Our deployment is all network based. It means that a lab full of machines can be reinstalled at the same time. Deploying a new iamge for an upgrade takes about 10 mins (including the walk around the room to reset each machine and change bios to netboot). I like our IT department - they do nice things.
When students visit me with work it is rare for them to even bring usb, normally it is sitting on dropbox or onecloud. Installing single one-off machines was the last use that I had for opticals, but now usbboot is quite stable and its less hassle to nuke a stick than it is to find a machine to burn a disc in.
When was slashdot not for the lulz? Nerdbait + random quirky interest stories was always the formula. The quirky story selection left with CmdrTaco (heard the tragic news on the radio this morning, sad for one so young and gifted).
Just because there is more noise, and the ratio to the amount of signal has changed, does not mean that there is less signal. Hackers always were a rare breed. They still are.
It's 90% of the total vehicle days they included in the study (cars only - they did not mention freight?). And there is no information about the 10% that is not covered is distributed. So there is no information on whether:
* 10% of people could not use EVs. * 100% of people could not use EVs 10% of the time. * Somewhere inbetween.
So you are just speculating, yet you are trying to state it as fact. Do you have more information than what was available in the abstract or are you just projected your beliefs onto the story?
According to the abstract at Nature it is 90% of "vehicle days". 90% of vehicles would be a much stronger result. Because it is vehicle-days you cannot assume how they are distributed across the owners of vehicles. There is a post much higher up that calls it right: "electric cars would fail their owners 10% of the time: 36.5 days a year".
You're overreacting. The technology to block that portion of the spectrum has been integrated into wallets for centuries. It's quite neat tech - google for leather.
When somebody puts a site on the web they are making it publicly available to anybody that wants to connect to it. Trying to to then impose constraints on how people access that content *after making it available* has no moral validity at all. The web was not invented to be "monetised", and fuck corporate apologists like you would try to rewrite history to make it so.
YMMV. I had about 250GB of mp3 when I got bored maintaining / organising the collection, and for me there was a lot of "same". It would depend largely on your memory / perception of music. Since I switched over to Spotify Premium I don't hit the same problems. There are are other problems: mainly licensing issues that make things disappear or albums that have tracks missing...
Helmut struggled for a few years. The culture shock was more than he anticipated, and his slightly autistic traits made it difficult to build the network he needed to launch. He stuck it out for 2 years and 5 months before he quit. In that time living in in the "fintech scene" cost him 123,000 euros (about 5 billion pounds post brexit).
Statistically speaking we should see another 22-year old German fintech chancer in 1.6 years, although it is doubtful they will want to leave the EU. Most probable is a young chap called Boris from Frankfurt.
Ah, so you want to screw over a entire country of people so that they learn a lesson? Let's face it, if they could not see that the capital classes were using the racists as a smokescreen to dismantle labour laws - it is not because they have failed to learn from experience. It is because they are terminally stupid. A lesson is not going to help and you are simply being a giant dick about the whole thing.
The Leave campaigners did not call out "no take backs" before the vote, so fuck that result right in the eye. It's a do over, and we'll keep fucking going until the sheep vote the right way. I signed the petition, hope they do it right this time.
So your argument is that a shit reviewer (who doesn't check out the product) writes shit reviews?
Slow clap. Perhaps it is more robust to assume that reviewers make errors, and that an ideal review is one in which the reviewer tells the reader what they reviewed. You seem to have some difficulty with this?
1. You can't prove that, its simply an assumption. 2. Again, people assume this but there is no proof. 3. You seem to believe this is non-trivial? Certainly this is true of far more than just OC graphics cards...
I haven't said that it is a good, or a bad thing. I'm not some kind of simpleton who would try to reduce it to those terms...
Interesting, if some bizarre, choice of example. I assume there is always some bias and error in reviews. I'm happy as long as they disclose exactly what they are reviewing so that I can judge for myself. You seem to believe that a review can be representative of an entire class of products, and that the single sample holds some kind of statistical significance. In your naive world, did the imaginary reviewer mention the $100 bill in the review?
Slashdot Mirror
Which of course begs the question: is that relevant to this discussion?
Our deployment is all network based. It means that a lab full of machines can be reinstalled at the same time. Deploying a new iamge for an upgrade takes about 10 mins (including the walk around the room to reset each machine and change bios to netboot). I like our IT department - they do nice things.
When students visit me with work it is rare for them to even bring usb, normally it is sitting on dropbox or onecloud. Installing single one-off machines was the last use that I had for opticals, but now usbboot is quite stable and its less hassle to nuke a stick than it is to find a machine to burn a disc in.
When was slashdot not for the lulz? Nerdbait + random quirky interest stories was always the formula. The quirky story selection left with CmdrTaco (heard the tragic news on the radio this morning, sad for one so young and gifted).
Just because there is more noise, and the ratio to the amount of signal has changed, does not mean that there is less signal. Hackers always were a rare breed. They still are.
Which is nice. Made me think "Tank, I need a pilot program for a V-212 helicopter."
Errr. No.
It's 90% of the total vehicle days they included in the study (cars only - they did not mention freight?). And there is no information about the 10% that is not covered is distributed. So there is no information on whether:
* 10% of people could not use EVs.
* 100% of people could not use EVs 10% of the time.
* Somewhere inbetween.
So you are just speculating, yet you are trying to state it as fact. Do you have more information than what was available in the abstract or are you just projected your beliefs onto the story?
No - the headline is misstating the paper.
According to the abstract at Nature it is 90% of "vehicle days". 90% of vehicles would be a much stronger result. Because it is vehicle-days you cannot assume how they are distributed across the owners of vehicles. There is a post much higher up that calls it right: "electric cars would fail their owners 10% of the time: 36.5 days a year".
I thought about it reading the preview, and thought "what if he really is paranoid?". Subtle freudian slip for the trollin a-game.
It's ok, the grammar works quite well with the material. Paranoid conspiracy theorists are generally too strung up to overly care about grammar.
You're overreacting. The technology to block that portion of the spectrum has been integrated into wallets for centuries. It's quite neat tech - google for leather.
Doubt it. Sweden has been a defacto cashless society for years. I can't remember the last time I used cash. No downside that I can see.
O'Really?
When somebody puts a site on the web they are making it publicly available to anybody that wants to connect to it. Trying to to then impose constraints on how people access that content *after making it available* has no moral validity at all. The web was not invented to be "monetised", and fuck corporate apologists like you would try to rewrite history to make it so.
Disclaimer: Slashdot does not condone Leonardo DiCaprio.
I doubt it. The name and address are in a public registry where I live and I doubt they are sharing the credit card number.
Lazy?
I take it that your time is not worth very much money. Penny-wise and pound foolish, eh?
YMMV. I had about 250GB of mp3 when I got bored maintaining / organising the collection, and for me there was a lot of "same". It would depend largely on your memory / perception of music. Since I switched over to Spotify Premium I don't hit the same problems. There are are other problems: mainly licensing issues that make things disappear or albums that have tracks missing...
Paying customer don't get ads on the service. Perfectly targeted ads that are not heard would be somewhat useless...
You could go the whole hog and just the British version of the language. It is far more refined.
Can't decide if this a typo, bait fir the grammar nazis, or a clever reference to evil mode. Well played.
How did they claim a 75x speedup using 64 cores?
Without access to Japanese wartime records can you really be sure the intersection is empty?
Helmut struggled for a few years. The culture shock was more than he anticipated, and his slightly autistic traits made it difficult to build the network he needed to launch. He stuck it out for 2 years and 5 months before he quit. In that time living in in the "fintech scene" cost him 123,000 euros (about 5 billion pounds post brexit).
Statistically speaking we should see another 22-year old German fintech chancer in 1.6 years, although it is doubtful they will want to leave the EU. Most probable is a young chap called Boris from Frankfurt.
Ah, so you want to screw over a entire country of people so that they learn a lesson? Let's face it, if they could not see that the capital classes were using the racists as a smokescreen to dismantle labour laws - it is not because they have failed to learn from experience. It is because they are terminally stupid. A lesson is not going to help and you are simply being a giant dick about the whole thing.
The Leave campaigners did not call out "no take backs" before the vote, so fuck that result right in the eye. It's a do over, and we'll keep fucking going until the sheep vote the right way. I signed the petition, hope they do it right this time.
So your argument is that a shit reviewer (who doesn't check out the product) writes shit reviews?
Slow clap. Perhaps it is more robust to assume that reviewers make errors, and that an ideal review is one in which the reviewer tells the reader what they reviewed. You seem to have some difficulty with this?
1. You can't prove that, its simply an assumption.
2. Again, people assume this but there is no proof.
3. You seem to believe this is non-trivial? Certainly this is true of far more than just OC graphics cards...
I haven't said that it is a good, or a bad thing. I'm not some kind of simpleton who would try to reduce it to those terms...
Interesting, if some bizarre, choice of example. I assume there is always some bias and error in reviews. I'm happy as long as they disclose exactly what they are reviewing so that I can judge for myself. You seem to believe that a review can be representative of an entire class of products, and that the single sample holds some kind of statistical significance. In your naive world, did the imaginary reviewer mention the $100 bill in the review?