVD DRM (and Macrovision before it) came before general-purpose computers could play back video well. This isn't a chicken and egg problem, we know which came first. It seems likely that the main original purpose of DVD DRM was to enforce region coding, not to prevent copying.
It's called a Conflict Monitor Unit and it's a required element for traffic lights per law. It basically does as you say - it looks at the outputs and if an invalid one crops up (two greens, say) then it immediately shuts down the traffic light and optionally returns a signal that could notify when this occurs.
Nevertheless, problems can creep up. I ran into one once where conflicting greens were given, but they were on different light heads. (this was the very complex intersection on Rt 202 in KIng of Prussia, PA). I've also seen them go directly from green to red with no yellow or a brief flash of yellow; I guess that's not really a "conflict" but it's disconcerting.
Must be getting a lot dumber. I'm willing to bet an insane amount of money relative to my income that the credit cards companies are FAR FAR better at predicting who to loan money too than any Googler.
I'm going to bet you my dog's credit card offer that they don't.
Once you get a little older you realize that the person you were when you got out of school is entirely different than the person you are 10 years later.
It's far past time we dropped China as a Most Favored Nation trading partner, and brought our manufacturing back home.
Most Favored Nation status has not existed for about 15 years. The status is now called Normal Trade Relations, and there are only two countries (Cuba and North Korea) which do not have it.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe they could change the title to this bill to the "Piss on Aaron Swartz's Grave Act of 2013"?
Seriously, what did you expect. The noose always gets tighter.
Sure, most of the death and injury caused by illegal uses aren't accidental.
We're no strangers to love
You know the rules and so do I
A full committiment's what I'm thinking of
You just wouldn't get this from any other guy
I just want to tell you how I'm feeling
Gotta make you understand
Never gonna give you up,
Never gonna let you down
Never gonna run around, and desert you
Never gonna make you cry,
Never gonna say goodbye
Never gonna tell a lie, and hurt you
Unfortunately, increasing our efficiency 2X is not always possible.
This is not an efficiency increase. This is a tradeoff of comfort for energy usage.
More efficient, but obviously there are tradeoffs as well.
Buses are typically less efficient than cars on an amortized basis.
There are none available in the US. And outside the US they're running diesel, so it's not a valid comparison.
I'm not so sure reworking the entire urban (and suburban) landscape to achieve that goal, and necessarily centrally planning it in the process, is going to be all that efficient.
This proposal fails to account for deals cut in smoke-filled back rooms (smoke-free back rooms for younger Democrats). Since most of what matters in government happens in such places, and they can't be replaced with teleconferencing for various reasons, this proposal won't work.
Welcome to the Internet. Back when digital porn was ASCII drawings, the Internet was for trolls, and they're still here.
I wouldn't call her a "bitch", because that's playing right into her hands. However, if you sympathize with her, I agree; you should steer clear of tech jobs. We don't need the grief. Nobody likes to be in a situation where they have to walk on eggshells for fear someone will complain and ruin their life.
Marijuana, gambling, incandescent light bulbs, alcohol (since unbanned), machine guns, COX-2 inhibitors, pseudoephedrine (pseudobanned), Cuban cigars.... Oh, you meant the BAN made our lives better.... um, that's a bit harder. Leaded gasoline, maybe?
So Nokia apparently has some trash "routing data from one network to another ON A MOBILE DEVICE" patent, and Florian Mueller is breathless about it. What's new?
Wait, you mean a nunnery isn't just a convent? And country matters aren't just rural (or national) matters? And a petard is something other than a small explosive? You don't mean that "thy stones with lime and hair knit up in thee" refers to anything but a stone wall mortared with horsehair plaster, do you? And kissing the wall's hole? Oh dear.
Oh well, it helps to have hundreds of years of language drift to conceal the double entendres.
I think what he's saying is he's too much of a wimp to handle APL, Forth, OCaml, or Haskell. Unless he writes exclusively with templates, none of those Algol-likes are more than middling difficult.
The whole brogrammer thing is a hoax (and an obvious one; the concept is that there's a whole subculture of nerds who act like stereotypical frat boys except that they also write code) that the tech press has picked up on as a real "thing". It's actually pretty funny that some radicals who constantly decry male geeks as the most misogynistic cusses on earth have picked up on it as a real thing.
This is about a group of people who wish to impose their code of conduct -- which is basically "no talking or doing anything related to sex, ever, especially if you're male" -- on others. I think they're picking on geeks partially because they see geeks as a soft target; we know we're not in the social mainstream, so when these people proclaim a radical code of conduct we're supposed to follow and claim it's merely "professional standards", we might actually believe them.
Of course, this is bullshit. Their code of conduct is not what other professionals follow either. People who put on a suit every day still make dick jokes. Lawyers, doctors, bankers... all of them. Well, I'm not sure about accountants. And then there's salespeople. Maybe these people wouldn't make such jokes at a formal staff meeting (and maybe they would), but a conference isn't such a formal occasion; there's a strong social as well as professional element to them, which these radicals want to excise.
Sadly, Pycon has, for whatever reason (perhaps legal, perhaps harassment from the radicals), bought into this agenda with their code of conduct which forbids "sexualized" anything. That's reason enough not to go.
After the AT&T revelation, why would you believe they aren't ALREADY scanning pretty much everything they can?
I'm a white male and am in situations where I am not in power all the time. The way the corporate world works puts engineers at the bottom of the org chart.
Except in Harlem at night, particularly if you chose to walk through the grounds of a housing project, you might actually run across persons who not only feel you do not belong in their neighborhood, but are perfectly willing to enforce their preferences with violence. And you will have no one who will back you up, during or after the fact. Comparing geeks to gangbangers is ridiculous.
How they feel is largely up to them. If they're going to feel disrespected because someone somewhere made a dick joke, or unsafe because there's a lot of guys around, that's not something anyone needs to cater to.
You don't see a problem with a person trying to establish a standard and punish another person for violating it, when she herself does not follow said standard? There's a related legal principle called "unclean hands"... sometimes "she did it too" does apply.
Naa, that's BS. Did you read her whole mock-heroic (though I think the 'mock' was unintentional) description of her rationale?
Right, because men are never automatically assumed guilty by accusation in a rape case.
In a war? Unarmed enemy soldiers are fair game unless they've surrendered.
...attempting to make me feel bad for being male, for being a geek, and for being a male geek. Not going to fly, Ms. Richards. You want to make it "us" vs "them"? Well, OK, but given the relative numbers I don't think you're going to win that one.
Do not stare at lawn dart hung up in tree.
If you ignore this advice, at least move when it starts to get bigger.
Don't be silly. The CIA already has a better drone program, they're just dumping their old crap on the military.
So what you are saying is that when freedom is being abused, it's the job of government to move to limit it?
And that failure of the government to enforce specific laws against abuse of certain freedoms is good justification for government to make general laws taking away the freedoms being abused.
...are state-sponsored terrorism.
Nice try. But the DMCA came before Napster, and DVD DRM (and Macrovision before it) came before general-purpose computers could play back video well. This isn't a chicken and egg problem, we know which came first. It seems likely that the main original purpose of DVD DRM was to enforce region coding, not to prevent copying.
Nevertheless, problems can creep up. I ran into one once where conflicting greens were given, but they were on different light heads. (this was the very complex intersection on Rt 202 in KIng of Prussia, PA). I've also seen them go directly from green to red with no yellow or a brief flash of yellow; I guess that's not really a "conflict" but it's disconcerting.
Most Favored Nation status has not existed for about 15 years. The status is now called Normal Trade Relations, and there are only two countries (Cuba and North Korea) which do not have it.