This is how things were already circa 1995-2001.. Then everyone got on this "make the web 'accessible'" mantra, so it's being dumbed down to 'hoodrat' level.
It did. It's also why the network is getting less secure, less peer friendly, and less functional while it focuses on people who do nothing but shop at strip malls.
1. having a reference url that can be shared by im, irc, game chat, socialmedia, etc with simple copy and paste is valuable. This is still quite valid and is reason enough for keeping it visible and accessible. 2. the ability to navigate bad websites when they fail (eg they break the back button purposely) but you really need the information they contain. 3. There are still sites out there that use static urls.. it's just that google and facebook don't, so everyone now assumes no one does. 4. Being able to see fishing urls for what they really are, though this is more useful as a cursor hover in the statusbar, which is another thing the web 2.0 generation is scrambling to get rid of.
Targeting the lowest common denominator is what breeds the next generation of better idiots who can't even figure out your already dumbed down design. At some point, "this far, no farther" should rule the day.
1. They're the primary reason campuses are tainted with center left politics and the propaganda of professional victimhood. This has to go. Universities should rise above any particular ideology so that the on-campus culture is encouraged to judge them all more objectively. Now, there's a good basis for a humanities program. 2. language skills are needed and are probably one of the most important things the humanities offer. 3. 'Social' science is also loaded with marxist dogma. Strip them clean and start over. 4. All of that Mental masturbating while huffing too much vacuum in the ivory tower is also not productive.
This is not an all inclusive list but it is a good start.
Once you buy them out, then what? How will you change the law? They will balk at not being able to receive such funding in the future, esp if your success hinged on the biggest buyout in history. The moment your funding is spent and they're back to business as usual, congress will undo those laws just enough to let funding trickle through again.
The fundamental problem with washington politics (and really, world politics) is that it is more interested in compromise than it is in making correct decisions. Not rocking the boat and risking their 'careers' is of higher concern than treating their positions as duties like they're supposed to. As a result, few politicians nowadays have the testicular fortitude and backbone to LEAD; to make unilateral decisions when the situation calls for it. It's the only way to break the vicious cycle of passive aggressive fallacious attacks that make up the bulk of the 'political process.'
Good luck. You'll need it. The mention of TED however makes me wonder this is just another left wing power grab, same as it might be a neocon power grab if this came from the heritage foundation.
It seems like all this 'smartness' is just being used to make things as annoying and publicly pressured, tracked, and monitored as possible. This would just further encourage me to NOT carry any cellnet devices. I'll pass, especially if the taxpayer has to fund it.
Also, because the leaderships in our supposedly 'free' nations have repeatedly proven themselves too immature to handle that kind of power, I don't want them given any more metrics than they already have. Networks like this can always be used to surveil the nodes connected to them.
Yeah, because breaking the law in and of itself is never justifiable, right? As far as lives go, you'd have to offset the number of denied 911 calls that would've saved someone against the number of accidents he prevented by denying cellnet access to all those childadult accidents-waiting-to-happen. Really, it goes either way, and I'll bet the difference he made either way was negligible.
As far as critical infrastructure goes, it should be hardwired, with RF as an emergency fallback. It seems everyone, including emergency responders, politicians, and, apparently, even some technophiles here, need to realize these things are radios first, computers second, and phones/cameras/whatever a distant last. If it's important, hardwire it. If it's important and sensitive, hardwire and crypt it. If you cant hardwire it, then plan the necessary contingencies for when service is denied. Radio is not a guaranteed service. Deal with it. Frankly, the fact that so much already depends on the shitty, overpriced cell nets concerns me more than some guy with too much time on his hands. The fact he was able to do it should be a wake up call, but of course it won't. It'll just result in harsher penalties from lawyer-politicians who think the law defines reality. Meanwhile, the technologies deployed won't change one iota.
Nah, most intelligent people don't breed, so they'd have no need for such vehicles. It's the troglodytic soccer moms with the 4 kids and the two dogs driving around in the huge SUV while on the phone and/or texting like they're still 17yo.
oh well. the towers along the highways were put in at the end of the last era where authorities assumed people could make intelligent decisions..now, they just want to dumb everything down and reenforce insipid dependency. It's time to pull the towers.
You mean the license that keeps the project free for everyone and does not allow someone to close it and then compete against the authors or anyone else who chooses to develop it? Unless you're planning to sell a modified version, why do you care? Use it if it suits your needs. If not, don't.
Actually the summary has it wrong. It's the male pheromone that inhibits pain but also increases stress.. If anything, this is 'feminist' science trying to find a reason to diss men...or perhaps it is correct science speaking the truth.
These days, her opinion prevails mainly because of the implied threat of her leaving and taking all his life's earning with her, hangs over his head. We have the ivy league left-wing indoctrinated feminist judges to thank for that (both male and female). For Great (Social) Justice.
This is the kind of argument so-called 'social scientists' make to ignore science that contradicts the 'proof' they want to present that backs their particular ideology/politics. Take it far enough and it's basically the creationist "well it's just a theory so therefore my beliefs are right" routine.
While it's true that obtaining a perfect 'clean room' to study complex interactions is near impossible, external effects can be minimized to measure cause-effects accurately with high probabilities.
As opposed to then group of histrionic drama queens who now make up the bulk of the ruling class, who think that feelings (specifically theirs) should be center stage in everyone else's decision making process?
Slashdot Mirror
This is how things were already circa 1995-2001.. Then everyone got on this "make the web 'accessible'" mantra, so it's being dumbed down to 'hoodrat' level.
It did. It's also why the network is getting less secure, less peer friendly, and less functional while it focuses on people who do nothing but shop at strip malls.
Granted, but having access still has utility.
1. having a reference url that can be shared by im, irc, game chat, socialmedia, etc with simple copy and paste is valuable. This is still quite valid and is reason enough for keeping it visible and accessible.
2. the ability to navigate bad websites when they fail (eg they break the back button purposely) but you really need the information they contain.
3. There are still sites out there that use static urls.. it's just that google and facebook don't, so everyone now assumes no one does.
4. Being able to see fishing urls for what they really are, though this is more useful as a cursor hover in the statusbar, which is another thing the web 2.0 generation is scrambling to get rid of.
Targeting the lowest common denominator is what breeds the next generation of better idiots who can't even figure out your already dumbed down design. At some point, "this far, no farther" should rule the day.
That doesn't mean you take the opportunity for learning away for the sake of some stupid hipster aesthetic.
Too bad you're probably right. It explains why software is getting less useful and more user hostile. Those 'beautiful people' are suckers.
Deliberately hiding details because they confuse people is not a solid reason for turning everything into its fisher price equivalent.
When it comes to encryption, a paranoid default assumption rules the day.
1. They're the primary reason campuses are tainted with center left politics and the propaganda of professional victimhood. This has to go. Universities should rise above any particular ideology so that the on-campus culture is encouraged to judge them all more objectively. Now, there's a good basis for a humanities program.
2. language skills are needed and are probably one of the most important things the humanities offer.
3. 'Social' science is also loaded with marxist dogma. Strip them clean and start over.
4. All of that Mental masturbating while huffing too much vacuum in the ivory tower is also not productive.
This is not an all inclusive list but it is a good start.
Once you buy them out, then what? How will you change the law? They will balk at not being able to receive such funding in the future, esp if your success hinged on the biggest buyout in history. The moment your funding is spent and they're back to business as usual, congress will undo those laws just enough to let funding trickle through again.
The fundamental problem with washington politics (and really, world politics) is that it is more interested in compromise than it is in making correct decisions. Not rocking the boat and risking their 'careers' is of higher concern than treating their positions as duties like they're supposed to. As a result, few politicians nowadays have the testicular fortitude and backbone to LEAD; to make unilateral decisions when the situation calls for it. It's the only way to break the vicious cycle of passive aggressive fallacious attacks that make up the bulk of the 'political process.'
Good luck. You'll need it. The mention of TED however makes me wonder this is just another left wing power grab, same as it might be a neocon power grab if this came from the heritage foundation.
It seems like all this 'smartness' is just being used to make things as annoying and publicly pressured, tracked, and monitored as possible. This would just further encourage me to NOT carry any cellnet devices. I'll pass, especially if the taxpayer has to fund it.
Also, because the leaderships in our supposedly 'free' nations have repeatedly proven themselves too immature to handle that kind of power, I don't want them given any more metrics than they already have. Networks like this can always be used to surveil the nodes connected to them.
ruby? on an 'embedded' platform? Your customers must not mind paying for 50x the hardware that's actually needed.
So what exactly is dated about it?
Then she shouldn't be in the car because you've already abandoned her for her abandonment issue-driven control freakery.
Yeah, because breaking the law in and of itself is never justifiable, right? As far as lives go, you'd have to offset the number of denied 911 calls that would've saved someone against the number of accidents he prevented by denying cellnet access to all those childadult accidents-waiting-to-happen. Really, it goes either way, and I'll bet the difference he made either way was negligible.
As far as critical infrastructure goes, it should be hardwired, with RF as an emergency fallback. It seems everyone, including emergency responders, politicians, and, apparently, even some technophiles here, need to realize these things are radios first, computers second, and phones/cameras/whatever a distant last. If it's important, hardwire it. If it's important and sensitive, hardwire and crypt it. If you cant hardwire it, then plan the necessary contingencies for when service is denied. Radio is not a guaranteed service. Deal with it. Frankly, the fact that so much already depends on the shitty, overpriced cell nets concerns me more than some guy with too much time on his hands. The fact he was able to do it should be a wake up call, but of course it won't. It'll just result in harsher penalties from lawyer-politicians who think the law defines reality. Meanwhile, the technologies deployed won't change one iota.
Nah, most intelligent people don't breed, so they'd have no need for such vehicles. It's the troglodytic soccer moms with the 4 kids and the two dogs driving around in the huge SUV while on the phone and/or texting like they're still 17yo.
this is not a troll.
oh well. the towers along the highways were put in at the end of the last era where authorities assumed people could make intelligent decisions..now, they just want to dumb everything down and reenforce insipid dependency. It's time to pull the towers.
You mean the license that keeps the project free for everyone and does not allow someone to close it and then compete against the authors or anyone else who chooses to develop it? Unless you're planning to sell a modified version, why do you care? Use it if it suits your needs. If not, don't.
Why do you need 256 colors for a character display?
his comment may or may not be stupid, but its anonymity has nothing to do with it.
Actually the summary has it wrong. It's the male pheromone that inhibits pain but also increases stress.. If anything, this is 'feminist' science trying to find a reason to diss men...or perhaps it is correct science speaking the truth.
These days, her opinion prevails mainly because of the implied threat of her leaving and taking all his life's earning with her, hangs over his head. We have the ivy league left-wing indoctrinated feminist judges to thank for that (both male and female). For Great (Social) Justice.
This is the kind of argument so-called 'social scientists' make to ignore science that contradicts the 'proof' they want to present that backs their particular ideology/politics. Take it far enough and it's basically the creationist "well it's just a theory so therefore my beliefs are right" routine.
While it's true that obtaining a perfect 'clean room' to study complex interactions is near impossible, external effects can be minimized to measure cause-effects accurately with high probabilities.
As opposed to then group of histrionic drama queens who now make up the bulk of the ruling class, who think that feelings (specifically theirs) should be center stage in everyone else's decision making process?