there's a lot of internet out there which cannot be all monitored and sorted. Google are experts in doing this. Google indexing mainland Chinese blogs/sites at all may actually be bolstering ChinaGov's totalitarian police state. Imagine all the information you have that's contained on Google's servers, private or otherwise: search history, personal email, calendars, chat logs, purchases, sites you go to. Now imagine those servers being sequestered by the Chinese government.
Those types of videos have been showing up on the popular surveillance camera TV clip shows. You might want to keep an eye out for that. Would it change your opinion any to know that anything that's videotaped at any time could end up being broadcast on television internationally without your consent?
I knew a guy years ago that had a junction box in between his power box and the grid. It just had two circuit breakers, one inverted to the other, the switches taped together. Push up, you're on local power. Push down, you're on grid. It passed city inspection. Obviously, it may not pass yours.
It's generally not a good idea to rely on a one line dictionary definition for your understanding of a subject. But I will admit that there is substantial disagreement among mystics regarding the objective truth of their experiences. However, the entire point is the experience, not being told something. Sharing what you learned literally has no value.
There is a more insidious effect of Slashdot moderation, in that if you are a frequent poster here, moderation will slowly train you to say (and to some extent think) what you know won't get moderated into oblivion. It's not creating order, it's creating groupthink.
There is a next level to participation in Slashdot, and I hesitate to mention it: formal groups. Trolls have already done it in the past, I'm surprised no one else has. Forming an explicit group of users who agree to use their mod points to further certain classes of comments. For example, Appledotters modding down anything critical of Apple, or a group of Windows users that make sure intelligent, rational posts about Windows aren't unfairly punished by irrationally anti-MS zealots. I'm going to disagree with Spun here, there is definitely groupthink on Slashdot, but it's not absolute. There are very large groups of specific opinion that will punish you if you effectively say the wrong thing, but not everyone thinks the same thing.
It's probably the best general purpose forum on the net, but it's got some serious "moral panic" problems. Hopefully you don't get caught up in a "furry" or "pedophile" or "RON PAUL supporter" witch hunt.
The 10 dollars thing works fantastic though, it keeps out the trolls. Metafilter does the same thing to great effect as well.
I worked at a power company over the summers during college. One summer I worked as an assistant in the monitoring center, which was a giant room inside a concrete dome that was rated to withstand an F5 hurricane (the site is in the midwest.) Behind a couple sets of keycarded locked doors, you came into a circular dimmed room with a giant map from floor to (_very_ high) ceiling of the entire service area of the power company, with lights indicating status of electricity and water pressure in the different parts of the water system. In the center there was a long circular console lined with monitors showing power plant stats and weather reports and other stuff. The walls were all accent-lit with natural light bulbs, it looked really cool and modern. Against one of the walls was a large bank of "something" with blinking green lights. About two weeks in, a guy comes out from behind and starts talking to me, it turns out there was another little office back there with a couple of HP-UX machines nestled among a mountain of tech manuals running a SCADA system.
It looked pretty much like you see in the movies, only it wasn't messy like on some shows except for that little office.
What does her age have to do with it? Are sweat pants somehow relevant to the fact that the coffee was served at an unreasonably high temperature? Because old people have thinner, more fragile skin and are more susceptible to burns. Because sweat pants absorb and hold large amounts of liquid, even burning liquid. Because if you're not an idiot you don't hold hot coffee in a flexible cup in your crotch even if you don't have a cupholder. I will never back down on this. Doing that makes you an idiot.
I wonder if you would mind terribly sharing with us precisely how many minutes one is required to wait for coffee to cool? It's not measured by minutes, YOU WAIT UNTIL IT'S COOL ENOUGH TO DRINK. You put it close to your face and you gauge the temperature by the steam coming off. You might dip the very tip of your tongue in if you're not sure, or in a sippy cup like McDonalds uses, you might dribble a bit onto your tongue gently. Do you seriously not know how to drink hot stuff?
I drink my morning coffee immediately after I get it and add cream to it. I don't know what you're doing wrong, but I'm less than impressed with your coffee-drinking abilities. OK, your response is making sense now.
Are you alleging perjury? And if so, could you please point at the specific instances, or at least provide some sort of relevant citation? I'm alleging that paid expert witnesses are hired by both sides to spin or fabricate facts for their clients. For example talking about how coffee right off the burner can burn your face off despite the fact that you're not supposed to put hot coffee right off the burner right into your mouth (or lap.)
The reason it caused third degree burns was because she was old and was wearing sweat pants and was holding the cup in her crotch. The vast majority of the burn cases for McDonalds were not third degree burns but first degree burns which can happen to any coffee drinker. Anyway, you're not supposed to drink your coffee immediately after you get it. So to testify that immediately drinking coffee after you get it would burn your mouth is meaningless. To some extent her case had merit, and in fact the liability was split. But most of the facts presented are frequently taken out of context or are wrong. She had a legitimate grievance but that does not mean that all testimony that was given in the trial is correct.
The implicit condition for being chosen to host the Olympics was that China would try to act like a modern, free first world democracy at least until after the Olympics were over.
Re:Generally, I disregard these
on
Second Person
·
· Score: 1
The only class of book I've seen it commonly used in (besides the obvious choose-your-own-adventure) is pornography, but I couldn't tell you if that was because of the poor quality of the writers or if it was because it's more effective if you insert yourself in there (no pun intended.)
Why is this marked funny? Back in 2001 during their Beijing hosting bid, China promised precisely NOT to do this. They also promised total freedom of movement and reporting for international press, which they have also broken (see: Tibet.) China is hoping you all have short memories, but I forget nothing. I wish I could link to a news article with all the stuff they promised, but going back that far most sites charge for access.
And you're an ignorant asshole. Mysticism is the exploration of self, even if you could accurately transmit what you've discovered, it's wouldn't even be applicable to anyone else. The knowledge gained in self-exploration helps you understand who you are and what you do and why, and why you should do it, and its "truth" is ONLY a function of how inquisitive and honest you are. It is a completely different field of inquiry than empiricism because it is concerned with values rather than mechanics.
Other ignorant statements in this thread, explicit or implied:
* Mysticism is about stone idols * science and empiricism operates outside a philosophical paradigm (you're always operating inside one whether you know it or not) * Altered states of consciousness are less "true" because they are experienced under chemical influence while normal perception is not(laughably untrue)
I totally agree, the 18 age-limit is too high. Unless we are talking about really graphic stuff I think. But then, that's why the law is probably too vague.
Well, I disagree precisely because most of those works do not meet a contemporary criteria of "explicit." That's all the law is really concerned with, not if it was extremely racy when it was written. I don't disagree with your examples, you are totally correct, I'm saying that most are not and you're saying some are. We're both right I think. Swift was a very crude writer, and for that reason many primary school libraries do not contain ANY of his works, or they only contain Gulliver's Travels in a censored form. Because there is an understanding that the community doesn't believe that material is appropriate for children.
But maybe it's your job to make sure she isn't getting hold of things she shouldn't, not the bookseller's? This is an argument that gets rehashed on Slashdot all the time. It's not possible or desirable for a parent to control and watch their kids all the time (something Slashdot as a group OTOH, is very vehement about.) So people have a social responsibility to observe community standards when selling stuff to kids. If you as a parent have a different standard, then you can buy it and give it to them. Apparently however, for the same people that complain you're not watching your kid 24 hours a day to keep them from buying the book, them going to the store to buy it for their own kid is too much work.
Also, just so you know, I would not support the law though I agree in the principle of community standards regarding selling things to kids. And I'm not "the" Alan Dershowitz, it's a long, uninteresting story how I ended up picking this name:-)
No they aren't, because very few of the considered great works of literature were constructed primarily for the purpose of titillation. Anything that was usually is not going to meet the criteria of "important."
Second, just because it's important doesn't mean it's appropriate for kids at all. If I had a daughter in middle school, I would not want a teacher assigning her to research erotic poems of ancient Mesopotamia even though they are fantastic, important pieces of literature.
I wish I had mod points right now, because you are the only person so far that gets it. Most great literature contrary to some posts here, are not constructed primarily for the purpose of titillation, and are not going to be banned. But the law is likely to be vague and hard to define, and puts comics in particular at risk because frankly, most comics are NOT great literature.
For files that aren't huge, the operating system write caching should already speed up this operation. Regarding what you asked about, that almost sounds like it could be a specialized modification of RAID-1, which would be cool.
Two things: first, booting is ideally going to be largely sequential reads because OS X caches files used in the boot process in order to speed up the boot by removing random access. SSD's have an advantage over hard drives in random reads because there's comparatively no seek time. So I wouldn't expect to see a huge advantage. Secondly, I'm not going to be using my macbook air's tiny SSD drive for analog video capture or something anyway, so high write speed is really not that relevant to me. On the other hand the thing is supposed to be light and use little battery, so SSD seems like it wins for the reasons it was used. Also, the tests bear out a higher average read speed, which is also what I would have expected. I don't see anything surprising here.
Well, I'll be open and say that the ban was on PUBLICATION (not ownership to my knowledge) and was for reasons of state secrets (still, you couldn't do this in the USA for example.) The book in question was "Spycatcher" and is actually a pretty lousy read IMO. I don't know of any bans on possession. I don't want to misrepresent what I said.
Then ask yourself, do you really want to give the government the ability to ban books? The UK has banned books as recently as 1988, and, as far as I know, still can. Additionally the UK reserves the right to ban importation of books, games and movies, and has done so for a very long time, AND has repeatedly exercised this right to prevent the importation of violent pornography _specifically_.
I am playing devil's advocate here, but the government has a job to maintain a safe and working society. There are laws that restrict personal freedoms because they have a bad effect on society. For example, guns were banned. Again I'm not saying any individual action is correct, but they do have that power. A logical argument could be made that consensual acts in private by a small number of people does not have the same negative impact on society that wide distribution of depictions of those acts would. So, the importnat questions here are: are there things that the UK government _cannot_ restrict in the interest of protecting society? Is the material in question one of those things? Are the materials really harmful (and, according to who) to the extent that they need to be banned? If you are going to make an argument either pro or con regarding banning, you need to answer questions like these.
Primary and foreign keys and in some cases check constraints, but past that not usually. One thing I do use PL/SQL for is general-purpose string utilities to make things like name matching easier and formatting addresses. So I agree that some app-logic works best in the database, but from my viewpoint general purpose functionality and not app-specific functionality if you can help it.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, that's what someone told me that worked there. I have no idea.
Those types of videos have been showing up on the popular surveillance camera TV clip shows. You might want to keep an eye out for that. Would it change your opinion any to know that anything that's videotaped at any time could end up being broadcast on television internationally without your consent?
I knew a guy years ago that had a junction box in between his power box and the grid. It just had two circuit breakers, one inverted to the other, the switches taped together. Push up, you're on local power. Push down, you're on grid. It passed city inspection. Obviously, it may not pass yours.
It's generally not a good idea to rely on a one line dictionary definition for your understanding of a subject. But I will admit that there is substantial disagreement among mystics regarding the objective truth of their experiences. However, the entire point is the experience, not being told something. Sharing what you learned literally has no value.
There is a more insidious effect of Slashdot moderation, in that if you are a frequent poster here, moderation will slowly train you to say (and to some extent think) what you know won't get moderated into oblivion. It's not creating order, it's creating groupthink.
There is a next level to participation in Slashdot, and I hesitate to mention it: formal groups. Trolls have already done it in the past, I'm surprised no one else has. Forming an explicit group of users who agree to use their mod points to further certain classes of comments. For example, Appledotters modding down anything critical of Apple, or a group of Windows users that make sure intelligent, rational posts about Windows aren't unfairly punished by irrationally anti-MS zealots. I'm going to disagree with Spun here, there is definitely groupthink on Slashdot, but it's not absolute. There are very large groups of specific opinion that will punish you if you effectively say the wrong thing, but not everyone thinks the same thing.
It's probably the best general purpose forum on the net, but it's got some serious "moral panic" problems. Hopefully you don't get caught up in a "furry" or "pedophile" or "RON PAUL supporter" witch hunt.
The 10 dollars thing works fantastic though, it keeps out the trolls. Metafilter does the same thing to great effect as well.
I worked at a power company over the summers during college. One summer I worked as an assistant in the monitoring center, which was a giant room inside a concrete dome that was rated to withstand an F5 hurricane (the site is in the midwest.) Behind a couple sets of keycarded locked doors, you came into a circular dimmed room with a giant map from floor to (_very_ high) ceiling of the entire service area of the power company, with lights indicating status of electricity and water pressure in the different parts of the water system. In the center there was a long circular console lined with monitors showing power plant stats and weather reports and other stuff. The walls were all accent-lit with natural light bulbs, it looked really cool and modern. Against one of the walls was a large bank of "something" with blinking green lights. About two weeks in, a guy comes out from behind and starts talking to me, it turns out there was another little office back there with a couple of HP-UX machines nestled among a mountain of tech manuals running a SCADA system.
It looked pretty much like you see in the movies, only it wasn't messy like on some shows except for that little office.
Satan wasn't born in the USA and is thus ineligible.
The reason it caused third degree burns was because she was old and was wearing sweat pants and was holding the cup in her crotch. The vast majority of the burn cases for McDonalds were not third degree burns but first degree burns which can happen to any coffee drinker. Anyway, you're not supposed to drink your coffee immediately after you get it. So to testify that immediately drinking coffee after you get it would burn your mouth is meaningless. To some extent her case had merit, and in fact the liability was split. But most of the facts presented are frequently taken out of context or are wrong. She had a legitimate grievance but that does not mean that all testimony that was given in the trial is correct.
The implicit condition for being chosen to host the Olympics was that China would try to act like a modern, free first world democracy at least until after the Olympics were over.
The only class of book I've seen it commonly used in (besides the obvious choose-your-own-adventure) is pornography, but I couldn't tell you if that was because of the poor quality of the writers or if it was because it's more effective if you insert yourself in there (no pun intended.)
Why is this marked funny? Back in 2001 during their Beijing hosting bid, China promised precisely NOT to do this. They also promised total freedom of movement and reporting for international press, which they have also broken (see: Tibet.) China is hoping you all have short memories, but I forget nothing. I wish I could link to a news article with all the stuff they promised, but going back that far most sites charge for access.
And you're an ignorant asshole. Mysticism is the exploration of self, even if you could accurately transmit what you've discovered, it's wouldn't even be applicable to anyone else. The knowledge gained in self-exploration helps you understand who you are and what you do and why, and why you should do it, and its "truth" is ONLY a function of how inquisitive and honest you are. It is a completely different field of inquiry than empiricism because it is concerned with values rather than mechanics.
Other ignorant statements in this thread, explicit or implied:
* Mysticism is about stone idols
* science and empiricism operates outside a philosophical paradigm (you're always operating inside one whether you know it or not)
* Altered states of consciousness are less "true" because they are experienced under chemical influence while normal perception is not(laughably untrue)
I totally agree, the 18 age-limit is too high. Unless we are talking about really graphic stuff I think. But then, that's why the law is probably too vague.
Also, just so you know, I would not support the law though I agree in the principle of community standards regarding selling things to kids. And I'm not "the" Alan Dershowitz, it's a long, uninteresting story how I ended up picking this name :-)
Second, just because it's important doesn't mean it's appropriate for kids at all. If I had a daughter in middle school, I would not want a teacher assigning her to research erotic poems of ancient Mesopotamia even though they are fantastic, important pieces of literature.
I wish I had mod points right now, because you are the only person so far that gets it. Most great literature contrary to some posts here, are not constructed primarily for the purpose of titillation, and are not going to be banned. But the law is likely to be vague and hard to define, and puts comics in particular at risk because frankly, most comics are NOT great literature.
For files that aren't huge, the operating system write caching should already speed up this operation. Regarding what you asked about, that almost sounds like it could be a specialized modification of RAID-1, which would be cool.
Two things: first, booting is ideally going to be largely sequential reads because OS X caches files used in the boot process in order to speed up the boot by removing random access. SSD's have an advantage over hard drives in random reads because there's comparatively no seek time. So I wouldn't expect to see a huge advantage. Secondly, I'm not going to be using my macbook air's tiny SSD drive for analog video capture or something anyway, so high write speed is really not that relevant to me. On the other hand the thing is supposed to be light and use little battery, so SSD seems like it wins for the reasons it was used. Also, the tests bear out a higher average read speed, which is also what I would have expected. I don't see anything surprising here.
Well, I'll be open and say that the ban was on PUBLICATION (not ownership to my knowledge) and was for reasons of state secrets (still, you couldn't do this in the USA for example.) The book in question was "Spycatcher" and is actually a pretty lousy read IMO. I don't know of any bans on possession. I don't want to misrepresent what I said.
I am playing devil's advocate here, but the government has a job to maintain a safe and working society. There are laws that restrict personal freedoms because they have a bad effect on society. For example, guns were banned. Again I'm not saying any individual action is correct, but they do have that power. A logical argument could be made that consensual acts in private by a small number of people does not have the same negative impact on society that wide distribution of depictions of those acts would. So, the importnat questions here are: are there things that the UK government _cannot_ restrict in the interest of protecting society? Is the material in question one of those things? Are the materials really harmful (and, according to who) to the extent that they need to be banned? If you are going to make an argument either pro or con regarding banning, you need to answer questions like these.
Primary and foreign keys and in some cases check constraints, but past that not usually. One thing I do use PL/SQL for is general-purpose string utilities to make things like name matching easier and formatting addresses. So I agree that some app-logic works best in the database, but from my viewpoint general purpose functionality and not app-specific functionality if you can help it.