So... being a minority, by definition, means you are underserved?
No "minority" here does not mean all minorities. It is a PC euphemism for the races with low academic achievement in the US. More intelligent minorities such as Chinese, South Asian immigrants or Jews are explicitly excluded.
This sort of "words no longer mean anything" crap has completely swamped the entire educational establishment.
Better to make up a new nonsense word like "underserved", than to pervert an old one like "minority" which had a useful meaning once.
1. Graduate High School. (not college, just high school) 2. Stay out of prison. (don't commit felonies) 3. Don't have a child out of wedlock (use a rubber or learn to like blowjobs)
Sorry, but correlation is not cause. All three of those are highly correlated to IQ (at least in the USA). All that correlates to health, family support levels, and numerous other factors.
Those three are good advice, but will not make you smarter. If a person is destined to fail those criteria, and you - pay them to finish school - give them a good lawyer and support to stay out of prison - give them a contraceptive implant. there is no evidence you will change their long-term outcome. And that sort of thing has been tried many times, since the 1960s with programs like Headstart.
If you are going to bring up the patriarchy, what about MALE- FEMALE electrical connectors?
Have you noticed how power is always take by the male from the female? Never the other way around. This is sexist enough, without the conspicuous absence of the 31 other genders being represented.
While passive gay or lesbian cables and adaptors exist for USB, they are illegal when power is involved. Three-way power adaptors must always be one male and two female. Electrical engineers are almost all male. Coincidence?
Although California's almonds get a lot of the bad press, depleting the desert aquifers to grow hay and corn to feed slaughter cattle is similarly wasteful.
Having lived in both the UK and US with an oriental parent who spoke broken English, I have no problem understanding anyone speaking English anywhere in the world, except lower-class black Americans.
That'd be a variant of a Southern accent? If you go to the rural South, you'll hear white folk talkin' same way. But I do remember in Chicago really struggling, embarrassed, to understand the working-class black accents, while they understood my foreign accent perfectly. Just like in rural Ireland.
If they ahve Dollars, they probably speak American. That is not English by a very long mile.
Americans are a lot closer to standard English than some of the rural British accents. Even a working-class Glasgow or Newcastle accent is a lot tougher than 90% of Americans to understand for me.
It's called the Scunthorpe problem because it has the word "cunt" in it, and that prevented the good people of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England from creating accounts with AOL back when that was relevant.
There, saved y'all a click, since that's probably the only thing you were interested in about this story anyway.
No, it's not race it's poverty. Non-whites are far more likely to live in poverty in this country and
First, I'm talking about the differences in homicide rates between developed countries, and the statistical correlates, not absolute causes. I was not touching the subject of why blacks have higher homicide rates. It matters for the sake of comparison only that they do. Poverty is certainly a factor. However, in the case of the United States, poor non-blacks still have much lower homicide rates than poor blacks.
the fact that poverty breeds crime is about as close as you get to a sociological fact.
Inequality, not absolute poverty. Plenty of countries have high poverty and low crime.
What about Mozambique? Sub-Saharan Africa, much deeper poverty than any US inner city, lots of guns still around since the civil war ended. And it has a homicide rate lower than the U.S. Nobody is suggesting there is a simple answer to the whole problem.
There is no magic "crime gene" that makes non-whites more crime prone in this country.
No kidding. That is a silly comment. Most heritable traits are polygenic - including height, IQ, aggression, impulsiveness.
Do you think the high crime difference between men and women is 100% cultural and not due to biological differences?
The problem is that we have a homicide rate several times higher then the next closest first world countries.
Looking at the numbers, the elephant in the room as the biggest factor is race, not guns.
If you do a more fair comparison, the homicide rates of whites in the US to other developed countries, the difference is much less, but the US whites (males of course) have "only" double the homicide rate.
Bear in mind that in all cases, random mass-killing by assault rifle, truck, or any weapon, make up only a tiny proportion of homicides. So the "vehicle attack" argument is almost irrelevant to the broader question of gun homicide.
It is just a "meta study", grabbing other people's real work and aggregating it. I do not see any effort to go beyond correlation. Cobbled together because of the pressure to publish, and make conference presentations.
The article, and others googled, are very thin on detail.
(Orion could have been also, back when we didnt think twice about testing nukes all over the place..
It is actually not as bad as you'd think,
wikipedia: "From many smaller detonations combined the fallout for the entire launch of a 6,000 short ton (5,500 metric ton) Orion is equal to the detonation of a typical 10 megaton (40 petajoule) nuclear weapon as an airburst, therefore most of its fallout would be the comparatively dilute delayed fallout. Assuming the use of nuclear explosives with a high portion of total yield from fission, it would produce a combined fallout total similar to the surface burst yield of the Mike shot of Operation Ivy, a 10.4 Megaton device detonated in 1952. "
Large numbers could be launched at sea with no significant effect on global background radiation levels. Its not like ground-bursts.
Better if we could just launch a few, carrying the materials for an orbital ring.
There are better ways to get thrust using nuclear power than what Project Orion wanted to do, and the US was actually pursuing some of them. Project Rover took place at Los Alamos for about 2 decades starting in the 50s, and showed that nuclear thermal rockets were possible and had a lot of potential.
Nuclear thermal is useful, but only around double the specific impulse of chemical. Not revolutionary, but would be handy for getting to Mars and back. It was considered for Apollo third stage, but not worth the effort back then.
Orion's nuclear pulse drive on the other hand, is game-changing, with an order of magnitude better specific impulse, and massive thrust. You could send sci-fi sized spaceships with hundreds of crew to the outer planets and back. And we could have started building it in the 1960s. No fancy materials needed, just a lot of steel, like a battleship. The biggest task would be the economical mass production of the propulsion charges. I'd buy a ticket to watch the launch - from a safe distance upwind:-)
Rofl... The electric ferries safe 80% of their fuel costs...
Good on them. Maybe it even covers the capital cost with no subsidy needed. No need to be so smug. I don't claim to know the cost of diesel vs electricity in Norway, though expect the hydroelectric is cheap. I mean people there are willing to buy the "eco friendly" even when it costs *more*. Heck, we all are. Just more so in Norway.
If you read that thinking about cars, remember that battery are heavy, and that weight is much more a problem for a car than for a boat.
True, but typically range is much more of a problem for a ship. Short ferry crossings are the place to start. Norway feels terribly guilty about getting filthy rich from selling oil, so are willing to burn money to feel green. And those fjords need a lot of ferries.
Yep, all phones look the same now. Boring. I remember when Nokia alone made 20 different phones at once, ranging from square to banana shape. Slide-out keyboards, clamshells, circular keypads,...
Slashdot Mirror
So ... being a minority, by definition, means you are underserved?
No "minority" here does not mean all minorities. It is a PC euphemism for the races with low academic achievement in the US.
More intelligent minorities such as Chinese, South Asian immigrants or Jews are explicitly excluded.
This sort of "words no longer mean anything" crap has completely swamped the entire educational establishment.
Better to make up a new nonsense word like "underserved", than to pervert an old one like "minority" which had a useful meaning once.
1. Graduate High School. (not college, just high school)
2. Stay out of prison. (don't commit felonies)
3. Don't have a child out of wedlock (use a rubber or learn to like blowjobs)
Sorry, but correlation is not cause. All three of those are highly correlated to IQ (at least in the USA).
All that correlates to health, family support levels, and numerous other factors.
Those three are good advice, but will not make you smarter.
If a person is destined to fail those criteria, and you
- pay them to finish school
- give them a good lawyer and support to stay out of prison
- give them a contraceptive implant.
there is no evidence you will change their long-term outcome.
And that sort of thing has been tried many times, since the 1960s with programs like Headstart.
Not a racist, just a troll. Please don't encourage them by replying.
If you are going to bring up the patriarchy, what about MALE- FEMALE electrical connectors?
Have you noticed how power is always take by the male from the female? Never the other way around.
This is sexist enough, without the conspicuous absence of the 31 other genders being represented.
While passive gay or lesbian cables and adaptors exist for USB, they are illegal when power is involved.
Three-way power adaptors must always be one male and two female. Electrical engineers are almost all male. Coincidence?
> Death metal helps
"Cradle of Filth" ?
Richmond did some great presentations after listening to that.
Unfortunately, it's done virtually everywhere.
Although California's almonds get a lot of the bad press, depleting the desert aquifers to grow hay and corn to feed slaughter cattle is similarly wasteful.
Not as wasteful as towing it from Antarctica!
If you look at an old interview of Trump, you see a man far more coherent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Satellite coverage is always going to be a problem at the poles
No, that applies to geosynchronous broadcast satellites, but not to LEO constellations such as Starlink or Irridium.
And what do you call someone who speaks only one language?
American!
Or Australian. At least the Americans find Spanish a bit useful.
Having lived in both the UK and US with an oriental parent who spoke broken English, I have no problem understanding anyone speaking English anywhere in the world, except lower-class black Americans.
That'd be a variant of a Southern accent? If you go to the rural South, you'll hear white folk talkin' same way.
But I do remember in Chicago really struggling, embarrassed, to understand the working-class black accents, while they understood my foreign accent perfectly.
Just like in rural Ireland.
If they ahve Dollars, they probably speak American. That is not English by a very long mile.
Americans are a lot closer to standard English than some of the rural British accents. Even a working-class Glasgow or Newcastle accent is a lot tougher than 90% of Americans to understand for me.
Sad, but Tickle Cock bridge lives!
As does Twatt in the Shetland Islands, Bell End in Worcestershire, and of course Penistone, Yorkshire.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Anywhere is Gropecunt Lane when you are famous. Apparently.
It's called the Scunthorpe problem because it has the word "cunt" in it, and that prevented the good people of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England from creating accounts with AOL back when that was relevant.
There, saved y'all a click, since that's probably the only thing you were interested in about this story anyway.
They were more fortunate than anyone living in Gropecunt Lane .
No, it's not race it's poverty. Non-whites are far more likely to live in poverty in this country and
First, I'm talking about the differences in homicide rates between developed countries, and the statistical correlates, not absolute causes.
I was not touching the subject of why blacks have higher homicide rates. It matters for the sake of comparison only that they do.
Poverty is certainly a factor. However, in the case of the United States, poor non-blacks still have much lower homicide rates than poor blacks.
the fact that poverty breeds crime is about as close as you get to a sociological fact.
Inequality, not absolute poverty. Plenty of countries have high poverty and low crime.
What about Mozambique? Sub-Saharan Africa, much deeper poverty than any US inner city, lots of guns still around since the civil war ended. And it has a homicide rate lower than the U.S. Nobody is suggesting there is a simple answer to the whole problem.
There is no magic "crime gene" that makes non-whites more crime prone in this country.
No kidding. That is a silly comment. Most heritable traits are polygenic - including height, IQ, aggression, impulsiveness.
Do you think the high crime difference between men and women is 100% cultural and not due to biological differences?
here's some numbers: NEOWAY M590E and another: SIM800L,
Good luck finding an operational 2G network in 2018! :-)
Are there any cheap 3g/lte equivalents?
You could buy an old phone or USB 3G modem from ebay for a few dollars. Can an Arduino use the USB serial port on that?
The problem is that we have a homicide rate several times higher then the next closest first world countries.
Looking at the numbers, the elephant in the room as the biggest factor is race, not guns.
If you do a more fair comparison, the homicide rates of whites in the US to other developed countries, the difference is much less, but the US whites (males of course) have "only" double the homicide rate.
Bear in mind that in all cases, random mass-killing by assault rifle, truck, or any weapon, make up only a tiny proportion of homicides.
So the "vehicle attack" argument is almost irrelevant to the broader question of gun homicide.
WRONG movie reference.
Have you not heard of "Superman" where Lex Luthor has a plot to split the San Andres fault, and make a fortune on desert land becoming ocean-front?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It is just a "meta study", grabbing other people's real work and aggregating it. I do not see any effort to go beyond correlation.
Cobbled together because of the pressure to publish, and make conference presentations.
The article, and others googled, are very thin on detail.
(Orion could have been also, back when we didnt think twice about testing nukes all over the place..
It is actually not as bad as you'd think,
wikipedia: "From many smaller detonations combined the fallout for the entire launch of a 6,000 short ton (5,500 metric ton) Orion is equal to the detonation of a typical 10 megaton (40 petajoule) nuclear weapon as an airburst, therefore most of its fallout would be the comparatively dilute delayed fallout. Assuming the use of nuclear explosives with a high portion of total yield from fission, it would produce a combined fallout total similar to the surface burst yield of the Mike shot of Operation Ivy, a 10.4 Megaton device detonated in 1952. "
Large numbers could be launched at sea with no significant effect on global background radiation levels. Its not like ground-bursts.
Better if we could just launch a few, carrying the materials for an orbital ring.
There are better ways to get thrust using nuclear power than what Project Orion wanted to do, and the US was actually pursuing some of them. Project Rover took place at Los Alamos for about 2 decades starting in the 50s, and showed that nuclear thermal rockets were possible and had a lot of potential.
Nuclear thermal is useful, but only around double the specific impulse of chemical. Not revolutionary, but would be handy for getting to Mars and back.
It was considered for Apollo third stage, but not worth the effort back then.
Orion's nuclear pulse drive on the other hand, is game-changing, with an order of magnitude better specific impulse, and massive thrust. :-)
You could send sci-fi sized spaceships with hundreds of crew to the outer planets and back. And we could have started building it in the 1960s. No fancy materials needed, just a lot of steel, like a battleship. The biggest task would be the economical mass production of the propulsion charges.
I'd buy a ticket to watch the launch - from a safe distance upwind
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Rofl ... ...
The electric ferries safe 80% of their fuel costs
Good on them. Maybe it even covers the capital cost with no subsidy needed. No need to be so smug. I don't claim to know the cost of diesel vs electricity in Norway, though expect the hydroelectric is cheap.
I mean people there are willing to buy the "eco friendly" even when it costs *more*. Heck, we all are. Just more so in Norway.
If you read that thinking about cars, remember that battery are heavy, and that weight is much more a problem for a car than for a boat.
True, but typically range is much more of a problem for a ship.
Short ferry crossings are the place to start.
Norway feels terribly guilty about getting filthy rich from selling oil, so are willing to burn money to feel green. And those fjords need a lot of ferries.
Soon to be heard in the US:
Large Man: Who's that then?
Dead Collector: I dunno. Must be a CEO.
Large Man: Why?
Dead Collector: He hasn't got shit all over him.
Yep, all phones look the same now. Boring. ...
I remember when Nokia alone made 20 different phones at once, ranging from square to banana shape.
Slide-out keyboards, clamshells, circular keypads,