I was surprised as all heck when I flew domestic USA twice, and unlike international or domestic Canada, no one was asked for ID at the gate, they just scanned their boarding pass. Yes, you had to check in, and pass TSA screening with appropriate ID, but for some reason they decided not to bother with that final link in the chain of "trust but verify."
Hong Kong also has articulated subway cars, it's actually quite fascinating to watch the cars ahead or behind you twisting and turning at turns and inclines. Millions of people pack those subway trains, including standing in the articulated spaces (too short an area for any seats), without any problem.
Vomit is a little more substantial than rainwater or spilled drinks, so it won't run off. Even for liquids that might, their smell remains until it's washed away.
Seriously, you had to go back over a decade to find an example of Apple cheating on benchmarks? How many generations ago is that in computer technology?
Try again by citing a source that shows them cheating on benchmarks now.
I see you ignored that I said "usually," but even in your examples it can easily be argued we are somewhere between the absolutes.
Slavery: property of another, subject to their demands and abuses. Liberty: you're your own person, free to do as you wish. In developed societies, as a worker you are *not* property, but are subject to an employer's demands (i.e. "wage slave"), up until you freely choose another job and maybe file grievances for actionable abuses. In less developed societies factory workers are far closer to the "slave" end of the spectrum: hard labour, poor conditions, low pay, few rights... but they're not property and are technically free to leave their job any time. People in developed countries give tacit approval of this by continuing to buy products from these factories and demand still-lower prices.
Virtue and corruption: Not that these are really opposite extremes by definition, but in the spirit you probably mean them to be: No one can be completely virtuous and still get ahead in life, so select ideals are inevitably compromised/corrupted. And yet you have to retain some virtues lest you go too far and end up in jail, or worse.
When asked as he left the podium whether he believed America would be going through all this political turmoil again in a few months, the President didn't waste words. "No."'"
. . . still naive.
More like playing to the media. Much like asking any athlete after a playoff game loss whether they still have a chance to come back... only rarely will you get an honest answer, and when it happened recently (down 3-1 in a best-of-7, captain's answer as "probably not") the media raked him over the coals for being defeatist and having no confidence in his team.
Short version: the media, both sports and politics, ask some really stupid questions.
Congratulations! You have correctly absorbed the media's message on this fiasco:
Government shutdown Democrats in Senate and Democrat President refuse to negotiate So...It's all the Tea Party Republicans' fault.
See any logical flaws here?
Congratulations! You have correctly absorbed the media's message on this fiasco:
Government shutdown Democrats in Senate and Democrat President refuse to negotiate So...It's all the Tea Party Republicans' fault.
See any logical flaws here?
Yes, I see a logical flaw there. You deliberately left out parts of the story to paint the Republicans / TP as innocent bystanders.
The Democrats worked in the spirit of compromise for years on the ACA/Obamacare, and the Republicans / Tea Party took that as a weakness and excuse to demand more concessions and even the total destruction of the ACA.
Finally the Democrats and the President said no more, and gave the Republicans / TP a dose of their own bull-headed, no-compromise medicine. The House Republicans forced a shutdown, and then Boehner exacerbated it by refusing calls for a vote in the House because he knew enough moderate Republicans would vote against the TP extremists, risking civil war within the party.
Then, by waiting for the Senate to work out a bipartisan plan, House Republicans saved face--the moderates could still vote against their TP colleagues without actually opposing anything the TP had put on a bill.
Many people have already had cutbacks on their hours at work due to the law, and many of them lost health insurance in the process.
On this specific point, Walmart (of all companies) is reversing the working hour cutbacks and rehiring 35,000 people as full-time workers, with ACA coverage.
The number of the dramatic licenses (i.e. deliberate errors, not nitpicks) to generate and sustain the peril were too much for me to fully enjoy the film, though I have no problem saying it's a great movie. A friend didn't think the inaccuracies were that bad, and wrote them off as "it's Hollywood." True, but he doesn't know space physics and orbital mechanics as well as I do (relatively speaking; I'm not in the field either).
Then the next night we're watching a movie about mountaineering/climbing, which he actually does do, and then every time he pointed out a flaw it was my turn to rib him with the "it's Hollywood" line, which was acknowledged with a wry chuckle.
Between these sites slamming the door shut on public comments, walled login gardens, and NSA slimy fingers on everything, it's just super depressing. Feels like a mortal wound.
Seriously, critique the Slashdot comment system if you like, but it's a thousand times better than 99% of the sites out there. And it's pretty simple. Sites not ripping off this system seem like they conscientiously want a reason to slam the door on public conversation.
No it's not. The number of times I use to log in and put my name to the comment only to have it voted up on down not on merit but on popularity was depressing. If slashdot is so good why do we continually hear from people about how downhill it has all gone.
I call BS. Keep patting yourself on the back while the Titanic sinks.
Name one high-traffic moderation/comment system that's better than Slashdot, and explain why.
Even if you manage that, the point still stands that/.'s system is far better than 99% of the sites out there.
I disagree, message boards are great for getting those alternative perspectives out there. If you don't know how to think without an authority telling you what to listen to you aren't thinking scientifically anyway.
Many people, probably a majority, *don't* know how to think without an authority telling them what to listen to. That "authority" is not necessarily government, or church leaders, or politicians, it's *anyone* who's charismatic enough that people trust what they say or write. Rush Limbaugh, Steve Jobs, Greenpeace activists, Jenny McCarthy, market analysts, parenting experts, a non-techy's tech friend, etc. Most of those in turn have their own authorities that they listen to.
That practice is not unwise at all, but it *is* unwise to assume the car(s) in front will accelerate as quickly or constantly as your own car. I've had idiots tailgate me right off the green light, and then have to brake because I drive full manual in a country where 90% of cars sold are automatic, and no matter how fast I shift there *will* be a 100% loss of acceleration for at least a half a second, and another half to build it up again.
In this particular UK case though, the rear-ending driver somehow missed that the car in front was at a complete stop, and hit hard enough to cause death. That's a whole different kind of inattention.
Considering all the passenger videos of takeoff and landings that are on Youtube, some all the way from the gate pushback, taxi, all the way up to level flight, they haven't been doing a good job of enforcement anyway. And it's pretty clear modern personal electronic has little to no impact on operational safety of the aircraft.
It seems you missed that I was supporting your argument with an analogy, which of course isn't exact.
1) no matter what evidence is given, the disbelievers will demand more proof that it wasn't faked, "ad infinitum." 2) Irrespective of all other evidence, the reputation of the challenger (no need to be a market competitor) is all the supporting evidence needed.
The difference obviously is that the CCC's reputation bolsters their actions/claims, whereas the reputation of the USSR as the USA's chief adversary and the circumstances of the Cold War bolsters their inaction and lack of claim.
No. It wouldn't matter. No matter what they did there would always be the next thing they could have just done. How do we know that the phone wasn't programmed to unlock with the second guys fingerprint? How do we know they didn't edit the video? etc, ad infinitum. What makes it highly believable is none of that. It is the reputation of the Chaos Computer Club that makes it believable. They aren't about to sacrifice a reputation it took them more than 30 years to build, especially for essentially no gain. If it was an unknown group I'd say maybe they are looking for 15 minutes of fame. But this is the CCC we are talking about here.
A nice and convincing argument. I've said something similar about the "faked" moon landings: never mind all the science-y explanations, if the Soviet Union didn't raise all hell and denounce the USA for faking the landings, then the landings were not faked by the USA.
I bet most people unlock with a thumb, but use an index finger on the screen.
While true, one of the supposed reasons/excuses the iPhone screen remains that small is one-handed operation, i.e. when held normally by an adult with average-sized hands, their thumb can extend and reach almost every part of the touchscreen.
Folder open/close animation is slightly but noticeably longer, and the springboard/homescreen loading takes twice as long as under iOS6. I can see this clearly on my iOS7 4S vs my iOS6 5. These seem to be built-in to the animations of iOS7 itself, rather than being caused by older hardware.
I wish this didn't change my perception that iOS7 is a bit slower, but it is literally visible as soon as I start using it (unlocking to springboard/homescreen). 3 years ago when I experimented with jailbreaking, one of the best ones was reducing all animation time by half.
My (i)phone (4) hung in the middle of the upgrade, so I ended up having to do a clean install.
It took all night, but it feels less laggy than iOS 6 was at the end. Also, some have complained about the useless animations, but if my actions are acknowledged immediately, I don't end up assuming the phone ignored my input, trying again, and taking eleven pictures of the floor in front of me while trying to start the camera.
Protip: Consider doing a clean install.
That's the thing, I installed iOS7 on my test/backup iPhone 4S, so I could explore it before installing on my iPhone 5. The overall UI remained smooth as I used the browser, various apps, etc for a couple hours... no appreciable stuttering or lag, which was impressive.
However, the feel of the UI itself is definitely slower. The lockscreen fade-in and fade out, while nicer than the instant on/off in earlier iOS, takes too long. The animation that happens after exiting the lockscreen to Homescreen, which while running prevents me tapping on an app to launch it, is over 1 second, whereas my iPhone 5 on iOS6 is half that.
Also, after pressing the home button in iOS6 it's about 1/4 second before an app exits, which still allows time for starting double- or even triple-press functions. In iOS7 this delay is a full second! This is the epitome of actions NOT being acknowledged immediately, and there's no obvious good reason why this additional delay was put in.
It's not just because it's installed on an older device or because it wasn't a clean install, I verified iOS7's longer, built-in UI response times on an iPhone 5S in the store.
I can get used to the visual changes, I really don't appreciate the additional lag times that seem to be built-in to the OS itself, since the whole idea was to simplify and improve the interface!
in the mid-90s **high school kids** had pagers...they were such barbaric 1-way only text gagets...but compared to nothing it was like telepathy
**ANYONE** with half a brain at that time would logically conclude that there is a market for a **two-way** texting device
the next logical step in functionality is not innovation
it's just not...
Sorry, but saying two-ways after one-way is obvious and therefore not an innovation is all manner of wrong.
For example, tablets: there were prop computer tablets going all the way back at least to Star Trek in the 1960s, or the movie 2001, or Star Trek: The Next Generation's PADDs. It was "obvious" that at some point it would happen, but *how* you do it, with what technology works in the background, can certainly be innovative. The industry had 7 years of Windows tablets that didn't get much traction, then 3 years after the iPhone to predict what an Apple tablet would be, but still almost every competitor and analyst (hopefully they all have at least half a brain) got it wrong when the iPad came out. It wasn't a Mac tablet, and it was half the price they were expecting, and it blew the consumer tablet market wide open.
Back to BB and pagers. Yes obviously there was going to be a 2-way communication after 1-way, but how they did it can (I won't say for sure since I don't know) certainly be innovative.
I don't remember being corrected on this before.. (not saying that nobody has tried, but I don't remember it). Perhaps if you'd give some evidence that they are whales rather than just saying they are, I'd change my mental model of the cetacean family.
Killer whale scientific classification Kingdom: Animalia Phylum: Chordata Class: Mammalia Order: Cetacea (all whales) Suborder: Odontoceti (toothed whales, including dolphins and porpoises) Family: Delphinidae (oceanic dolphin) Genus: Orcinus Species: O. orca
People tend to think of the idea of "teaching the controversy" as an insidious effort to get religion's foot in the door. In fact, it's one of the most amazing things that Team Texas Religion has ever done- offer a compromise. For a Texan to even admit that the other side's point of view EXISTS is jaw-droppingly astounding. To offer to teach it alongside their own is nothing short of miraculous.
I don't think it's amazing at all. Except for citizens vs illegals, in all your other examples the opposing sides are both "limited" to their state's borders and inconsequential to the rest of the country. With textbooks, for whatever reason their state controls the majority of the printing. If they outright tried excluding evolution from the textbooks they print, school boards in more enlightened areas *will* get alternatives, and then Texas loses their underserved pseudo-monopoly.
Slashdot Mirror
I was surprised as all heck when I flew domestic USA twice, and unlike international or domestic Canada, no one was asked for ID at the gate, they just scanned their boarding pass. Yes, you had to check in, and pass TSA screening with appropriate ID, but for some reason they decided not to bother with that final link in the chain of "trust but verify."
Hong Kong also has articulated subway cars, it's actually quite fascinating to watch the cars ahead or behind you twisting and turning at turns and inclines. Millions of people pack those subway trains, including standing in the articulated spaces (too short an area for any seats), without any problem.
Or Canadians party harder than Berliners :)
Vomit is a little more substantial than rainwater or spilled drinks, so it won't run off. Even for liquids that might, their smell remains until it's washed away.
Seriously, you had to go back over a decade to find an example of Apple cheating on benchmarks? How many generations ago is that in computer technology?
Try again by citing a source that shows them cheating on benchmarks now.
I see you ignored that I said "usually," but even in your examples it can easily be argued we are somewhere between the absolutes.
Slavery: property of another, subject to their demands and abuses. Liberty: you're your own person, free to do as you wish. In developed societies, as a worker you are *not* property, but are subject to an employer's demands (i.e. "wage slave"), up until you freely choose another job and maybe file grievances for actionable abuses. In less developed societies factory workers are far closer to the "slave" end of the spectrum: hard labour, poor conditions, low pay, few rights... but they're not property and are technically free to leave their job any time. People in developed countries give tacit approval of this by continuing to buy products from these factories and demand still-lower prices.
Virtue and corruption: Not that these are really opposite extremes by definition, but in the spirit you probably mean them to be: No one can be completely virtuous and still get ahead in life, so select ideals are inevitably compromised/corrupted. And yet you have to retain some virtues lest you go too far and end up in jail, or worse.
You can still agree with me--the "usually" means it doesn't apply in every case.
A healthy balance between any extreme is usually ideal.
When asked as he left the podium whether he believed America would be going through all this political turmoil again in a few months, the President didn't waste words. "No."'"
. . . still naive.
More like playing to the media. Much like asking any athlete after a playoff game loss whether they still have a chance to come back... only rarely will you get an honest answer, and when it happened recently (down 3-1 in a best-of-7, captain's answer as "probably not") the media raked him over the coals for being defeatist and having no confidence in his team.
Short version: the media, both sports and politics, ask some really stupid questions.
Congratulations! You have correctly absorbed the media's message on this fiasco:
Government shutdown
Democrats in Senate and Democrat President refuse to negotiate
So...It's all the Tea Party Republicans' fault.
See any logical flaws here?
Congratulations! You have correctly absorbed the media's message on this fiasco:
Government shutdown
Democrats in Senate and Democrat President refuse to negotiate
So...It's all the Tea Party Republicans' fault.
See any logical flaws here?
Yes, I see a logical flaw there. You deliberately left out parts of the story to paint the Republicans / TP as innocent bystanders.
The Democrats worked in the spirit of compromise for years on the ACA/Obamacare, and the Republicans / Tea Party took that as a weakness and excuse to demand more concessions and even the total destruction of the ACA.
Finally the Democrats and the President said no more, and gave the Republicans / TP a dose of their own bull-headed, no-compromise medicine. The House Republicans forced a shutdown, and then Boehner exacerbated it by refusing calls for a vote in the House because he knew enough moderate Republicans would vote against the TP extremists, risking civil war within the party.
Then, by waiting for the Senate to work out a bipartisan plan, House Republicans saved face--the moderates could still vote against their TP colleagues without actually opposing anything the TP had put on a bill.
Many people have already had cutbacks on their hours at work due to the law, and many of them lost health insurance in the process.
On this specific point, Walmart (of all companies) is reversing the working hour cutbacks and rehiring 35,000 people as full-time workers, with ACA coverage.
Why? Funny enough, simple free-market principles: "While the company’s trend toward temporary employees has allowed the retailer to avoid its responsibilities under the Affordable Care Act [...] they’ve managed to tank their store sales in the process."
The number of the dramatic licenses (i.e. deliberate errors, not nitpicks) to generate and sustain the peril were too much for me to fully enjoy the film, though I have no problem saying it's a great movie. A friend didn't think the inaccuracies were that bad, and wrote them off as "it's Hollywood." True, but he doesn't know space physics and orbital mechanics as well as I do (relatively speaking; I'm not in the field either).
Then the next night we're watching a movie about mountaineering/climbing, which he actually does do, and then every time he pointed out a flaw it was my turn to rib him with the "it's Hollywood" line, which was acknowledged with a wry chuckle.
Between these sites slamming the door shut on public comments, walled login gardens, and NSA slimy fingers on everything, it's just super depressing. Feels like a mortal wound.
Seriously, critique the Slashdot comment system if you like, but it's a thousand times better than 99% of the sites out there. And it's pretty simple. Sites not ripping off this system seem like they conscientiously want a reason to slam the door on public conversation.
No it's not. The number of times I use to log in and put my name to the comment only to have it voted up on down not on merit but on popularity was depressing. If slashdot is so good why do we continually hear from people about how downhill it has all gone.
I call BS. Keep patting yourself on the back while the Titanic sinks.
Name one high-traffic moderation/comment system that's better than Slashdot, and explain why.
Even if you manage that, the point still stands that /.'s system is far better than 99% of the sites out there.
I disagree, message boards are great for getting those alternative perspectives out there. If you don't know how to think without an authority telling you what to listen to you aren't thinking scientifically anyway.
Many people, probably a majority, *don't* know how to think without an authority telling them what to listen to. That "authority" is not necessarily government, or church leaders, or politicians, it's *anyone* who's charismatic enough that people trust what they say or write. Rush Limbaugh, Steve Jobs, Greenpeace activists, Jenny McCarthy, market analysts, parenting experts, a non-techy's tech friend, etc. Most of those in turn have their own authorities that they listen to.
I don't drink coffee, nor energy drinks, and tea only rarely, but thanks for playing.
That practice is not unwise at all, but it *is* unwise to assume the car(s) in front will accelerate as quickly or constantly as your own car. I've had idiots tailgate me right off the green light, and then have to brake because I drive full manual in a country where 90% of cars sold are automatic, and no matter how fast I shift there *will* be a 100% loss of acceleration for at least a half a second, and another half to build it up again.
In this particular UK case though, the rear-ending driver somehow missed that the car in front was at a complete stop, and hit hard enough to cause death. That's a whole different kind of inattention.
Considering all the passenger videos of takeoff and landings that are on Youtube, some all the way from the gate pushback, taxi, all the way up to level flight, they haven't been doing a good job of enforcement anyway. And it's pretty clear modern personal electronic has little to no impact on operational safety of the aircraft.
It seems you missed that I was supporting your argument with an analogy, which of course isn't exact.
1) no matter what evidence is given, the disbelievers will demand more proof that it wasn't faked, "ad infinitum."
2) Irrespective of all other evidence, the reputation of the challenger (no need to be a market competitor) is all the supporting evidence needed.
The difference obviously is that the CCC's reputation bolsters their actions/claims, whereas the reputation of the USSR as the USA's chief adversary and the circumstances of the Cold War bolsters their inaction and lack of claim.
No. It wouldn't matter. No matter what they did there would always be the next thing they could have just done. How do we know that the phone wasn't programmed to unlock with the second guys fingerprint? How do we know they didn't edit the video? etc, ad infinitum. What makes it highly believable is none of that. It is the reputation of the Chaos Computer Club that makes it believable. They aren't about to sacrifice a reputation it took them more than 30 years to build, especially for essentially no gain. If it was an unknown group I'd say maybe they are looking for 15 minutes of fame. But this is the CCC we are talking about here.
A nice and convincing argument. I've said something similar about the "faked" moon landings: never mind all the science-y explanations, if the Soviet Union didn't raise all hell and denounce the USA for faking the landings, then the landings were not faked by the USA.
I bet most people unlock with a thumb, but use an index finger on the screen.
While true, one of the supposed reasons/excuses the iPhone screen remains that small is one-handed operation, i.e. when held normally by an adult with average-sized hands, their thumb can extend and reach almost every part of the touchscreen.
Folder open/close animation is slightly but noticeably longer, and the springboard/homescreen loading takes twice as long as under iOS6. I can see this clearly on my iOS7 4S vs my iOS6 5. These seem to be built-in to the animations of iOS7 itself, rather than being caused by older hardware.
I wish this didn't change my perception that iOS7 is a bit slower, but it is literally visible as soon as I start using it (unlocking to springboard/homescreen). 3 years ago when I experimented with jailbreaking, one of the best ones was reducing all animation time by half.
My (i)phone (4) hung in the middle of the upgrade, so I ended up having to do a clean install.
It took all night, but it feels less laggy than iOS 6 was at the end. Also, some have complained about the useless animations, but if my actions are acknowledged immediately, I don't end up assuming the phone ignored my input, trying again, and taking eleven pictures of the floor in front of me while trying to start the camera.
Protip: Consider doing a clean install.
That's the thing, I installed iOS7 on my test/backup iPhone 4S, so I could explore it before installing on my iPhone 5. The overall UI remained smooth as I used the browser, various apps, etc for a couple hours... no appreciable stuttering or lag, which was impressive.
However, the feel of the UI itself is definitely slower. The lockscreen fade-in and fade out, while nicer than the instant on/off in earlier iOS, takes too long. The animation that happens after exiting the lockscreen to Homescreen, which while running prevents me tapping on an app to launch it, is over 1 second, whereas my iPhone 5 on iOS6 is half that.
Also, after pressing the home button in iOS6 it's about 1/4 second before an app exits, which still allows time for starting double- or even triple-press functions. In iOS7 this delay is a full second! This is the epitome of actions NOT being acknowledged immediately, and there's no obvious good reason why this additional delay was put in.
It's not just because it's installed on an older device or because it wasn't a clean install, I verified iOS7's longer, built-in UI response times on an iPhone 5S in the store.
I can get used to the visual changes, I really don't appreciate the additional lag times that seem to be built-in to the OS itself, since the whole idea was to simplify and improve the interface!
in the mid-90s **high school kids** had pagers...they were such barbaric 1-way only text gagets...but compared to nothing it was like telepathy
**ANYONE** with half a brain at that time would logically conclude that there is a market for a **two-way** texting device
the next logical step in functionality is not innovation
it's just not...
Sorry, but saying two-ways after one-way is obvious and therefore not an innovation is all manner of wrong.
For example, tablets: there were prop computer tablets going all the way back at least to Star Trek in the 1960s, or the movie 2001, or Star Trek: The Next Generation's PADDs. It was "obvious" that at some point it would happen, but *how* you do it, with what technology works in the background, can certainly be innovative. The industry had 7 years of Windows tablets that didn't get much traction, then 3 years after the iPhone to predict what an Apple tablet would be, but still almost every competitor and analyst (hopefully they all have at least half a brain) got it wrong when the iPad came out. It wasn't a Mac tablet, and it was half the price they were expecting, and it blew the consumer tablet market wide open.
Back to BB and pagers. Yes obviously there was going to be a 2-way communication after 1-way, but how they did it can (I won't say for sure since I don't know) certainly be innovative.
I don't remember being corrected on this before.. (not saying that nobody has tried, but I don't remember it). Perhaps if you'd give some evidence that they are whales rather than just saying they are, I'd change my mental model of the cetacean family.
Killer whale scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Cetacea (all whales)
Suborder: Odontoceti (toothed whales, including dolphins and porpoises)
Family: Delphinidae (oceanic dolphin)
Genus: Orcinus
Species: O. orca
Backup from a non-wiki source:
The word "cetacean" is derived from the Greek word for whale, ketos [...] Living cetaceans are further divided into two suborders: the Odontoceti (toothed whales) and the Mysticeti (baleen whales).
In other words, any current species falling under Cetacean is by definition a whale.
So when you say
they're not "whales eating other whales". They would be "cetaceans eating other cetaceans"
You are in fact saying the same thing. In more common language, "whales eating other whales" is entirely correct.
People tend to think of the idea of "teaching the controversy" as an insidious effort to get religion's foot in the door. In fact, it's one of the most amazing things that Team Texas Religion has ever done- offer a compromise. For a Texan to even admit that the other side's point of view EXISTS is jaw-droppingly astounding. To offer to teach it alongside their own is nothing short of miraculous.
I don't think it's amazing at all. Except for citizens vs illegals, in all your other examples the opposing sides are both "limited" to their state's borders and inconsequential to the rest of the country. With textbooks, for whatever reason their state controls the majority of the printing. If they outright tried excluding evolution from the textbooks they print, school boards in more enlightened areas *will* get alternatives, and then Texas loses their underserved pseudo-monopoly.