I came here to make fun of "chemicals" as well. It's not that I don't think this is a problem, it's that people use the word "chemicals" when they mean to say "dangerous chemicals". Water is a chemical. I'm made of chemicals. It's ignorant to use the generic word "chemical" when trying to scare someone.
Gradually over time, they began relying on it more and more. With the 2.0 liter diesel engine, they didn't want to pay Mercedes to license the urea injection system. So they began used the software instead. (On the 3.0 liter engines which have urea injection, it appears to have been used as a crutch so they could get away with putting in a smaller, cheaper catalytic converter and not have to use as much urea.)
Seems like you could build a urinal into the driver's seat and kill two birds with one stone here.
The Olympic committee has issued a decree that hackers cannot hack them. Also, if hackers do try to hack them they are not allowed to use any of the trademarks - including the word "Olympic" or the 5 rings symbol - in reference to their planned hacks.
Look, this is simple. We just need government workers to show up and actually work. Yeah, crazy talk, I know.
Rachel from Cardholder Services advertises on Craigslist in Orlando. How difficult is it to just use their services (I know they're calling people at the FTC) and track them down? Use existing laws to put them out of business. There are plenty of options for those willing to do the minimal amount of work.
Canada uses the same voting system as the UK, but we have nearly double the number of voters than Canada, we don't require *any* ID to be shown to vote (you get asked your name and street address, thats it - its illegal for the officer to ask for ID) and the UK still has a near zero rate of election fraud. Its so low that individual cases of people turning up to vote and finding their name has already been crossed off make the national news.
The vote fraud that happens in the US is typically dead people "voting" for Democrats. There is very little fraud that is actually tracked down and prosecuted (which is why liberals in our country like to claim there's no voter fraud) but some hilarious cases have come to light. In TN here, for example, there was a really contentious state senator race a few years back. Someone went overboard with the fraud and in a precinct near his home that had 100 registered voters 150 voted. So, yeah, it happens. Requiring an ID fixes most of the problem. There are also reports now and then of Democrats driving homeless people around to various polling places to vote multiple times, usually rewarding them with cigarettes.
In case you think I'm biased (I'm not) Republicans have other interesting methods. One which they've been caught doing is using automated phone calls to areas that vote heavily D and letting the folks know that the election day has been changed.
Ugly dirty crap. But when we try to implement common sense reforms (like ID to vote) you can see who screams loudest and deduce who's going to be impacted most by it.
Canada generally requires a photo ID to vote, which we in the US know is actually RACIST! So, I think we can ignore any other commonsense measures you may use.
They're right here INSISTING that well, okay okay, it got built, but IT'LL NEVER WORK! Because turns and trucks and bridges and all KINDS of DUH OBVIOUS real-world stuff (not that they've ever seen it, holed up their moms' basements) that those stupid "engineers" CLEARLY haven't thought about before pissing away MILLIONS on this thing!
In other words, a normal day on Slashdot.:)
Honestly, all of those things *are* problems. But the problems won't get solved (or the whole thing shown to be a major debacle) without building it and playing around with it. This is v 0.9, give them some time to work out the kinks and see how the rest of the city interacts with it. Another problem I see is the fact that all seating is on the second floor, meaning the elderly and handicapped are going to have a harder time of it. But, again, they're not done, they're just getting started.
Sorry, I'm tired of it. Silicon Valley has more "diverse" people than the rest of the industry - there literally aren't enough women, blacks, latinos, trannies - whatever you think makes them "diverse" - interested in tech to work at these places and bring the statistics up more even if it were a worthwhile goal. But it's not. And it's not "progress". Progress is having the most qualified people working, regardless of innate traits.
Yeah, that's what I liked about it. I learned how to draw with logo and do simple procedures, but I never really paid much attention to it as I was already programming in other languages before Logo. In college a professor pointed out that Logo is based on Lisp, and I went and actually read the documentation at that point (on the TI-99) and found that there was much more to it. Played around with it more and was impressed. I don't like the syntax but I understand why he didn't want to go nuts with parentheses.
Just curious, anyone else out there work with lists and such with logo? It was loosely based on lisp and used "first" and "butfirst" in place of "car" and "cdr". Cool stuff, had an entire other world in there that few people explored.
So, Mitt Romney was an idiot for calling Russia a threat 4 years ago. But now, we have a new narrative to push: the Russians are helping Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton by releasing emails from the DNC. As part of that, now we have to push the idea that Russia has a badass hacking army that's a threat to the US. Is that about right?
Just because Trump asked Russia to do this, and Russian hackers did this doesn't mean there's a causal relationship.
He didn't "ask Russia to do this". He was joking about Clinton's missing 30,000 emails. Emails that are apparently now a national security concern even though they're just about yoga and Chelsea's wedding, according to Hillary.
He's a Presidential candidate, the entire process is about getting attention. Hillary gets plenty of free attention because she's a Democrat, Trump has to work for it.
I don't know what I hate worse: Trump or the idiots who make up stupid shit about him.
In summary: A 3rd party candidate is statistically more likely to be closer in ideology to one of the two major parties.
If you have primary parties A and B, and C is the 3rd party, C is probably more like B than A (for this example). If you and I vote for C because we hate A and like C better than B, our votes didn't count for B. So instead of a vote being a 49% A and 51% B vote, it may well turn out 49% A, 41% B, and 10% C. Thus the party we least liked, A, is the winner.
That's actually how Bill Clinton won in 1992. Ross Perot would likely have won, but he dropped out and only reentered the race at the last month or so. He pulled far more votes from Bush than Clinton, and Clinton ended up winning because of it.
The government's response? LOL, you Republicans crack me up. We elected President Hope & Change 7 years ago in case you forgot, and we now have the most transparent government in history which works for the *people*, not big Republican-donating industries like the movie industry.
The government's response will be quite predictable: the EFF is correct and we need to quit enforcing these Republican corporatist crony laws right now!
I can't wait to see the looks on those Hollywood Republican's faces when Obama tells his Justice Department lawyers to give it to them good and hard! For the People!
Yes, it's true that for criminal cases, it's the state bringing charges against you, not the victim. That's what that stuff in cop TV shows about the victim refusing to "press charges" is sort-of BS. However, not completely: a prosecutor who pursues charges against a (alleged) criminal, but has a victim who is completely uncooperative, is going to have a hard time winning that case, so in practice they rarely pursue cases like these because it's a waste of time and money, and makes them look bad too.
Yes, acknowledged - if the main witness is uncooperative then it's difficult. Given the instant case, though, I'm not sure the witness is needed at this point.
Just a nit - there's a difference between a civil case and a criminal case. It's nice that Polanski's victim has forgiven him - that means he doesn't have to face a civil case. But that doesn't absolve him from criminal liability. Statutory rape (and, if I remember the case correctly it was actually just plain "rape" - big difference for those of you who are scratching your heads) is a crime and is considered an offense against everybody, hence the criminal aspect of it.
Spending on social programs is never wasted as it goes directly to the people who need it most.
Do you have any evidence that it actually *helps* those people? I have nothing against feeding the hungry, but at some point wouldn't self-sufficiency be a loftier goal?
Make breaking the law a crime. Yeah, totally crazy, right? Except, that's how laws that don't apply to government employees work. We need to criminalize "breaking" the 4th amendment along with the rest of them. It'll only take one or two government criminals going to jail before the rest catch on.
Sadly, it really is that simple and congress could do that tomorrow.
Thanks for the advice. I work on the fringes of the music industry and know plenty of people who make money from it. Few of them "perform". She's very capable and has what it takes, just needs to add "hard work" to what she has. Difficult to say what she'll end up doing.
I've explained that it's a hard road, but I think she'll be fine.
Slashdot Mirror
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/1...
It helps if there is a working link in TFS.
Well, if I'm going to RTFA. I would have had no idea had you not pointed this out.
I came here to make fun of "chemicals" as well. It's not that I don't think this is a problem, it's that people use the word "chemicals" when they mean to say "dangerous chemicals". Water is a chemical. I'm made of chemicals. It's ignorant to use the generic word "chemical" when trying to scare someone.
I'm not ready for Chrome to talk to my bluetooth devices. I mean, I cannot imagine how that's going to be misused.
Gradually over time, they began relying on it more and more. With the 2.0 liter diesel engine, they didn't want to pay Mercedes to license the urea injection system. So they began used the software instead. (On the 3.0 liter engines which have urea injection, it appears to have been used as a crutch so they could get away with putting in a smaller, cheaper catalytic converter and not have to use as much urea.)
Seems like you could build a urinal into the driver's seat and kill two birds with one stone here.
The Olympic committee has issued a decree that hackers cannot hack them. Also, if hackers do try to hack them they are not allowed to use any of the trademarks - including the word "Olympic" or the 5 rings symbol - in reference to their planned hacks.
Look, this is simple. We just need government workers to show up and actually work. Yeah, crazy talk, I know.
Rachel from Cardholder Services advertises on Craigslist in Orlando. How difficult is it to just use their services (I know they're calling people at the FTC) and track them down? Use existing laws to put them out of business. There are plenty of options for those willing to do the minimal amount of work.
Canada uses the same voting system as the UK, but we have nearly double the number of voters than Canada, we don't require *any* ID to be shown to vote (you get asked your name and street address, thats it - its illegal for the officer to ask for ID) and the UK still has a near zero rate of election fraud. Its so low that individual cases of people turning up to vote and finding their name has already been crossed off make the national news.
The vote fraud that happens in the US is typically dead people "voting" for Democrats. There is very little fraud that is actually tracked down and prosecuted (which is why liberals in our country like to claim there's no voter fraud) but some hilarious cases have come to light. In TN here, for example, there was a really contentious state senator race a few years back. Someone went overboard with the fraud and in a precinct near his home that had 100 registered voters 150 voted. So, yeah, it happens. Requiring an ID fixes most of the problem. There are also reports now and then of Democrats driving homeless people around to various polling places to vote multiple times, usually rewarding them with cigarettes.
In case you think I'm biased (I'm not) Republicans have other interesting methods. One which they've been caught doing is using automated phone calls to areas that vote heavily D and letting the folks know that the election day has been changed.
Ugly dirty crap. But when we try to implement common sense reforms (like ID to vote) you can see who screams loudest and deduce who's going to be impacted most by it.
Canada generally requires a photo ID to vote, which we in the US know is actually RACIST! So, I think we can ignore any other commonsense measures you may use.
They're right here INSISTING that well, okay okay, it got built, but IT'LL NEVER WORK! Because turns and trucks and bridges and all KINDS of DUH OBVIOUS real-world stuff (not that they've ever seen it, holed up their moms' basements) that those stupid "engineers" CLEARLY haven't thought about before pissing away MILLIONS on this thing!
In other words, a normal day on Slashdot. :)
Honestly, all of those things *are* problems. But the problems won't get solved (or the whole thing shown to be a major debacle) without building it and playing around with it. This is v 0.9, give them some time to work out the kinks and see how the rest of the city interacts with it. Another problem I see is the fact that all seating is on the second floor, meaning the elderly and handicapped are going to have a harder time of it. But, again, they're not done, they're just getting started.
At least they're trying *something*.
Sorry, I'm tired of it. Silicon Valley has more "diverse" people than the rest of the industry - there literally aren't enough women, blacks, latinos, trannies - whatever you think makes them "diverse" - interested in tech to work at these places and bring the statistics up more even if it were a worthwhile goal. But it's not. And it's not "progress". Progress is having the most qualified people working, regardless of innate traits.
Yeah, that's what I liked about it. I learned how to draw with logo and do simple procedures, but I never really paid much attention to it as I was already programming in other languages before Logo. In college a professor pointed out that Logo is based on Lisp, and I went and actually read the documentation at that point (on the TI-99) and found that there was much more to it. Played around with it more and was impressed. I don't like the syntax but I understand why he didn't want to go nuts with parentheses.
Just curious, anyone else out there work with lists and such with logo? It was loosely based on lisp and used "first" and "butfirst" in place of "car" and "cdr". Cool stuff, had an entire other world in there that few people explored.
So, Mitt Romney was an idiot for calling Russia a threat 4 years ago. But now, we have a new narrative to push: the Russians are helping Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton by releasing emails from the DNC. As part of that, now we have to push the idea that Russia has a badass hacking army that's a threat to the US. Is that about right?
Just because Trump asked Russia to do this, and Russian hackers did this doesn't mean there's a causal relationship.
He didn't "ask Russia to do this". He was joking about Clinton's missing 30,000 emails. Emails that are apparently now a national security concern even though they're just about yoga and Chelsea's wedding, according to Hillary.
But he has a pathological need for attention.
He's a Presidential candidate, the entire process is about getting attention. Hillary gets plenty of free attention because she's a Democrat, Trump has to work for it.
I don't know what I hate worse: Trump or the idiots who make up stupid shit about him.
In summary: A 3rd party candidate is statistically more likely to be closer in ideology to one of the two major parties.
If you have primary parties A and B, and C is the 3rd party, C is probably more like B than A (for this example). If you and I vote for C because we hate A and like C better than B, our votes didn't count for B. So instead of a vote being a 49% A and 51% B vote, it may well turn out 49% A, 41% B, and 10% C. Thus the party we least liked, A, is the winner.
That's actually how Bill Clinton won in 1992. Ross Perot would likely have won, but he dropped out and only reentered the race at the last month or so. He pulled far more votes from Bush than Clinton, and Clinton ended up winning because of it.
Oh, I'm sure there are worse. Cuecat is a decent example:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
No, everybody gets richer, there's just a bigger gap between rich and poor. But the poor are still better off.
Hollywood supports Republicans? Really?
Whoosh!
The government's response? LOL, you Republicans crack me up. We elected President Hope & Change 7 years ago in case you forgot, and we now have the most transparent government in history which works for the *people*, not big Republican-donating industries like the movie industry.
The government's response will be quite predictable: the EFF is correct and we need to quit enforcing these Republican corporatist crony laws right now!
I can't wait to see the looks on those Hollywood Republican's faces when Obama tells his Justice Department lawyers to give it to them good and hard! For the People!
Yes, it's true that for criminal cases, it's the state bringing charges against you, not the victim. That's what that stuff in cop TV shows about the victim refusing to "press charges" is sort-of BS. However, not completely: a prosecutor who pursues charges against a (alleged) criminal, but has a victim who is completely uncooperative, is going to have a hard time winning that case, so in practice they rarely pursue cases like these because it's a waste of time and money, and makes them look bad too.
Yes, acknowledged - if the main witness is uncooperative then it's difficult. Given the instant case, though, I'm not sure the witness is needed at this point.
Just a nit - there's a difference between a civil case and a criminal case. It's nice that Polanski's victim has forgiven him - that means he doesn't have to face a civil case. But that doesn't absolve him from criminal liability. Statutory rape (and, if I remember the case correctly it was actually just plain "rape" - big difference for those of you who are scratching your heads) is a crime and is considered an offense against everybody, hence the criminal aspect of it.
Spending on social programs is never wasted as it goes directly to the people who need it most.
Do you have any evidence that it actually *helps* those people? I have nothing against feeding the hungry, but at some point wouldn't self-sufficiency be a loftier goal?
Make breaking the law a crime. Yeah, totally crazy, right? Except, that's how laws that don't apply to government employees work. We need to criminalize "breaking" the 4th amendment along with the rest of them. It'll only take one or two government criminals going to jail before the rest catch on.
Sadly, it really is that simple and congress could do that tomorrow.
Thanks for the advice. I work on the fringes of the music industry and know plenty of people who make money from it. Few of them "perform". She's very capable and has what it takes, just needs to add "hard work" to what she has. Difficult to say what she'll end up doing.
I've explained that it's a hard road, but I think she'll be fine.