My job requires three general things: 1) I'm an expert in my field, 2) I understand the legal landscape in my field, and 3) I can pull these two things together and communicate processes, policies, and paths forward to the rest of the people in my business.
While someone in another country could possibly pull these skills together, #3 becomes a lot harder if you're not fluent in English, but if even if you are and you're not fluent in the "office speak" of that business. What abbreviations are used, what acronyms which people understand and which don't, etc. I was in a meeting the other day when someone burst out laughing. When we all looked at them, they said, "I just pictured someone from another organization walking through the door and listening to us, and I realized that what we're talking about would be utterly incomprehensible to them."
If someone in another country is fully fluent in English, they still need the knowledge base, and that's not always going to be easy to acquire. And even if they have the English fluency and the knowledge, being able to communicate in a way that everyone understands is not always trivial.
How else could they charge extra for the top spot in people’s feed while making it less obvious to the average viewer that that's what they're doing. (FTFY)
I wish every police force had that sort of training, and got it often. If you want to raise my taxes a bit and train the local cops better, I'm 100% in favor of that. The cost of lawsuits, insurance, and hospital bills are orders of magnitude higher than good training. I absolutely believe that good training is a money saver in the long run.
Your average person only needs the reasonable suspicion of danger to defend themselves.
Which is also entirely bullshit, uncivilized, and the reason the US has so much more death and destroyed lives than most other civilized countries.
I'm baffled why you think being able to straight up murder someone because you're scared is a mark of honor and a good thing. It's fucking barbaric.
You are almost literally putting handcuffs on police with your rules of engagement.
And that is a good thing, right? Yep, more cops will get shot at if they shoot second. But at the same time, 0 innocent people will get shot by cops. These people didn't choose to stand in the line of fire as their job, while the police did. Seems pretty reasonable to me that cops should get shot at while unarmed people should not get shot at by cops. If the cops don't want to get shot at, they can choose a different profession.
On top of this, a whole pile of suspects who otherwise would have gotten shot or committed suicide by cop won't get wounded or die. And that's also a good thing, unless you're some inhumane savage. And the end result of this is probably a lot less death and violence all around.
And if someone shoots at a cop? That person is definitely fair game in my book. Cops can show up and feel free to shoot at the least provocation. I want the cops to do their job. Their job isn't murdering unarmed people, no matter how scared they might claim to be.
And yes, I very much support good training, health care, mental health care, medical benefits, salaries, and retirement for cops. They do a really tough job. But I don't support them shooting first 99.9% of the time. If other countries can figure out how to be civilized, we can too.
Same here. I don't allow my phone to demand my attention. It doesn't matter the reason.
Nothing gets to make noise on it, and nothing gets to pop up on the screen except calls and texts from the small number of people I've given the number to.
I can't wrap my mind around how 99% of the population allow their phones to dictate and interrupt their lives. I'm not interested in what an algorithm thinks I should be paying attention to. I'm not interested in what most people think I should be paying attention to. I'm busy living my own life.
If I am unable to make a serious distinction between what I think is trolling or just disagreeing, why would anybody else be able to do that for me?
If it's not serial, it shouldn't be banned. That's my viewpoint. I think a system which can parse posts into "definitely tr0lling", "maybe tr0lling" and "probably not tr0lling" could be of use, if users were able to set their tr0lling threshold.
If someone tr0lls 50% of the time and is insightful the other 50%, for some that's far too much tr0lling, and for others it's fine. For some people 5% of the time trolling is too much. And even if this system wasn't perfect, being able to personally adjust the ratio would likely allow you to fix some if the issues.
Where I think a real problem lies is in someone else (most like an algorithm) setting that ceiling for you. That's a bit too authoritarian and heavy-handed for my taste.
And that's one reason I still come to/. - very few posts ever get deleted, and I can browse at -1 and mod stuff up there that needs it. I can set my own threshold to view at, and I can adjust how posts modded different ways are weighted. While there is a mod system, I've got control over how I interpret the mods, and what triggers a post to be hidden or visible. That's hugely important to me.
-------
Sigh. And then stupid shit like this: Filter error: Lameness filter encountered.
Apparently I said tr0lling too many times. Now let me go back and replace the os with 0s so the filter lets me post....and here I was saying nice things about/.
Wonderful. Then as I requested, please provide me with the location of the "leftists" headquarters so I can go and talk to them. I have a lot of questions.
Just because you can find a definition of something doesn't make it a real thing. Are you five?
And on top of that, "the political left" isn't a homogeneous thing either. "Left" doesn't even fully overlap with "Democrat" at this point in time! Your flamebait was well earned. I hope the leftists don't turn you into a gay SJW tonight. Sleep tight!
"Leftists" is the label that is made up. If it's not made up, please direct me to the nearest leftist headquarters so I can ask them what they stand for.
You provided no objective observations, just like I can't provide objective observations of the unicornists. They don't exist. Like leftists.
I'm somewhat confused how you don't understand this.
I almost agree, except that the pageviews fall off exponentially some amount of time after an article is posted. That means that the early modding and commenting has a disproportionate amount of eyeballs on it.
And the early modding and commenting tends to be a lot of the flailing wailing types, and less of the slow and thoughtful types. I occasionally go back to older articles on the weekend that I just looked at for a few minutes when they were posted, and there's often a noticeable shift in tone and conversation.
That's not broken, per-se, but it's at least not ideal. But in this day and age of twitter-speed, I'm not sure there's an alternate that wouldn't alienate most readers.
Except its not a straw man, its a factual observation, an uncomfortable truth.
What's factual about making up a label with no definition that nobody really adheres to and then slandering that label? I might as well tell you how shitty the unicornists are, and how they want to shut down any discussion of how horses are superior.
And more hilariously, there's no censorship on/.. Your flamebait being marked for what is proves nothing other than that one person thinks it's flamebait. (Well at least two, counting me.)
You've made a giant boogyman up of "leftists" and see their impacts everywhere. Yet they don't exist. Who is projecting?
One time on one forum that I kick myself forever for having forgotten, they did group shadowbanning for trolls. Big PSA not to feed the trolls, and then shadowbanned a whole lot of them.
What happened? The trolls essentially got their own forum, trolling each other, and it appeared to them that the PSA was amazingly effective. Normal users didn't reply to them, but other trolls did, and they did all sorts of trolling of each other. Because they still got replies, and didn't know who was shadowbanned and who wasn't, it took awhile for some of them to figure out what was going on. So underneath this quiet, sedate forum, a frothing troll fest was lurking, and if you were too much of a troll on the surface forums, you'd suddenly find yourself sucked into the cesspool.
The problem was that the cesspool was vastly more entertaining than the surface forums, which rather defeated the point.
No dude, they do not prove your point. Quite the opposite.
The "leftist" epithet is a very lame bit of virtue signaling on your part to try to both demean a strawman you've created to allow you to hate a large portion of the population and signal to "your tribe" that you're one of them.
It's flamebait through and through.
As much as you wish there were "leftists" out there to hate, the uncomfortable truth is that nobody is a "leftist". That's not a thing, nobody identifies as that, there isn't a "leftist" political party, and "leftist" doesn't have a creed or values.
So why would you talk about it like it's a thing? To stir up flames. I.E., to flamebait.
I've seen it many times - making up a strawman as a defensive reaction to avoid having to respond on the merits another group may have.
There are two major issues with/. modding. Or three. The first is that sockpuppeting still happens, although the random mod point distribution does help with that. The second is that it doesn't seem like many people metamoderate, and that system is broken and showing me unmoderated posts 3/4 of the time when I go anyway.
The last problem is that it seems that a lot of bad mods get done by the twitchy tweeters and redditors who dive into an article shortly after it's posted, and then hack and slash, close the tab, and move on. Over the next few hours, days and even weeks those mods get reversed into what seem more sensible mods, but it takes the thoughtful slow old folks some time to get to it.
During all that time, the modding is slowly going from frothing angst towards reasoned discussion, but the earlier people hit an article, the worse the moderation tends to be. I think if the metamodding was fixed and people actually took the time to do it, that would go away somewhat faster.
India and China have more than enough ability to make their own powerpacks for much less than Tesla is going to sell them.
And it's generally assumed that Tesla makes their own powerpacks for less than they sell them for too. The difference between the two values is what we call profit. Perhaps you meant
India and China have more than enough ability to make their own powerpacks for much less than Tesla makes them for.
Sure. But that's if you only compare direct energy generation prices, and ignore everything else.
Would it be cheaper per watt if my parent's little town made a field of solar panels than them putting them on their house? Absolutely. Will there be revenue sharing with my parents if the town does that once the panels are paid off? Not likely. Maybe taxes will stay flat for a few years. And that's if you can get half the town to vote for the project, and willing to let it be town owned and run rather than privatized.
Since that's not going to happen, my parents bought solar panels for the house. Granted it's only 9 months of extrapolation right now, but it looks like their ROI is going to be 5-7 years in the NE US. After that it's a profit maker for them.
Why wouldn't they make that investment? It gives them a bit of independence from the grid and will make them money in a relatively short period of time. They can get neither of those benefits by the local town building a large array. Which it wasn't going to do anyway.
What they did find was that the Federal law outlawing gambling was unconstitutional because of the way it was written, essentially forcing the states to ban gambling themselves.
It was even weirder than that. It forced the stats to unban gambling during a narrow window, and then closed that window for all states for all time.
It allowed states a window to opt out of a federal law, if they pushed through legislature to do it.
I'm more than happy seeing fucked up shit like that overturned. The justices pretty much said to congress, "If you want to ban it, do it right."
Launch went off mostly flawlessly, except for the non-unexpected live camera feed issues. I remain amazed that they're able to do a live feed up to space and back as it is, so I can't complain too much. Expecting perfection there is asking a bit much, I think.
If this rocket performs as expected, it really is the game-changer that SpaceX is designed it to be. They're already out-competing everyone on launch costs. If they can really do a 24 hr turnaround on the same rocket? Holy. Shit.
Musk is always late on his predictions, but goddamn does he keep eventually getting there. I'm really blown away by this, and I can't wait to see what comes next.
Well, the absolutely delicious irony is that if you were using an ad blocker, you'd be able to block that overlay. My guess is that the do-not-track disables some JS, and that's likely what's causing the issue, or you otherwise block JS from running.
Slashdot Mirror
I sort-of agree, but also disagree.
My job requires three general things: 1) I'm an expert in my field, 2) I understand the legal landscape in my field, and 3) I can pull these two things together and communicate processes, policies, and paths forward to the rest of the people in my business.
While someone in another country could possibly pull these skills together, #3 becomes a lot harder if you're not fluent in English, but if even if you are and you're not fluent in the "office speak" of that business. What abbreviations are used, what acronyms which people understand and which don't, etc. I was in a meeting the other day when someone burst out laughing. When we all looked at them, they said, "I just pictured someone from another organization walking through the door and listening to us, and I realized that what we're talking about would be utterly incomprehensible to them."
If someone in another country is fully fluent in English, they still need the knowledge base, and that's not always going to be easy to acquire. And even if they have the English fluency and the knowledge, being able to communicate in a way that everyone understands is not always trivial.
How else could they charge extra for the top spot in people’s feed while making it less obvious to the average viewer that that's what they're doing. (FTFY)
That sounds awesome.
I wish every police force had that sort of training, and got it often. If you want to raise my taxes a bit and train the local cops better, I'm 100% in favor of that. The cost of lawsuits, insurance, and hospital bills are orders of magnitude higher than good training. I absolutely believe that good training is a money saver in the long run.
Your average person only needs the reasonable suspicion of danger to defend themselves.
Which is also entirely bullshit, uncivilized, and the reason the US has so much more death and destroyed lives than most other civilized countries.
I'm baffled why you think being able to straight up murder someone because you're scared is a mark of honor and a good thing. It's fucking barbaric.
You are almost literally putting handcuffs on police with your rules of engagement.
And that is a good thing, right? Yep, more cops will get shot at if they shoot second. But at the same time, 0 innocent people will get shot by cops. These people didn't choose to stand in the line of fire as their job, while the police did. Seems pretty reasonable to me that cops should get shot at while unarmed people should not get shot at by cops. If the cops don't want to get shot at, they can choose a different profession.
On top of this, a whole pile of suspects who otherwise would have gotten shot or committed suicide by cop won't get wounded or die. And that's also a good thing, unless you're some inhumane savage. And the end result of this is probably a lot less death and violence all around.
And if someone shoots at a cop? That person is definitely fair game in my book. Cops can show up and feel free to shoot at the least provocation. I want the cops to do their job. Their job isn't murdering unarmed people, no matter how scared they might claim to be.
And yes, I very much support good training, health care, mental health care, medical benefits, salaries, and retirement for cops. They do a really tough job. But I don't support them shooting first 99.9% of the time. If other countries can figure out how to be civilized, we can too.
Currently? Yes. That's what the law says.
Change the law, and change this unfortunate reality.
Same here. I don't allow my phone to demand my attention. It doesn't matter the reason.
Nothing gets to make noise on it, and nothing gets to pop up on the screen except calls and texts from the small number of people I've given the number to.
I can't wrap my mind around how 99% of the population allow their phones to dictate and interrupt their lives. I'm not interested in what an algorithm thinks I should be paying attention to. I'm not interested in what most people think I should be paying attention to. I'm busy living my own life.
Thank you. I saw the headline and wanted to stab the writer instantly.
"GUYS, GUYS, GUYS, MAYBE IF WE PUT AIRBAGS IN CARS THEY WOULDN'T CRASH ANYMORE!!!!"
How does shit like this get on /.? It's like the editors are doing the opposite job of what they're supposed to be doing.
If I am unable to make a serious distinction between what I think is trolling or just disagreeing, why would anybody else be able to do that for me?
If it's not serial, it shouldn't be banned. That's my viewpoint. I think a system which can parse posts into "definitely tr0lling", "maybe tr0lling" and "probably not tr0lling" could be of use, if users were able to set their tr0lling threshold.
If someone tr0lls 50% of the time and is insightful the other 50%, for some that's far too much tr0lling, and for others it's fine. For some people 5% of the time trolling is too much. And even if this system wasn't perfect, being able to personally adjust the ratio would likely allow you to fix some if the issues.
Where I think a real problem lies is in someone else (most like an algorithm) setting that ceiling for you. That's a bit too authoritarian and heavy-handed for my taste.
And that's one reason I still come to /. - very few posts ever get deleted, and I can browse at -1 and mod stuff up there that needs it. I can set my own threshold to view at, and I can adjust how posts modded different ways are weighted. While there is a mod system, I've got control over how I interpret the mods, and what triggers a post to be hidden or visible. That's hugely important to me.
-------
Sigh. And then stupid shit like this: Filter error: Lameness filter encountered.
Apparently I said tr0lling too many times. Now let me go back and replace the os with 0s so the filter lets me post....and here I was saying nice things about /.
Wonderful. Then as I requested, please provide me with the location of the "leftists" headquarters so I can go and talk to them. I have a lot of questions.
Just because you can find a definition of something doesn't make it a real thing. Are you five?
And on top of that, "the political left" isn't a homogeneous thing either. "Left" doesn't even fully overlap with "Democrat" at this point in time! Your flamebait was well earned. I hope the leftists don't turn you into a gay SJW tonight. Sleep tight!
"Leftists" is the label that is made up. If it's not made up, please direct me to the nearest leftist headquarters so I can ask them what they stand for.
You provided no objective observations, just like I can't provide objective observations of the unicornists. They don't exist. Like leftists.
I'm somewhat confused how you don't understand this.
I almost agree, except that the pageviews fall off exponentially some amount of time after an article is posted. That means that the early modding and commenting has a disproportionate amount of eyeballs on it.
And the early modding and commenting tends to be a lot of the flailing wailing types, and less of the slow and thoughtful types. I occasionally go back to older articles on the weekend that I just looked at for a few minutes when they were posted, and there's often a noticeable shift in tone and conversation.
That's not broken, per-se, but it's at least not ideal. But in this day and age of twitter-speed, I'm not sure there's an alternate that wouldn't alienate most readers.
Except its not a straw man, its a factual observation, an uncomfortable truth.
What's factual about making up a label with no definition that nobody really adheres to and then slandering that label? I might as well tell you how shitty the unicornists are, and how they want to shut down any discussion of how horses are superior.
And more hilariously, there's no censorship on /.. Your flamebait being marked for what is proves nothing other than that one person thinks it's flamebait. (Well at least two, counting me.)
You've made a giant boogyman up of "leftists" and see their impacts everywhere. Yet they don't exist. Who is projecting?
One time on one forum that I kick myself forever for having forgotten, they did group shadowbanning for trolls. Big PSA not to feed the trolls, and then shadowbanned a whole lot of them.
What happened? The trolls essentially got their own forum, trolling each other, and it appeared to them that the PSA was amazingly effective. Normal users didn't reply to them, but other trolls did, and they did all sorts of trolling of each other. Because they still got replies, and didn't know who was shadowbanned and who wasn't, it took awhile for some of them to figure out what was going on. So underneath this quiet, sedate forum, a frothing troll fest was lurking, and if you were too much of a troll on the surface forums, you'd suddenly find yourself sucked into the cesspool.
The problem was that the cesspool was vastly more entertaining than the surface forums, which rather defeated the point.
No dude, they do not prove your point. Quite the opposite.
The "leftist" epithet is a very lame bit of virtue signaling on your part to try to both demean a strawman you've created to allow you to hate a large portion of the population and signal to "your tribe" that you're one of them.
It's flamebait through and through.
As much as you wish there were "leftists" out there to hate, the uncomfortable truth is that nobody is a "leftist". That's not a thing, nobody identifies as that, there isn't a "leftist" political party, and "leftist" doesn't have a creed or values.
So why would you talk about it like it's a thing? To stir up flames. I.E., to flamebait.
I've seen it many times - making up a strawman as a defensive reaction to avoid having to respond on the merits another group may have.
There are two major issues with /. modding. Or three. The first is that sockpuppeting still happens, although the random mod point distribution does help with that. The second is that it doesn't seem like many people metamoderate, and that system is broken and showing me unmoderated posts 3/4 of the time when I go anyway.
The last problem is that it seems that a lot of bad mods get done by the twitchy tweeters and redditors who dive into an article shortly after it's posted, and then hack and slash, close the tab, and move on. Over the next few hours, days and even weeks those mods get reversed into what seem more sensible mods, but it takes the thoughtful slow old folks some time to get to it.
During all that time, the modding is slowly going from frothing angst towards reasoned discussion, but the earlier people hit an article, the worse the moderation tends to be. I think if the metamodding was fixed and people actually took the time to do it, that would go away somewhat faster.
India and China have more than enough ability to make their own powerpacks for much less than Tesla is going to sell them.
And it's generally assumed that Tesla makes their own powerpacks for less than they sell them for too. The difference between the two values is what we call profit. Perhaps you meant
India and China have more than enough ability to make their own powerpacks for much less than Tesla makes them for.
Sure. But that's if you only compare direct energy generation prices, and ignore everything else.
Would it be cheaper per watt if my parent's little town made a field of solar panels than them putting them on their house? Absolutely. Will there be revenue sharing with my parents if the town does that once the panels are paid off? Not likely. Maybe taxes will stay flat for a few years. And that's if you can get half the town to vote for the project, and willing to let it be town owned and run rather than privatized.
Since that's not going to happen, my parents bought solar panels for the house. Granted it's only 9 months of extrapolation right now, but it looks like their ROI is going to be 5-7 years in the NE US. After that it's a profit maker for them.
Why wouldn't they make that investment? It gives them a bit of independence from the grid and will make them money in a relatively short period of time. They can get neither of those benefits by the local town building a large array. Which it wasn't going to do anyway.
What they did find was that the Federal law outlawing gambling was unconstitutional because of the way it was written, essentially forcing the states to ban gambling themselves.
It was even weirder than that. It forced the stats to unban gambling during a narrow window, and then closed that window for all states for all time.
It allowed states a window to opt out of a federal law, if they pushed through legislature to do it.
I'm more than happy seeing fucked up shit like that overturned. The justices pretty much said to congress, "If you want to ban it, do it right."
Yeah, I'm assuming the mummies are failing the driving tests when they go in, and nobody is noticing that they're mummies...
Or, you know, backup your database and practice your restores on a regular basis....
His ass. It's a really convenient place place to pull shit from, because it's so handy.
Shhhhhh...... he's "editing". Don't ruin it.
Launch went off mostly flawlessly, except for the non-unexpected live camera feed issues. I remain amazed that they're able to do a live feed up to space and back as it is, so I can't complain too much. Expecting perfection there is asking a bit much, I think.
If this rocket performs as expected, it really is the game-changer that SpaceX is designed it to be. They're already out-competing everyone on launch costs. If they can really do a 24 hr turnaround on the same rocket? Holy. Shit.
Musk is always late on his predictions, but goddamn does he keep eventually getting there. I'm really blown away by this, and I can't wait to see what comes next.
Well, the absolutely delicious irony is that if you were using an ad blocker, you'd be able to block that overlay. My guess is that the do-not-track disables some JS, and that's likely what's causing the issue, or you otherwise block JS from running.
But are you for phylactics or not? Inquiring minds want to know....