So tell me, can these "kids" be 17yr olds or college students that Facebook/Microsoft/any other tech machine imports and then pays for school on, allowing them to work and subsequently apply for a VISA?
In other words, why are the tech cartels chiming in so quickly in response to this? This has to be a back door they are using to displace Americans workers under the imaginary "shortage" of skilled workers. Just like the real reason a Washington court blocked the travel ban was that it interfered with Tech companies ability to illicitly staff from a number of the affected nations. That isn't a conspiracy theory, it is the rationale the judge wrote in his ruling.
Don't forget people just leaving the TV on while they go about other activities in the house or even to go to sleep at night. In 8hrs of TV play time a house wife might WATCH 5mins of TV.
"On average, American adults watch five hours and four minutes of television per day."
I'm highly skeptical of this statistic, especially if you control for the retired/elderly/unemployed. Not to mention controlling for the biggest consumer, people who leave the TV on whether they are watching it or not. We put the TV on for noise when we go to sleep and definitely aren't the only ones, that is 8hrs a day that nobody is really watching TV.
But if I watch 16hrs of binge TV on Sat/Sun that is an average of 2.2hrs/day without any other watching at all. If you follow sports that is at least another 0.75hrs/day.
What does education have to do with a subjective measure of enjoyment from different methods of consuming television? Seems like a pretty giant leap. It also isn't a statistically significant study with only one program and two tiny groups of watchers.
There is nothing scientific about a sample set of one show and a mere 51 students that makes any sort of conclusion, let alone sweeping conclusions about all watchers and shows. The anecdotal experience of anyone who consumes television is more significant than this study.
Yes, but all the systems the GP mentioned are also robust Oracle is just well known and an easy sell in Enterprise. It's like the old "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" mantra.
"on the server. They've fixed most of the major issues. You still have to reboot them for no good reason, but with load balancing that's not really an issue."
The biggest issue is that it's a less capable platform with more overhead and no upside except where it supports windows desktops. Nobody uses SQL server, IIS, or SharePoint because they are the best answer to their problems, they use them because of interaction with other products in the windows ecosystem (including things produced by windows focused developers). Without the windows desktop there won't be new generations of developers and admins who took the easy path of developing and learning on the windows platform their desktop runs on. Also without the windows desktop, you have no AD servers, without AD servers the rest of it becomes a major headache and platform doesn't make sense.
Not at work and for gaming it hasn't. A full keyboard, mouse, and multiple good sized monitors isn't going away. It isn't only the interface, larger components will always have more speed and capacity than smaller components and there will always be those who need that difference. Developers tend to blow the gains from advances to gain easier, lazier, and more rapid development rather than letting them float down to the users in the form of increased performance.
Not in business. The desktop (or usually laptop now) is still very real and really the only reason windows persists. There is less push on this front because in any organization with separate windows and *nix resources the *nix resources don't have to deal with nonsense related to individual users and most like it that way.
"People who actually adhere to Christian teachings believe their highest command is to love others as they love themselves."
Unless they are women, homosexuals, Satanists, peoples of conflicting denominations, etc. It's actually fascinating watching this at work. Of course the "actually adhere to Christian teachings" part is the automatic out to point at any Christians doing something you disagree with or looks bad and suggest they aren't "real Christians." This is a key part of how you not only dodge their taint but maintain the delusion that your massive majority is somehow a repressed minority or generate an excuse to persecute pretty much anyone.
"which is where you get many of the cut throat business types that crush thousands of people financially to get ahead unfairly and unethically and then create a charitable foundation at 55 because they fell like the shit that they actually are and want to feel better about themselves and all the bad things they have done."
You do know almost all of the people who fit this description are Christians right? The "Do unto others" philosophy is even adopted by large corporations in a common field to allow collusion between key players on policies and create the effects of collusion and monopoly with needing to meet illegally.
"Atheists, hedonists and agnostics can be altruistic, but they have no motivation beyond their own self interest to feel good about themselves"
Self-interest yes, to feel good about themselves is not always accurate. These people are still part of groups and when one sees oneself as part of a group the definition of "self" gets extended to one degree or another to that group. Atheists engage in humanitarian work because they are all human.
"Buddhism teaches detachment from the world"
Buddhism isn't a religion it is a philosophy, and it doesn't teach detachment it teaches oneness with all life so that suffering in Haiti is akin to having a broken leg.
Not everyone needs unquestionable orders from a sky fairy to act in the interests of others but everyone sane ultimately acts out of self-interest. Believing things will be better or worse for you on Earth or the afterlife is still self-interest. Doing things for family (especially those descended from you) is self-interest. Working to save the business that employs you or toward the interests of your nation is self-interest, and working towards the benefit of humankind is self-interest. Even working toward reducing the suffering of other creatures you believe are intelligent is self-interest. In all of these cases you're working toward your own benefit or those with common ground you share.
Agreed. And there is no moral win for Google here. If there was actually an NDA it implies Google knew full well what they were doing was wrong at the time they were doing it and were trying to prevent it from getting out. If there wasn't an NDA and Google is trying to allege one it suggests that they know what they were doing was wrong. Either implies an attempt to suppress the reporting of something.
If I hacked someone to steal financial data for fun and profit that should have different consequences than hacking someone to obtain information for the general good such as revealing corruption in politics or an undercover genocide. If I reveal that your bank is ripping you off, you should consider the content of what I revealed independent of whether I was going for a joyride in bank data and selling it for a profit when I turned up the information that told you this. The bank doesn't suddenly become more or less wrong because of how right or wrong the hacker was. There isn't a limited amount of blame where assigning to one party reduces the amount left for the other.
And yes, I agree this also applies with a highly popularized hack of a certain U.S. political party and public figure allegedly perpetrated by Russians (with essentially no real disclosed evidence to date). It doesn't suddenly become okay to toss out valid logic when it gets in the way of demonizing someone you strongly dislike and oppose.
"As a disclaimer, I happen to think that Google is no different than most other multinational corporations -- that is, they are as evil as it is profitable to be."
I agree with this sentiment and it applies to all large corporations, multi-national or not. That is why we should never consider "trust" or "ethics" with regard to large entities (including governments) and just assume any and all position and power they have can and will be abused. All decisions with regard to regulations and legal powers should be based on this assumption.
Who cares if there was an NDA or not. That issue is a red herring to distract you from the content of what was revealed. It isn't suddenly okay to do bad things because you'd gagged all the witnesses.
"They didn't suddenly change their entire personalities just because the company got bigger "
Yes and no. They didn't suddenly become different people but their behavior and outlook changes. All people are basically selfish and abusive underneath the hood the only thing that changes is circumstances and perspective.
Strictly speaking this is true but hormonally speaking it is better to have periodic higher carbohydrate intake. The anabolic diet is a good example, low to no carbs and red meat through the week then swap things with lower fat and higher carb levels on the weekend.
It's too bad Perl 5 has fallen on the popularity scale. Node was better for async code about five years ago but now Perl has some amazing modern async systems and if written properly is lightning fast. Every time one of these new upstart languages has a feature or advantage Perl just absorbs it. Sadly, most of the Perl code you actually see is written because it is the lowest common denominator which means not using any new functionality and sometimes not even having access to CPAN. Non-blocking async code with websockets scaling to tens or even hundreds of thousands of connections, no problem for actual modern perl. Perl has been around for so long though that someone trying to pick up Perl is going to find a lot of old cruft out there showing old ways. Hell there is even a book called "Modern Perl" that is hopelessly ridiculously outdated.
JavaScript isn't even a real language. Sounds like you've written in other languages... be honest, if written without a style convention Perl can look ugly but JavaScript actually IS ugly. You might get the job done in JS but you feel a little dirty afterwards.
It was a troll, surely you must have caught that when he suggested replacing C code with JavaScript... It's bad enough that people have wedged Java code into the domain of C. A scripted language like Perl or Ruby can actually be used to achieve similar performance for some use cases by someone who has a little understanding of how those languages are actually implemented and gain some advantages in terms of development speed and easier integration with the systems side scripting and applications that tend to be developed in house. Java is just a POS that corporations bought into because it was backed by a large commercial effort and JavaScript is just nasty.
Rust is actually a decent language that can be used for serious coding for one. Also, wake up grandpa, efforts are being made to bring http closer and closer to the system, even so far as pushing the websocket model so that the current realm of java and now javascript programming is more and more the system level.
It's a sad world, granted, but more and more it is the real world.
Sadly true. Compelling enough that my gut says its true definitely doesn't meet my definition of reasonable. You can find numerical "evidence" of just about anything with a confirmation bias.
Numbers are full of coincidental patterns and people get confused about statistics. The probability of any given pattern being present is independent of any other patterns found not grouped. Just as each spin of a perfect roulette wheel has the same odds of landing on a given number, even if it just landed on the same number six times in a row, the odds of it hitting that number again are exactly the same as any other roulette wheel on the next spin.
These problems have creeped into our legal system in many places. For instance the same flawed logic is used in DEA busts where common place chemicals and tools are combined with the incorrect idea that having a number of them gives a very high probability of being guilty and in some cases even constitutes a burden of proof. The reality is that your probability of having each item has no impact on the probability you would have the others, it only logically follows that someone who is guilty is likely to have those chemicals and tools it does not follow that someone who has those chemicals and tools is likely guilty. People have trouble understanding that distinction and it is unreasonable to expect a judges and jury members to consistently do so.
You might find the ladies prefer if you fuck at a somewhat slower pace than that... they might not object if you only brought it down to Hitachi ultrasonic rates though...
Slashdot Mirror
So tell me, can these "kids" be 17yr olds or college students that Facebook/Microsoft/any other tech machine imports and then pays for school on, allowing them to work and subsequently apply for a VISA?
In other words, why are the tech cartels chiming in so quickly in response to this? This has to be a back door they are using to displace Americans workers under the imaginary "shortage" of skilled workers. Just like the real reason a Washington court blocked the travel ban was that it interfered with Tech companies ability to illicitly staff from a number of the affected nations. That isn't a conspiracy theory, it is the rationale the judge wrote in his ruling.
I fail to see the problem here. The fact tech companies immediately chimed in upset suggests this was another illicit H1B backdoor stratagem.
You need some serious help with reading comprehension. That is pretty much the opposite of what I said in the post you are responding to.
Don't forget people just leaving the TV on while they go about other activities in the house or even to go to sleep at night. In 8hrs of TV play time a house wife might WATCH 5mins of TV.
"On average, American adults watch five hours and four minutes of television per day."
I'm highly skeptical of this statistic, especially if you control for the retired/elderly/unemployed. Not to mention controlling for the biggest consumer, people who leave the TV on whether they are watching it or not. We put the TV on for noise when we go to sleep and definitely aren't the only ones, that is 8hrs a day that nobody is really watching TV.
But if I watch 16hrs of binge TV on Sat/Sun that is an average of 2.2hrs/day without any other watching at all. If you follow sports that is at least another 0.75hrs/day.
What does education have to do with a subjective measure of enjoyment from different methods of consuming television? Seems like a pretty giant leap. It also isn't a statistically significant study with only one program and two tiny groups of watchers.
There is nothing scientific about a sample set of one show and a mere 51 students that makes any sort of conclusion, let alone sweeping conclusions about all watchers and shows. The anecdotal experience of anyone who consumes television is more significant than this study.
That binge watching "BBC Cold War-era drama 'The Game'" makes it less enjoyable.
Some shows lend themselves to binge watching more than others. Especially shows that progress the main story arc little from episode to episode.
Yes, but all the systems the GP mentioned are also robust Oracle is just well known and an easy sell in Enterprise. It's like the old "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" mantra.
"on the server. They've fixed most of the major issues. You still have to reboot them for no good reason, but with load balancing that's not really an issue."
The biggest issue is that it's a less capable platform with more overhead and no upside except where it supports windows desktops. Nobody uses SQL server, IIS, or SharePoint because they are the best answer to their problems, they use them because of interaction with other products in the windows ecosystem (including things produced by windows focused developers). Without the windows desktop there won't be new generations of developers and admins who took the easy path of developing and learning on the windows platform their desktop runs on. Also without the windows desktop, you have no AD servers, without AD servers the rest of it becomes a major headache and platform doesn't make sense.
Not at work and for gaming it hasn't. A full keyboard, mouse, and multiple good sized monitors isn't going away. It isn't only the interface, larger components will always have more speed and capacity than smaller components and there will always be those who need that difference. Developers tend to blow the gains from advances to gain easier, lazier, and more rapid development rather than letting them float down to the users in the form of increased performance.
Not in business. The desktop (or usually laptop now) is still very real and really the only reason windows persists. There is less push on this front because in any organization with separate windows and *nix resources the *nix resources don't have to deal with nonsense related to individual users and most like it that way.
"People who actually adhere to Christian teachings believe their highest command is to love others as they love themselves."
Unless they are women, homosexuals, Satanists, peoples of conflicting denominations, etc. It's actually fascinating watching this at work. Of course the "actually adhere to Christian teachings" part is the automatic out to point at any Christians doing something you disagree with or looks bad and suggest they aren't "real Christians." This is a key part of how you not only dodge their taint but maintain the delusion that your massive majority is somehow a repressed minority or generate an excuse to persecute pretty much anyone.
"which is where you get many of the cut throat business types that crush thousands of people financially to get ahead unfairly and unethically and then create a charitable foundation at 55 because they fell like the shit that they actually are and want to feel better about themselves and all the bad things they have done."
You do know almost all of the people who fit this description are Christians right? The "Do unto others" philosophy is even adopted by large corporations in a common field to allow collusion between key players on policies and create the effects of collusion and monopoly with needing to meet illegally.
"Atheists, hedonists and agnostics can be altruistic, but they have no motivation beyond their own self interest to feel good about themselves"
Self-interest yes, to feel good about themselves is not always accurate. These people are still part of groups and when one sees oneself as part of a group the definition of "self" gets extended to one degree or another to that group. Atheists engage in humanitarian work because they are all human.
"Buddhism teaches detachment from the world"
Buddhism isn't a religion it is a philosophy, and it doesn't teach detachment it teaches oneness with all life so that suffering in Haiti is akin to having a broken leg.
Not everyone needs unquestionable orders from a sky fairy to act in the interests of others but everyone sane ultimately acts out of self-interest. Believing things will be better or worse for you on Earth or the afterlife is still self-interest. Doing things for family (especially those descended from you) is self-interest. Working to save the business that employs you or toward the interests of your nation is self-interest, and working towards the benefit of humankind is self-interest. Even working toward reducing the suffering of other creatures you believe are intelligent is self-interest. In all of these cases you're working toward your own benefit or those with common ground you share.
Agreed. And there is no moral win for Google here. If there was actually an NDA it implies Google knew full well what they were doing was wrong at the time they were doing it and were trying to prevent it from getting out. If there wasn't an NDA and Google is trying to allege one it suggests that they know what they were doing was wrong. Either implies an attempt to suppress the reporting of something.
If I hacked someone to steal financial data for fun and profit that should have different consequences than hacking someone to obtain information for the general good such as revealing corruption in politics or an undercover genocide. If I reveal that your bank is ripping you off, you should consider the content of what I revealed independent of whether I was going for a joyride in bank data and selling it for a profit when I turned up the information that told you this. The bank doesn't suddenly become more or less wrong because of how right or wrong the hacker was. There isn't a limited amount of blame where assigning to one party reduces the amount left for the other.
And yes, I agree this also applies with a highly popularized hack of a certain U.S. political party and public figure allegedly perpetrated by Russians (with essentially no real disclosed evidence to date). It doesn't suddenly become okay to toss out valid logic when it gets in the way of demonizing someone you strongly dislike and oppose.
"As a disclaimer, I happen to think that Google is no different than most other multinational corporations -- that is, they are as evil as it is profitable to be."
I agree with this sentiment and it applies to all large corporations, multi-national or not. That is why we should never consider "trust" or "ethics" with regard to large entities (including governments) and just assume any and all position and power they have can and will be abused. All decisions with regard to regulations and legal powers should be based on this assumption.
Who cares if there was an NDA or not. That issue is a red herring to distract you from the content of what was revealed. It isn't suddenly okay to do bad things because you'd gagged all the witnesses.
"They didn't suddenly change their entire personalities just because the company got bigger "
Yes and no. They didn't suddenly become different people but their behavior and outlook changes. All people are basically selfish and abusive underneath the hood the only thing that changes is circumstances and perspective.
Strictly speaking this is true but hormonally speaking it is better to have periodic higher carbohydrate intake. The anabolic diet is a good example, low to no carbs and red meat through the week then swap things with lower fat and higher carb levels on the weekend.
It's too bad Perl 5 has fallen on the popularity scale. Node was better for async code about five years ago but now Perl has some amazing modern async systems and if written properly is lightning fast. Every time one of these new upstart languages has a feature or advantage Perl just absorbs it. Sadly, most of the Perl code you actually see is written because it is the lowest common denominator which means not using any new functionality and sometimes not even having access to CPAN. Non-blocking async code with websockets scaling to tens or even hundreds of thousands of connections, no problem for actual modern perl. Perl has been around for so long though that someone trying to pick up Perl is going to find a lot of old cruft out there showing old ways. Hell there is even a book called "Modern Perl" that is hopelessly ridiculously outdated.
JavaScript isn't even a real language. Sounds like you've written in other languages... be honest, if written without a style convention Perl can look ugly but JavaScript actually IS ugly. You might get the job done in JS but you feel a little dirty afterwards.
It was a troll, surely you must have caught that when he suggested replacing C code with JavaScript... It's bad enough that people have wedged Java code into the domain of C. A scripted language like Perl or Ruby can actually be used to achieve similar performance for some use cases by someone who has a little understanding of how those languages are actually implemented and gain some advantages in terms of development speed and easier integration with the systems side scripting and applications that tend to be developed in house. Java is just a POS that corporations bought into because it was backed by a large commercial effort and JavaScript is just nasty.
Rust is actually a decent language that can be used for serious coding for one. Also, wake up grandpa, efforts are being made to bring http closer and closer to the system, even so far as pushing the websocket model so that the current realm of java and now javascript programming is more and more the system level.
It's a sad world, granted, but more and more it is the real world.
Sadly true. Compelling enough that my gut says its true definitely doesn't meet my definition of reasonable. You can find numerical "evidence" of just about anything with a confirmation bias.
Numbers are full of coincidental patterns and people get confused about statistics. The probability of any given pattern being present is independent of any other patterns found not grouped. Just as each spin of a perfect roulette wheel has the same odds of landing on a given number, even if it just landed on the same number six times in a row, the odds of it hitting that number again are exactly the same as any other roulette wheel on the next spin.
These problems have creeped into our legal system in many places. For instance the same flawed logic is used in DEA busts where common place chemicals and tools are combined with the incorrect idea that having a number of them gives a very high probability of being guilty and in some cases even constitutes a burden of proof. The reality is that your probability of having each item has no impact on the probability you would have the others, it only logically follows that someone who is guilty is likely to have those chemicals and tools it does not follow that someone who has those chemicals and tools is likely guilty. People have trouble understanding that distinction and it is unreasonable to expect a judges and jury members to consistently do so.
You might find the ladies prefer if you fuck at a somewhat slower pace than that... they might not object if you only brought it down to Hitachi ultrasonic rates though...
This. Mod up.