The "leaders" of these countries will protest and stop the vaccinations, claiming they are an American plot to harm the poor African children
This sort of resistance to humanitarian efforts has been going on for years, but we unfortunately validated it to some extent by using a sham vaccination campaign to try to track down bin Laden:
How the CIA’s Fake Vaccination Campaign Endangers Us All. The ruse failed to provide useful intelligence and the CIA promised never to do it again, but trust is easier to destroy than it is to build.
The Note 7 was released in August 2016. The S7 was released in March 2016. The S8, therefore, follows on the heels of the phone they released that routinely caught on fire. The Note 7 immediately precedes the S8 by chronology, though not by name. This is not something that I thought needed to be spelled out in the context of a site dedicated to tech news.
Yeah, but c'mon. This is supposed to be Samsung's flagship phone and it's following on the heels of a phone that was so bad that it routinely caught on fire. It'd inspire more confidence if they were releasing this one without a bunch of problems, even if they do seem to be minor. It doesn't seem to be quite finished, which makes me wonder what corners they've cut other than the ones we can see so far.
I've been using an S4 for a couple years, and I was looking forward to possibly upgrading to the S8. But it seems like a bit of a shitshow. The fingerprint scanner is in a weird place, apparently as a last-minute change because they couldn't get it working on the touchscreen. The software assistant doesn't work in English. This wouldn't be that big a deal to me because I probably wouldn't use it anyway, but the hardware button for activating it is not re-programmable, so it's a complete waste at the moment. Obviously, no removable battery. And now the screen is red. At least it has a headphone jack, I guess?
That is not how the CC has been introduced in our school district. It's been very aggressive in enforcing some ridiculous methodologies.
Yeah, look at the Big Education corporations. Find out how much your district payed Pearson. Ask questions about whether curriculum changes are necessary because of CC or because of Big Ed. If an administrator insists that some horrible change is required because of CC, ask them to cite the section of the standard that requires it.
I think a lot of districts probably just thought it would be easier to claim compliance with CC if they purchased a ready-made package rather than auditing their own curricula to see what changes they'd have to make. But I also think most of them were probably wrong in thinking that.
But that is opposing the common core curriculum methodology which specifies not only what to teach but how to teach it. In many cases it does not matter if a student gets the correct answer if they do not do it the CC way
The Common Core standards are not a fully developed curriculum; they are a list of skills that students should have at certain points in their education. Here's an example:
CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.7.G.B.5
Use facts about supplementary, complementary, vertical, and adjacent angles in a multi-step problem to write and solve simple equations for an unknown angle in a figure.
Notice that it says nothing here about how to teach this skill, nor does it prescribe any mode of assessment that a teacher must use. There is nothing in CC that says students should still get credit for getting the wrong answer as long as they got it in a particular way.
Certain for-profit education companies like Pearson have developed all kinds of wacky new instructional materials that have kids doing math in ways that make absolutely no sense to me. Maybe your school/district/state/whoever bought a package from one of these corporations and then mandated that teachers must teach exactly according to the materials, but the Common Core standards is only a list of skills, it does not force teachers to teach or evaluate students in specific ways.
Most professors do not write textbooks. Most professors don't get paid by their university to write textbooks, and even when a publisher pays them, it's usually not very much. Most professors don't have the motivation or time to write textbooks. Professors who write nationally popular textbooks for subjects like calculus and physics are exceptions, and those guys are making money at it. My philosophy prof who had a shrink-wrapped stack of paper in the bookstore doesn't make a lot of profit from that.
My theory is that the projection is so strong that it would never occur to them to question whether others have the same insecurity. It's not even worth evaluating to them: emasculation is the absolute worst thing for them, so it must be the worst thing for everyone, so trying to undermine their opponents' masculinity will be the most devastating attack they can make. Sadly, it differs from schoolyard insults only by vocabulary level, so it makes them look pretty pathetic, and because there's absolutely no way to reason with someone who thinks calling an opponent 'cuck' is a legitimate rhetorical approach, it tends to end the conversation and then they think they've 'won'. So they feel pretty good about it and keep doing it.
It's interesting. This article was first posted with the headline "Dozens Of Canonical Employees Resign, Shuttleworth Returns As CEO." Then it was re-posted less than a minute later as "Dozens Of Canonical Employees Resign As Ubuntu Switches To GNOME, Shuttleworth Returns As CEO."
The only difference between the two is "As Ubuntu Switches to GNOME," but if you look at TFA, the word 'gnome' does not appear. So someone went to the effort of editing this post to add gnome to the headline despite its having nothing to do with the article. I guess to give us a target for hating on? Two of the stories about gnome this month have gotten more than 300 comments, which is relatively big these days for Slashdot.
Just an observation and a theory about the way our overlords try to influence the discussion.
this means they had to have taken someone who didn't have a seat and given that person a seat while forcing somebody else who already had a seat to give up that seat
Yes, that's exactly what they did. The people who didn't have seats were employees of United Airlines who needed to be on the flight so they could crew some other flight later. So they randomly chose four chumps to kick off the plane. If they'd taken care of this at the gate before boarding, we wouldn't be reading about it in the news. Someone really fucked up.
After this shitshow, they had to get everyone off the plane so they could sanitize all the surfaces that were exposed to the blood of the passenger they injured.
The summary raises an interesting issue, that "the big increase in Mac OS malware was due to adware bundling." What adware is being bundled with what software or hardware? Obviously, Apple isn't going to be bundling adware with their MacOS devices, so who is doing this? What has been the effect of this malware? What's the most common malware, and what does it do? How is this affecting Mac users?
So I went to TFA for answers and found their section on Mac OS. Out of the 49 pages of the report, this is the entire text of the MacOS section: "Just as last quarter, the big increase in Mac OS malware was due to adware bundling. " There are also a couple of bar graphs.
I skimmed some of the rest of the report. There's 15 pages with some details about the Mirai botnet and how it works. In fact, it's the longest article in the thing. If I were going to try to get someone to read this report, and I wanted to give, say, a headline and summary talking about its contents, I might choose to talk about the Mirai article, rather than a throw-away gloss on page 39 with two bar graphs that exist without context in something that looks like an appendix.
Ugh. I don't have a part of the supreme court. There's no need to make that into a tiresome us vs. them argument. The court makes decisions, and according to the way we organized our country, those decisions are binding for all of us. There may be justices with whom I agree more often than others, and there may be decisions that I don't like very much, but I don't get to disclaim justices and decisions that I don't like. My part of the court is the whole court.
But, to your larger point, you seem to be asserting the losing argument of a case that went before the supreme court. And I guess you're trying to say that I should agree with that argument because it's "liberal" and so am I and therefore I must support it. But I don't, and more importantly the majority of the court didn't, so it doesn't matter. And I don't need to come up with the argument that you demand: lawmakers and judges have already done it. That's why these people are being prosecuted, and people who record police in public are not. It's already the law.
Obviously, privacy of police officers is less equal than that of Planned Parenthood officials.
In this case, yes. People (including police officers) conducting their activities in public spaces do not have the expectation of privacy.
People (including Planned Parenthood employees) conducting their activities in private spaces in California do have the expectation of privacy. California is a two-party consent state, which means that in a private conversation, both parties must consent to recording.
It's super simple. You can throw up useless chaff like school vouchers if you want, but the law is pretty clear.
Freshman year of college, I played Tetris just about every night before bed. Then I would lie down and close my eyes, and there it would still be. I finally decided I had too much time on my hands and got a job.
create a network bridge between your system and the internet to prevent telemetry from working
This is exactly what I want before I upgrade from Windows 7. I recognize that I'll probably eventually need to upgrade to 10, but I want a hardware solution to stop my OS chatting with its mothership.
taking a detour through a different format certainly won't help
This was my objection to his idea, but I wasn't in charge. I think the guy learned to code from the Internet, and hung out on a lot of forums where XML is ridiculed, and he picked up his opinion there without ever understanding why. Everything he hadn't made was "needlessly complex." When we told him we had to adhere to the XML-based standard for I/O, he suggested that we create a new standard and then get all of the equipment makers to use it instead of the existing one.
At the time, I thought he was being stubborn for no reason I could see. I realize now he was just really, really green, and all this stuff that was needlessly complex was stuff that he was having a hard time understanding, and he found it easier to code up a simplistic replacement than to RTFM and understand there are reasons for the complexity of existing systems and standards.
In our shop, we use a lot of XML because our systems communicate with a lot of equipment that requires inputs according to a particular XML standard. We hired a new guy who thought XML was "old and busted" and could not be convinced to write code that output XML. He wanted to store all the values in mongodb as JSON objects and then translate them later. Which, to be fair, would work, if you were good enough to pull it off. He wasn't. He no longer works here, and we're painfully rewriting all of his code.
I'm still using my original battery for this one. It will last about 2.5 days of low usage, or 1 day of heavy usage. This is my paradox for buying a new phone... I like having a battery I can swap, but in practice I haven't actually swapped it (at least on this one). Also, you have to figure out where you can buy a battery that isn't a counterfeit that craps out almost immediately. My girlfriend's battery got old and we swapped that one, and then her whole phone failed six months later, so that was pointless.
Despite my security patch level, I plan to stick with this phone for the foreseeable future. Next time, I think I'd like to get a phone that isn't carrier locked so I can avoid the bloatware and possibly get more timely updates.
I have a Galaxy S4 on AT&T. I just checked, and it's at Lollipop 5.01 and says its "Android security patch level" is 2015-11-01. Nevertheless, when I push the software update button, AT&T assures me that my current software is up to date. Apparently, 5.01 is the latest version available for an S4, but what about security patches? Are they just done making them? Was AT&T planning on telling me that?
I guess I'm a bad consumer, using a four year old phone.
I counter your anecdote with my own. My 2-day orders are almost always on-time, with very few exceptions over the last few years. In fact, I ordered an item with 5-day delivery that was supposed to arrive day after tomorrow but came today.
So everybody on this forum who was actually educated about maps being distorted and globes being very common in school is wrong?
No, and nobody said that, either. All they've said is that it's just possible, given the equipment and budgets of various classrooms; the knowledge, expertise, and competence of various teachers; the priorities, goals, and available time of various curricula; the presence or absence of students on various days; the wide variation of educational standards and best practices over space and time; the fact that students sometimes change schools and wind up with gaps in their education; and other factors that I did not think of off the top of my head, that not every single young person has had a lesson in why map projections are distorted that involved a globe.
Isn't it enough that we can say that *most* students will be exposed to the idea in school? Do you need it to be true that *every student ever* has had that lesson? What would happen if they hadn't? What if I told you that I have a grandmother who was educated in rural Iowa in the 1920s and 30s? Is it conceivable that she never learned about the distortions of map projections?
Slashdot Mirror
This sort of resistance to humanitarian efforts has been going on for years, but we unfortunately validated it to some extent by using a sham vaccination campaign to try to track down bin Laden: How the CIA’s Fake Vaccination Campaign Endangers Us All. The ruse failed to provide useful intelligence and the CIA promised never to do it again, but trust is easier to destroy than it is to build.
The Note 7 was released in August 2016. The S7 was released in March 2016. The S8, therefore, follows on the heels of the phone they released that routinely caught on fire. The Note 7 immediately precedes the S8 by chronology, though not by name. This is not something that I thought needed to be spelled out in the context of a site dedicated to tech news.
Yeah, but c'mon. This is supposed to be Samsung's flagship phone and it's following on the heels of a phone that was so bad that it routinely caught on fire. It'd inspire more confidence if they were releasing this one without a bunch of problems, even if they do seem to be minor. It doesn't seem to be quite finished, which makes me wonder what corners they've cut other than the ones we can see so far.
I've been using an S4 for a couple years, and I was looking forward to possibly upgrading to the S8. But it seems like a bit of a shitshow. The fingerprint scanner is in a weird place, apparently as a last-minute change because they couldn't get it working on the touchscreen. The software assistant doesn't work in English. This wouldn't be that big a deal to me because I probably wouldn't use it anyway, but the hardware button for activating it is not re-programmable, so it's a complete waste at the moment. Obviously, no removable battery. And now the screen is red. At least it has a headphone jack, I guess?
Meh. I guess my current phone is good enough.
Yeah, look at the Big Education corporations. Find out how much your district payed Pearson. Ask questions about whether curriculum changes are necessary because of CC or because of Big Ed. If an administrator insists that some horrible change is required because of CC, ask them to cite the section of the standard that requires it.
I think a lot of districts probably just thought it would be easier to claim compliance with CC if they purchased a ready-made package rather than auditing their own curricula to see what changes they'd have to make. But I also think most of them were probably wrong in thinking that.
The Common Core standards are not a fully developed curriculum; they are a list of skills that students should have at certain points in their education. Here's an example:
Notice that it says nothing here about how to teach this skill, nor does it prescribe any mode of assessment that a teacher must use. There is nothing in CC that says students should still get credit for getting the wrong answer as long as they got it in a particular way.
Certain for-profit education companies like Pearson have developed all kinds of wacky new instructional materials that have kids doing math in ways that make absolutely no sense to me. Maybe your school/district/state/whoever bought a package from one of these corporations and then mandated that teachers must teach exactly according to the materials, but the Common Core standards is only a list of skills, it does not force teachers to teach or evaluate students in specific ways.
The entire CC is freely available for your inspection at their web site: http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/
Most professors do not write textbooks. Most professors don't get paid by their university to write textbooks, and even when a publisher pays them, it's usually not very much. Most professors don't have the motivation or time to write textbooks. Professors who write nationally popular textbooks for subjects like calculus and physics are exceptions, and those guys are making money at it. My philosophy prof who had a shrink-wrapped stack of paper in the bookstore doesn't make a lot of profit from that.
Very interesting, thank you.
My theory is that the projection is so strong that it would never occur to them to question whether others have the same insecurity. It's not even worth evaluating to them: emasculation is the absolute worst thing for them, so it must be the worst thing for everyone, so trying to undermine their opponents' masculinity will be the most devastating attack they can make. Sadly, it differs from schoolyard insults only by vocabulary level, so it makes them look pretty pathetic, and because there's absolutely no way to reason with someone who thinks calling an opponent 'cuck' is a legitimate rhetorical approach, it tends to end the conversation and then they think they've 'won'. So they feel pretty good about it and keep doing it.
It's interesting. This article was first posted with the headline "Dozens Of Canonical Employees Resign, Shuttleworth Returns As CEO." Then it was re-posted less than a minute later as "Dozens Of Canonical Employees Resign As Ubuntu Switches To GNOME, Shuttleworth Returns As CEO."
The only difference between the two is "As Ubuntu Switches to GNOME," but if you look at TFA, the word 'gnome' does not appear. So someone went to the effort of editing this post to add gnome to the headline despite its having nothing to do with the article. I guess to give us a target for hating on? Two of the stories about gnome this month have gotten more than 300 comments, which is relatively big these days for Slashdot.
Just an observation and a theory about the way our overlords try to influence the discussion.
I used WinAmp for many years, and I still have no idea what that means.
Yes, that's exactly what they did. The people who didn't have seats were employees of United Airlines who needed to be on the flight so they could crew some other flight later. So they randomly chose four chumps to kick off the plane. If they'd taken care of this at the gate before boarding, we wouldn't be reading about it in the news. Someone really fucked up.
After this shitshow, they had to get everyone off the plane so they could sanitize all the surfaces that were exposed to the blood of the passenger they injured.
The summary raises an interesting issue, that "the big increase in Mac OS malware was due to adware bundling." What adware is being bundled with what software or hardware? Obviously, Apple isn't going to be bundling adware with their MacOS devices, so who is doing this? What has been the effect of this malware? What's the most common malware, and what does it do? How is this affecting Mac users?
So I went to TFA for answers and found their section on Mac OS. Out of the 49 pages of the report, this is the entire text of the MacOS section: "Just as last quarter, the big increase in Mac OS malware was due to adware bundling. " There are also a couple of bar graphs.
I skimmed some of the rest of the report. There's 15 pages with some details about the Mirai botnet and how it works. In fact, it's the longest article in the thing. If I were going to try to get someone to read this report, and I wanted to give, say, a headline and summary talking about its contents, I might choose to talk about the Mirai article, rather than a throw-away gloss on page 39 with two bar graphs that exist without context in something that looks like an appendix.
Ugh. I don't have a part of the supreme court. There's no need to make that into a tiresome us vs. them argument. The court makes decisions, and according to the way we organized our country, those decisions are binding for all of us. There may be justices with whom I agree more often than others, and there may be decisions that I don't like very much, but I don't get to disclaim justices and decisions that I don't like. My part of the court is the whole court.
But, to your larger point, you seem to be asserting the losing argument of a case that went before the supreme court. And I guess you're trying to say that I should agree with that argument because it's "liberal" and so am I and therefore I must support it. But I don't, and more importantly the majority of the court didn't, so it doesn't matter. And I don't need to come up with the argument that you demand: lawmakers and judges have already done it. That's why these people are being prosecuted, and people who record police in public are not. It's already the law.
Umm. No. Get the supreme court to agree with you on that one, and I'll change my answer.
In this case, yes. People (including police officers) conducting their activities in public spaces do not have the expectation of privacy.
People (including Planned Parenthood employees) conducting their activities in private spaces in California do have the expectation of privacy. California is a two-party consent state, which means that in a private conversation, both parties must consent to recording.
It's super simple. You can throw up useless chaff like school vouchers if you want, but the law is pretty clear.
William Hartnell, Patrick Troughton, and Jon Pertwee all wish to have a word. Or, at least they would, if they weren't all dead.
Although given time travel, I suppose it's possible they were imitating Tom Baker before he was available to be imitated...
Freshman year of college, I played Tetris just about every night before bed. Then I would lie down and close my eyes, and there it would still be. I finally decided I had too much time on my hands and got a job.
This is exactly what I want before I upgrade from Windows 7. I recognize that I'll probably eventually need to upgrade to 10, but I want a hardware solution to stop my OS chatting with its mothership.
This was my objection to his idea, but I wasn't in charge. I think the guy learned to code from the Internet, and hung out on a lot of forums where XML is ridiculed, and he picked up his opinion there without ever understanding why. Everything he hadn't made was "needlessly complex." When we told him we had to adhere to the XML-based standard for I/O, he suggested that we create a new standard and then get all of the equipment makers to use it instead of the existing one.
At the time, I thought he was being stubborn for no reason I could see. I realize now he was just really, really green, and all this stuff that was needlessly complex was stuff that he was having a hard time understanding, and he found it easier to code up a simplistic replacement than to RTFM and understand there are reasons for the complexity of existing systems and standards.
In our shop, we use a lot of XML because our systems communicate with a lot of equipment that requires inputs according to a particular XML standard. We hired a new guy who thought XML was "old and busted" and could not be convinced to write code that output XML. He wanted to store all the values in mongodb as JSON objects and then translate them later. Which, to be fair, would work, if you were good enough to pull it off. He wasn't. He no longer works here, and we're painfully rewriting all of his code.
I'm still using my original battery for this one. It will last about 2.5 days of low usage, or 1 day of heavy usage. This is my paradox for buying a new phone... I like having a battery I can swap, but in practice I haven't actually swapped it (at least on this one). Also, you have to figure out where you can buy a battery that isn't a counterfeit that craps out almost immediately. My girlfriend's battery got old and we swapped that one, and then her whole phone failed six months later, so that was pointless.
Despite my security patch level, I plan to stick with this phone for the foreseeable future. Next time, I think I'd like to get a phone that isn't carrier locked so I can avoid the bloatware and possibly get more timely updates.
I have a Galaxy S4 on AT&T. I just checked, and it's at Lollipop 5.01 and says its "Android security patch level" is 2015-11-01. Nevertheless, when I push the software update button, AT&T assures me that my current software is up to date. Apparently, 5.01 is the latest version available for an S4, but what about security patches? Are they just done making them? Was AT&T planning on telling me that?
I guess I'm a bad consumer, using a four year old phone.
I counter your anecdote with my own. My 2-day orders are almost always on-time, with very few exceptions over the last few years. In fact, I ordered an item with 5-day delivery that was supposed to arrive day after tomorrow but came today.
So everybody on this forum who was actually educated about maps being distorted and globes being very common in school is wrong?
No, and nobody said that, either. All they've said is that it's just possible, given the equipment and budgets of various classrooms; the knowledge, expertise, and competence of various teachers; the priorities, goals, and available time of various curricula; the presence or absence of students on various days; the wide variation of educational standards and best practices over space and time; the fact that students sometimes change schools and wind up with gaps in their education; and other factors that I did not think of off the top of my head, that not every single young person has had a lesson in why map projections are distorted that involved a globe.
Isn't it enough that we can say that *most* students will be exposed to the idea in school? Do you need it to be true that *every student ever* has had that lesson? What would happen if they hadn't? What if I told you that I have a grandmother who was educated in rural Iowa in the 1920s and 30s? Is it conceivable that she never learned about the distortions of map projections?