I have a 2 TB drive and I have used about 300 GB of it. So I am inclined to agree that for my purposes, 100 TB is not something I will need by 2025. I may need it by 20 or 30 years after that. After all, I never really thought I would need 300 GB. There are plenty of people who do need huge amounts of space. Some people like to play their media from their computers instead of from the DVD/Blueray. Some people like to illegally acquire movies and games. Some people like to collect porn.
This. The "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks so we can negotiate a plea bargain to avoid a real trial" methods of prosecutors in what passes for the modern criminal justice system is just sickening.
I agree. It makes me wonder. If they threaten you with thousands of years of imprisonment and millions in fines and you plead guilty to some small violation that you didn't do in order to avoid the possibility of all that punishment for the other crimes you didn't commit, can they then bring you up on charges of perjury for lying in court and saying you committed a crime when you did not?
First they introduce multiple clicks to get to the menu, now they are introducing single click to search. How inconsistent. Is this the law of conservation of clicks?
noun: vuln; plural noun: vulns
a vulnerability, especially one associated with computer security.
According to Google, this usage of the word vuln has not been used much since the 1840s. Get with the times people!
Apparently, computer viruses were a big thing back then.
Where is it a one click process to apply? Everywhere I have seen, it is a tedious process of filling in there forms because they don't just want a Word Doc. They have to have it in their format. Some places even make you take four or five hours out of your day to take tests. Yet they have no intention of hiring you, because it was all a front to get an H1b.
"market standard" is also in a lie because of the death spiral of wages for a given title. If you are in the upper end of your "wage band" for your position and you want a raise, HR will not allow it because it is outside of the norm. However, companies will usually get around this by making you a "manager" or "director" even if you have no reports. Now you make more money, but are doing the job description of the lower paying position. Because you, as one of the top earners for that position, have now left the position, the average for that position has gone down, and as one of the lower earning people in your new position, the average for that position also goes down. Win-win for HR. Now they can justify hiring for both positions at even lower salaries. The logical conclusion of this method of advancement is that everyone will have the title CEO, but will be doing everything from mopping the floors, to, well, running the company. meanwhile, the salary for all job positions will tend toward zero.
The people for which the H1B program were created no longer find it worthwhile to come here under that program. We used to pay competitive wages for the best of the best from other countries. Now we pay slave wages to whomever applies. Why should the best of the best come over here for slave wages? Fix the H1B program so that it pays industry standard wages for a select few individuals, perhaps a few thousand per year, and soon enough we will be attracting the best and brightest again. The best and brightest can't even get there foot in the door when the H1B specialization firms are grabbing up all available visas within a couple of days every year and supplying us with commodity unskilled labor that hundreds of thousands of people already in the U.S. are perfectly capable of doing.
How did she get a popup ad on facebook? I finally succumbed to getting a facebook account because that is how the big band I am in communicates. I have literally never had a popup ad while on facebook.
Facebook could literally add the clause "We may harvest your organs in situ at any time and sell your children into sexual slavery." and the number of new sign-ups would not decrease by iota.
If you are not careful, you absolutely can click on the X and count as a click through, because some of these scum sucking low lifes just put a picture of an X there and it is not really the close button. Sometimes you can tell because your windows theme is different and they have made a static picture of the standard close X. I'm sure plenty of people are fooled by that. Then there are all of the onClose exploits, which you can defeat with some javascript, but a small minority of people know how to do that.
Well, sure, an individual is entitled to privacy. A corporation is not. As an individual and and owner of several businesses I don't have problems with that.
If individuals are allowed to withhold caller ID, I should also be allowed to silently refuse calls from such people as well.
Then repeal the law and give it teeth. No exclusions for charities or politicians. if you don't want a call, you don't get a call, period. If a complaint is filed, the call will be traced back to find out who paid for it at the expense of the offending organization. Make a fine of $5,000 half of which is payable to the consumer.
Here, let me google that for you.
I don't know who Dillon Taylor is, but I guess we have to decide whether Hispanics are white people or not. It appears they are "the white man" when they shoot Trayvon, but they are a minority when they are unarmed and get shot.
Unarmed white kids are killed by police all over the country as well. Why is it we only get up in arms when it is a black kid? Why do we have to make everything about race?
See, that is the problem with Miranda. What you say can be used against you. Why can it not be used for you? The police should not be there to try to put you in jail. If you are innocent, the evidence they collect should be allowed to be used to keep you out of jail. Right now the way it works is they collect evidence for and against, and the prosecutor will simply not bring up the evidence which exonerates you. They do have to share that with your lawyer, but it is up to your lawyer to bring up the evidence which exonerates you. Basically the prosecutors train of thought is, "This guy is probably innocent, but I can probably get him convicted if I run the case in such and such a fashion". That is completely the wrong attitude.
If in the past, brand X has shocked you 1% of the time and brand Y has shocked you 10% of the time, you are going to be more cautious around brand Y. This is millions of years of evolution of pattern recognition skills we are talking about. You have to fix both sides of the issue. Make brand Y less prone to shock and over time, the electrician will trust it again.
That being said, stop and frisk is illegal and unconstitutional and needs to be abolished.
I know my rights. Part of the problem is that at least some part of the populace doesn't agree that we should have some of those rights. As long as there is any doubt, then the rights will begin to be taken away from us. Rights are a lot harder to get than to lose.
I have NEVER seen a civics class where how do behave during a police stop was anywhere on the curriculum.
That is because curriculums are always behind the times. In the past there was no need for this sort of education, because in the past police wouldn't stop you without cause. In fact, the information gleaned from a Civics class would probably inform you that such a stop would be illegal. Why should they educate you on how to behave in a situation which should never arise because it is illegal?
Just average it out. The new glass is (negative infinity + X)/2 times tougher. Or refactoring for properties of infinity, it is negative infinity times tougher, also known as infinity times weaker.
"UP TO two times tougher than competitive glass"
"survives drops UP TO 80 percent of the time"
Just meaningless weasel words.
It's not meaningless at all. It means exactly what it says: The glass is somewhere between negative infinity times and 2 times tougher than competitive glass. And it survives drops somewhere between 0 percent and 80 percent of the time.
So be sure and take those figures into consideration when considering buying the product.
That is certainly possible with some software. On other software, it is not so easy. For example, the latest Microsoft Office seems bound and determined to waste screen space, and in particular to waste it in a horizontal fashion. The big issue with office and other products lately is they want you to have a "unified view across platforms". This means, that since phones have such tiny screens and have to have huge ugly buttons and giant fonts to be remotely useful, now your desktop has to have huge ugly screen wasting buttons and giant fonts as well. It used to take 5 times as long to perform a task on a phone versus a tablet because of the limitations of working on a small screen with limited input options. They have rectified this problem by making it take just as long on a desktop computer as it does on a phone.
Back in the 90s our company first got 17" desktop monitors. The size and resolution allowed us to work efficiently and without need of more screen real estate even in a single monitor system. Now, we have dual monitors, one of which is usually 24" or larger, and there is not enough screen real estate. This is due to application real estate bloat and waste.
Square doesn't help me any. 16 high by 9 wide suits my needs reasonably well. Almost as good as the Apple monitors we had back in the 90s for publishing applications.
Oh, God, I said something positive about Apple.
At least Helium is something that the U.S. has a natural resource that somebody else wants.
I doubt the Arab nations are as freaked out about depleting their oil as we are about depleting our helium.
This kind of reminds me about a time at work where we had 20 terabytes on a SAN, most of which was unused. One of my projects was using about 300 GB on the SAN and IT was freaking out about it. "The storage costs $10,000 per terabyte!". My thinking is that it costs $10,000 per terabyte to leave it sitting there unused as well. What did we buy the system for if we are not going to let people use it?
Exactly. In English, "Swap Foo for Bar" means you start with Foo and replace it with Bar.
Which English? When I see "Swap Foo for Bar" that means wherever I see Bar, I replace it with Foo.
When I see "Swap Foo with Bar" that means wherever I see Foo, I replace it with Bar.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a 2 TB drive and I have used about 300 GB of it. So I am inclined to agree that for my purposes, 100 TB is not something I will need by 2025. I may need it by 20 or 30 years after that. After all, I never really thought I would need 300 GB. There are plenty of people who do need huge amounts of space. Some people like to play their media from their computers instead of from the DVD/Blueray. Some people like to illegally acquire movies and games. Some people like to collect porn.
What kind of computer system does Hidalgo county have that 14,000 login attempts would even register as a blip on the CPU?
This. The "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks so we can negotiate a plea bargain to avoid a real trial" methods of prosecutors in what passes for the modern criminal justice system is just sickening.
I agree. It makes me wonder. If they threaten you with thousands of years of imprisonment and millions in fines and you plead guilty to some small violation that you didn't do in order to avoid the possibility of all that punishment for the other crimes you didn't commit, can they then bring you up on charges of perjury for lying in court and saying you committed a crime when you did not?
First they introduce multiple clicks to get to the menu, now they are introducing single click to search. How inconsistent. Is this the law of conservation of clicks?
noun: vuln; plural noun: vulns
a vulnerability, especially one associated with computer security.
According to Google, this usage of the word vuln has not been used much since the 1840s. Get with the times people!
Apparently, computer viruses were a big thing back then.
Where is it a one click process to apply? Everywhere I have seen, it is a tedious process of filling in there forms because they don't just want a Word Doc. They have to have it in their format. Some places even make you take four or five hours out of your day to take tests. Yet they have no intention of hiring you, because it was all a front to get an H1b.
"market standard" is also in a lie because of the death spiral of wages for a given title. If you are in the upper end of your "wage band" for your position and you want a raise, HR will not allow it because it is outside of the norm. However, companies will usually get around this by making you a "manager" or "director" even if you have no reports. Now you make more money, but are doing the job description of the lower paying position. Because you, as one of the top earners for that position, have now left the position, the average for that position has gone down, and as one of the lower earning people in your new position, the average for that position also goes down. Win-win for HR. Now they can justify hiring for both positions at even lower salaries. The logical conclusion of this method of advancement is that everyone will have the title CEO, but will be doing everything from mopping the floors, to, well, running the company. meanwhile, the salary for all job positions will tend toward zero.
The people for which the H1B program were created no longer find it worthwhile to come here under that program. We used to pay competitive wages for the best of the best from other countries. Now we pay slave wages to whomever applies. Why should the best of the best come over here for slave wages? Fix the H1B program so that it pays industry standard wages for a select few individuals, perhaps a few thousand per year, and soon enough we will be attracting the best and brightest again. The best and brightest can't even get there foot in the door when the H1B specialization firms are grabbing up all available visas within a couple of days every year and supplying us with commodity unskilled labor that hundreds of thousands of people already in the U.S. are perfectly capable of doing.
How did she get a popup ad on facebook? I finally succumbed to getting a facebook account because that is how the big band I am in communicates. I have literally never had a popup ad while on facebook.
Facebook could literally add the clause "We may harvest your organs in situ at any time and sell your children into sexual slavery." and the number of new sign-ups would not decrease by iota.
If you are not careful, you absolutely can click on the X and count as a click through, because some of these scum sucking low lifes just put a picture of an X there and it is not really the close button. Sometimes you can tell because your windows theme is different and they have made a static picture of the standard close X. I'm sure plenty of people are fooled by that. Then there are all of the onClose exploits, which you can defeat with some javascript, but a small minority of people know how to do that.
Well, sure, an individual is entitled to privacy. A corporation is not. As an individual and and owner of several businesses I don't have problems with that.
If individuals are allowed to withhold caller ID, I should also be allowed to silently refuse calls from such people as well.
Then repeal the law and give it teeth. No exclusions for charities or politicians. if you don't want a call, you don't get a call, period. If a complaint is filed, the call will be traced back to find out who paid for it at the expense of the offending organization. Make a fine of $5,000 half of which is payable to the consumer.
Here, let me google that for you.
I don't know who Dillon Taylor is, but I guess we have to decide whether Hispanics are white people or not. It appears they are "the white man" when they shoot Trayvon, but they are a minority when they are unarmed and get shot.
Unarmed white kids are killed by police all over the country as well. Why is it we only get up in arms when it is a black kid? Why do we have to make everything about race?
See, that is the problem with Miranda. What you say can be used against you. Why can it not be used for you? The police should not be there to try to put you in jail. If you are innocent, the evidence they collect should be allowed to be used to keep you out of jail. Right now the way it works is they collect evidence for and against, and the prosecutor will simply not bring up the evidence which exonerates you. They do have to share that with your lawyer, but it is up to your lawyer to bring up the evidence which exonerates you. Basically the prosecutors train of thought is, "This guy is probably innocent, but I can probably get him convicted if I run the case in such and such a fashion". That is completely the wrong attitude.
If in the past, brand X has shocked you 1% of the time and brand Y has shocked you 10% of the time, you are going to be more cautious around brand Y. This is millions of years of evolution of pattern recognition skills we are talking about. You have to fix both sides of the issue. Make brand Y less prone to shock and over time, the electrician will trust it again.
That being said, stop and frisk is illegal and unconstitutional and needs to be abolished.
I know my rights. Part of the problem is that at least some part of the populace doesn't agree that we should have some of those rights. As long as there is any doubt, then the rights will begin to be taken away from us. Rights are a lot harder to get than to lose.
I have NEVER seen a civics class where how do behave during a police stop was anywhere on the curriculum.
That is because curriculums are always behind the times. In the past there was no need for this sort of education, because in the past police wouldn't stop you without cause. In fact, the information gleaned from a Civics class would probably inform you that such a stop would be illegal. Why should they educate you on how to behave in a situation which should never arise because it is illegal?
Just average it out. The new glass is (negative infinity + X)/2 times tougher. Or refactoring for properties of infinity, it is negative infinity times tougher, also known as infinity times weaker.
"UP TO two times tougher than competitive glass" "survives drops UP TO 80 percent of the time"
Just meaningless weasel words.
It's not meaningless at all. It means exactly what it says: The glass is somewhere between negative infinity times and 2 times tougher than competitive glass. And it survives drops somewhere between 0 percent and 80 percent of the time.
So be sure and take those figures into consideration when considering buying the product.
That is certainly possible with some software. On other software, it is not so easy. For example, the latest Microsoft Office seems bound and determined to waste screen space, and in particular to waste it in a horizontal fashion. The big issue with office and other products lately is they want you to have a "unified view across platforms". This means, that since phones have such tiny screens and have to have huge ugly buttons and giant fonts to be remotely useful, now your desktop has to have huge ugly screen wasting buttons and giant fonts as well. It used to take 5 times as long to perform a task on a phone versus a tablet because of the limitations of working on a small screen with limited input options. They have rectified this problem by making it take just as long on a desktop computer as it does on a phone.
Back in the 90s our company first got 17" desktop monitors. The size and resolution allowed us to work efficiently and without need of more screen real estate even in a single monitor system. Now, we have dual monitors, one of which is usually 24" or larger, and there is not enough screen real estate. This is due to application real estate bloat and waste.
Square doesn't help me any. 16 high by 9 wide suits my needs reasonably well. Almost as good as the Apple monitors we had back in the 90s for publishing applications.
Oh, God, I said something positive about Apple.
At least Helium is something that the U.S. has a natural resource that somebody else wants.
I doubt the Arab nations are as freaked out about depleting their oil as we are about depleting our helium.
This kind of reminds me about a time at work where we had 20 terabytes on a SAN, most of which was unused. One of my projects was using about 300 GB on the SAN and IT was freaking out about it. "The storage costs $10,000 per terabyte!". My thinking is that it costs $10,000 per terabyte to leave it sitting there unused as well. What did we buy the system for if we are not going to let people use it?
Exactly. In English, "Swap Foo for Bar" means you start with Foo and replace it with Bar.
Which English? When I see "Swap Foo for Bar" that means wherever I see Bar, I replace it with Foo.
When I see "Swap Foo with Bar" that means wherever I see Foo, I replace it with Bar.