The more diversity of ideas, ideology, and people the better.
Utter bullshit. I'm all for freedom of speech and I'm going ot use that to counter that having more diversity of opinions on how and why I should be murdered is not for the better.
Who generally searches for ""Joseph Goebbels," "Josef Mengele," "Heinrich Himmler,"...and Benito Mussolini's long-defunct National Fascist Party." " on Facebook?
It's the scourge of the modern age: so many local in person meetups are on facebook now.
sarcasm Apparently 40+ errors are "minor factual errors". LUL.
An imagur link to basically a chunk of text in rendered with a small font into a bitmap. Ugh WTF is wrong with people? Can we dial back the outrage on this story so can have some REAL nerdrage over the offence that is that link? It's barbaric.
You can disable Facebook all you want on your Android device, but I'll bet a lot of money that google already sells that same information to Facebook and everybody else with a few bucks.
That seems unlikely and while I don't think google are remotely trustworthy there's no evidence of that. If anything they're pretty tight lipped with that kind of data. Google are in the business of selling advertising, not in the business of selling data. Their data is what supposedly gives them their edge to sell ads better.
Selling the data would seem to undermine their business if anything.
The data shows a bigger correlation between existing CVD risk factors - smoking, age, blood sugar and BMI.
Smoking, people lie about. BMI and blood sugar need measuring devices which aren't generally ready to hand. As the article points out it's useful because you need no equipment to make the measurement and it has pretty decent predictive power all things considered.
If you're a fat, old, smoker with high blood sugar, you have a higher risk of CVD and a high risk of a low number of push ups.
Those are all headlines in today's news. The misinterpretation is already beginning. Give it a week and it'll be "Pushups cure heart disease" or somesuch shit.:-(
Sure. On the other hand we don't stop using, researching and developing computers because some news sites post egregious bullshit about hackers or whatever. Blame the idiot press, not the science or the scientists.
Look, MS made a lot of boneheaded architectural decisions, but consistent backwards compatibility in their file system (regardless of how awful it is [and it is]) is not one of them.
Why not?
It's not like the ext2-ext3-ext4 switchover had any meaningful effect on anything I did except that things got faster and more stable in the event of a power outage, and much more tolerant of me doing stupid shit like having tons of files in one directory. About the main "downside" is I couldn't plug a storage device into a very much older machine and expect it to work out of the box. I never got on the MurderFS bandwagon, but I did run JFS for a while, too. Likewise there was no day to day difference (except lower CPU usage for JFS), or difference upgrading, switching machines and so on and so forth.
Of all the things that have changed in Linux, the FS type has had some of the biggest benefits and will have been noticed by far the least.
and 'studies' like this one are stupid, misleading, and I really wish they wouldn't bother releasing them to the public like this, it just mucks up the works.
It's not stupid, it's only mileading if you don't understand statistics. The solution though is to have scientists censor what tey tell each other in case some rando reads what they say then misinterprets it. Are you advocating for non open access so scientists can speak freely to each other without the risk of being overheard and misunderstood?
It's almost impossible as-is to get people to do ANY exercise of ANY kind, and crap like this ends up interpreted as "just do pushups and your heart will be healthy".
Sure, but I'm not going to advocate that we stop doing science in case people misinterpret the results. People at some point have to take responsibility for their actions.
People aren't going to do excercise no matter what this study says. It's not like they were a long distance runner then said oh hey dandom study said heart disease is negatively correlated with pushup ability so I'm going to stop running, chow down on cream buns and just stick to pushups.
The people using this as an excuse to not exercise are LOOKING for an excuse to not exercise. This gives one but there are already infinite excuses out there and this won't make the slightest bit of difference.
Just look at more or less any thread here that mentions BMI. Oddly it turns out that a whole 95% of slashdotters are in the 95th percentile of muscle mass such that BMI is no longer relevant. A lot higher than the expected 5%, but I guess we have a lot of tech pros who crush code then chow down roids.
Dangerous enough? Too chaotic? The machine never gets drunk. It never gets tired. It never gets distracted. It does not speed. It does not tailgate. It never takes its eyes off the road. It is implacable, knows no fear and is always hungry.
Er scratch the last three but you get my point. Humans are terrible divers.
I'm always entertained by how much people here take personal offence at any article on health.
You're not morally defective if you can't do 40 pushups and no one is saying you are.
They are not even saying you're guaranteed to die of a heart attack or anything that silly. And they're not saying that doing more pushups will improve your health.
There's a lot of them here. Whenever health, particularly BMI comes up it turns out the average slashdotter is 300lbs of pure rippling muscles and the BMI is lies I tell you all lies. That roll aground the middle? That's muscle too.
Gosh I know correlation is not causation, but for any article on health there's a strong correlation with people misunderstand the article and telling the world's how they're a special case.
Pushups are a better predictor of cardiovascular health than treadmill endurance. That means you take a random guy, and guess whether they'll get heart disease based on those two measures. You'll be right more often if you use the pushup one.
Don't like it? I don't really know what to say. It doesn't really depend on your feelings.
You also might want to read about conditional and marginal probabilities.
For people with little track record, there's not much to go on in a CV. You have to rely more on in person interviewa. Of course those are not great either, so you have to err in the side of caution.
I'm not surprised HR raised holy hell over that they were 100% right to do so. Only people in fairly narrow niches have time to do take finye coding tests. It skews heavily towards the young and especially those without dependents. Older candidates tend to have more in their lives outside work which preclude doing such tests.
And older, more experienced candidates know you don't do work for free.
They don't know you or your company. You're spending zero effort to ask them for a lot. They have no indication you'll put anything like a commensurate amount of effort into evaluating their work. We've all seen jobs where the winner was selected even before the advertisement. Who on earth but the naive or desperate wants to risk their work on that.
There's no guarantee that you'll get a fair shake if you have an on site, but you know that the company is spending about as much time as you are, so there's a good chance they're not simply wasting it.
Why are Brexiteers so stupid? I'm going to go slightly out of order:
But I did spell out why I wanted to leave,
No, you didn't. You said you wanted to leave and then you said the reason was that you wanted to leave. You seem to lack the basic grasp of English (which is rather ironic) to understand that that is not a reason. Fortunately you got a clue and answered in this post.
As suspected, you're answers are as silly as I thought they would be.
But I did spell out why I wanted to leave, But I did spell out why I wanted to leave,
There's a lot to unpack here. Basically you're saying we'll regain our independence and the first thing we'll do it give it all up again in trade deals. Here's a free clue for you: no one will give us a trade deal unless we agree to legally binding restrictions on what we do.
trade deals
And what makes you think we can make better trade deals as a third country compared to what is the world's largest trading bloc? We don't have anything like the clout of the EU. And everyone knows that. The EU can get good trade deals out of people. Japan has (oddly) refused to copy/paste the EU trade deal for us because they know they can get better terms.
So, freedom to get worse trade deals. I mean I guess...
diplomatic relations
Typical brexiteer stupidity: claim we'll get something we already have.
borders
Again more Brexiteer ill thought out stupidity to unpack. It's sad but telling that you think you can sum up a complex issue with tiny trite talking points.
We made a promise to Ireland to not close the border. The only way of closing the border to the EU is to renege on a promise we made made to Ireland. That promise doesn't magically vanish when we leave the EU because the deal was made with Ireland, not the EU.
You might say leaving the EU gives us the freedom to welch. We always had that freedom, and so leaving the EU doesn't grant it to us.
And then there's the rest of the border. What do you even mean "the border". I assume you mean immigrants. We had the power to cut immigration down by 50% before leaving the EU, since the EU has no say in immigrants from outside the EU. We chose not to. Leaving the EU isn't going to give us the ability to do something we already had the freedom to choose to do but din't do.
And asylum seekers are going to keep coming no matter how hard we shoot ourselves in the foot. OK techincally that's not true, if we make ourselves third-world enough they'll stop coming.
So the TL;DR of your reply is we'll get worse trade details, different restrictions on what we can do and still get lots of migration.
even as you continue to fail miserably at justifying staying in the EU
I was waiting for you to answer my question first. You've finally done it.
Well, firstly the European project has presided over the longest period of peace since Pax Romana. That has a certain appeal.
We get much greater individual freedom in the EU: people can move around to different countries, do business freely, live where they choose and so on. We have better worker rights as a result. So much more freedom to live, move, marry, work and so on.
There's the awkward fact that an open border is key to the peace deal we drew up in Ireland.
We get excellent trade deals because the EU has immense financial clout and very experienced negotiators.
Our economy is better, much better, in the EU. A good economy means more money for things like the NHS, transport, infrastructure, wellfare state and so on. The shrinking of the economy will harm the NHS budget and reduce the quality of care for example. That will have an actual literal death toll.
We're total shit at taking care of deprived regions of the country, because we keep electing tory asshats to power. The EU is much better at regional developement. Wales is full of things with little EU emblems on them. They are going to be so badlly screwed when we l
No deal. I'll take 'no deal'. It's not a disaster, it's a blip.
Even Reese-let's-leave-but-I've-moved-my-money-to-Ireland-Mogg thinks it will take at least 50 years for that "blip" to pass.
And let's see...
I don't want...
Thought so. All you ve done is answer "why leave the EU" with "I don't want to be in the EU".
There, that's choerent.
You've failed to give a reason at all. You haven't even remotely said what you expect to get/change as a result of leaving.
Typical Brexiter bullshit. You voted for a disaster and can't admit it. When the disaster unfolds you'll most likely blame everyone else except yourself.
One it has to do with falsifiable predictions for the future (which currently they are not - or have been proved wildly inaccurate.)
No that's bullshit denialism. Go look at the first IPCC report. It has predictions with error bars. The current measurements fit within those error bars.
Since you dey reality off the bad, everything else you say lacks credibility. I can't really be bothered to wade through it to see how else you're going to misrepresent reality.
Every day we see more and more how the reality of the disaster is going to play out. Project fear is turning out to be project reality. Why just today a major car manufacturer decided to leave the UK, and with is removing 3,500 jobs from a Brexit-heavy area.
I have yet to see anything approchaing a choerent argument for leaving the EU.
Slashdot Mirror
The more diversity of ideas, ideology, and people the better.
Utter bullshit. I'm all for freedom of speech and I'm going ot use that to counter that having more diversity of opinions on how and why I should be murdered is not for the better.
Who generally searches for ""Joseph Goebbels," "Josef Mengele," "Heinrich Himmler," ...and Benito Mussolini's long-defunct National Fascist Party." " on Facebook?
It's the scourge of the modern age: so many local in person meetups are on facebook now.
sarcasm Apparently 40+ errors are "minor factual errors". LUL.
An imagur link to basically a chunk of text in rendered with a small font into a bitmap. Ugh WTF is wrong with people? Can we dial back the outrage on this story so can have some REAL nerdrage over the offence that is that link? It's barbaric.
You can disable Facebook all you want on your Android device, but I'll bet a lot of money that google already sells that same information to Facebook and everybody else with a few bucks.
That seems unlikely and while I don't think google are remotely trustworthy there's no evidence of that. If anything they're pretty tight lipped with that kind of data. Google are in the business of selling advertising, not in the business of selling data. Their data is what supposedly gives them their edge to sell ads better.
Selling the data would seem to undermine their business if anything.
So Nestle is making a fuss over videos of kids eating lollipops?
No, they're making a fuss over something they think harms their brand image.
Nestle, the company who knowingly killed how many thousands of babies, pushing baby formulae in third world counties?
And now you see WHY they care so much about something that might harm their brand image.
Of course I would: free meat is free meat.
The data shows a bigger correlation between existing CVD risk factors - smoking, age, blood sugar and BMI.
Smoking, people lie about. BMI and blood sugar need measuring devices which aren't generally ready to hand. As the article points out it's useful because you need no equipment to make the measurement and it has pretty decent predictive power all things considered.
If you're a fat, old, smoker with high blood sugar, you have a higher risk of CVD and a high risk of a low number of push ups.
Quite.
Lately too many 'scientists' make 'press releases' of 'studies' more for purposes
Are you complaining about these scientists or scientists in general? Do you know anything about the scientists making a press release?
attracting funding sources
Well, we make scientists responsible for finding their own funding to keep their jobs. We don't just find good ones and give them jobs.
When they release half-asses 'studies' like this (for reasons explained above)
it's not half arsed and you've certainly not explained why it is, other than generalised complaints.
it either misleads those who can't properly understand it, or it's misquoted/misinterpreted by someone else, or whatever,
Well shit. I guess we should never do anything ever in case some idiot misinterprets it. Problem solved let's all go live under a fucking rock.
Those are all headlines in today's news. The misinterpretation is already beginning. Give it a week and it'll be "Pushups cure heart disease" or somesuch shit. :-(
Sure. On the other hand we don't stop using, researching and developing computers because some news sites post egregious bullshit about hackers or whatever. Blame the idiot press, not the science or the scientists.
Look, MS made a lot of boneheaded architectural decisions, but consistent backwards compatibility in their file system (regardless of how awful it is [and it is]) is not one of them.
Why not?
It's not like the ext2-ext3-ext4 switchover had any meaningful effect on anything I did except that things got faster and more stable in the event of a power outage, and much more tolerant of me doing stupid shit like having tons of files in one directory. About the main "downside" is I couldn't plug a storage device into a very much older machine and expect it to work out of the box. I never got on the MurderFS bandwagon, but I did run JFS for a while, too. Likewise there was no day to day difference (except lower CPU usage for JFS), or difference upgrading, switching machines and so on and so forth.
Of all the things that have changed in Linux, the FS type has had some of the biggest benefits and will have been noticed by far the least.
Correction: it makes you a politician.
If you don't like politics you can always go and work in Disney's legal department.
I took no offense.
Looked like it, I mean you seemed to really flip your shit over it. See:
At least not because of my health (or lack of it).
You really do seem offended that the paper told you you weren't healthy even though it did no such thing.
and 'studies' like this one are stupid, misleading, and I really wish they wouldn't bother releasing them to the public like this, it just mucks up the works.
It's not stupid, it's only mileading if you don't understand statistics. The solution though is to have scientists censor what tey tell each other in case some rando reads what they say then misinterprets it. Are you advocating for non open access so scientists can speak freely to each other without the risk of being overheard and misunderstood?
It's almost impossible as-is to get people to do ANY exercise of ANY kind, and crap like this ends up interpreted as "just do pushups and your heart will be healthy".
Sure, but I'm not going to advocate that we stop doing science in case people misinterpret the results. People at some point have to take responsibility for their actions.
People aren't going to do excercise no matter what this study says. It's not like they were a long distance runner then said oh hey dandom study said heart disease is negatively correlated with pushup ability so I'm going to stop running, chow down on cream buns and just stick to pushups.
The people using this as an excuse to not exercise are LOOKING for an excuse to not exercise. This gives one but there are already infinite excuses out there and this won't make the slightest bit of difference.
Just look at more or less any thread here that mentions BMI. Oddly it turns out that a whole 95% of slashdotters are in the 95th percentile of muscle mass such that BMI is no longer relevant. A lot higher than the expected 5%, but I guess we have a lot of tech pros who crush code then chow down roids.
Dangerous enough? Too chaotic? The machine never gets drunk. It never gets tired. It never gets distracted. It does not speed. It does not tailgate. It never takes its eyes off the road. It is implacable, knows no fear and is always hungry.
Er scratch the last three but you get my point. Humans are terrible divers.
I'm always entertained by how much people here take personal offence at any article on health.
You're not morally defective if you can't do 40 pushups and no one is saying you are.
They are not even saying you're guaranteed to die of a heart attack or anything that silly. And they're not saying that doing more pushups will improve your health.
There's a lot of them here. Whenever health, particularly BMI comes up it turns out the average slashdotter is 300lbs of pure rippling muscles and the BMI is lies I tell you all lies. That roll aground the middle? That's muscle too.
Gosh I know correlation is not causation, but for any article on health there's a strong correlation with people misunderstand the article and telling the world's how they're a special case.
Pushups are a better predictor of cardiovascular health than treadmill endurance. That means you take a random guy, and guess whether they'll get heart disease based on those two measures. You'll be right more often if you use the pushup one.
Don't like it? I don't really know what to say. It doesn't really depend on your feelings.
You also might want to read about conditional and marginal probabilities.
For people with little track record, there's not much to go on in a CV. You have to rely more on in person interviewa. Of course those are not great either, so you have to err in the side of caution.
I'm not surprised HR raised holy hell over that they were 100% right to do so. Only people in fairly narrow niches have time to do take finye coding tests. It skews heavily towards the young and especially those without dependents. Older candidates tend to have more in their lives outside work which preclude doing such tests.
And older, more experienced candidates know you don't do work for free.
They don't know you or your company. You're spending zero effort to ask them for a lot. They have no indication you'll put anything like a commensurate amount of effort into evaluating their work. We've all seen jobs where the winner was selected even before the advertisement. Who on earth but the naive or desperate wants to risk their work on that.
There's no guarantee that you'll get a fair shake if you have an on site, but you know that the company is spending about as much time as you are, so there's a good chance they're not simply wasting it.
Depending on the level you're hiring at, 5 to 10 to 1 on site you hire ratio is ok. It gets closer to 1 as candidates get more senior.
Why are Brexiteers so stupid? I'm going to go slightly out of order:
But I did spell out why I wanted to leave,
No, you didn't. You said you wanted to leave and then you said the reason was that you wanted to leave. You seem to lack the basic grasp of English (which is rather ironic) to understand that that is not a reason. Fortunately you got a clue and answered in this post.
As suspected, you're answers are as silly as I thought they would be.
But I did spell out why I wanted to leave, But I did spell out why I wanted to leave,
There's a lot to unpack here. Basically you're saying we'll regain our independence and the first thing we'll do it give it all up again in trade deals. Here's a free clue for you: no one will give us a trade deal unless we agree to legally binding restrictions on what we do.
trade deals
And what makes you think we can make better trade deals as a third country compared to what is the world's largest trading bloc? We don't have anything like the clout of the EU. And everyone knows that. The EU can get good trade deals out of people. Japan has (oddly) refused to copy/paste the EU trade deal for us because they know they can get better terms.
So, freedom to get worse trade deals. I mean I guess...
diplomatic relations
Typical brexiteer stupidity: claim we'll get something we already have.
borders
Again more Brexiteer ill thought out stupidity to unpack. It's sad but telling that you think you can sum up a complex issue with tiny trite talking points.
We made a promise to Ireland to not close the border. The only way of closing the border to the EU is to renege on a promise we made made to Ireland. That promise doesn't magically vanish when we leave the EU because the deal was made with Ireland, not the EU.
You might say leaving the EU gives us the freedom to welch. We always had that freedom, and so leaving the EU doesn't grant it to us.
And then there's the rest of the border. What do you even mean "the border". I assume you mean immigrants. We had the power to cut immigration down by 50% before leaving the EU, since the EU has no say in immigrants from outside the EU. We chose not to. Leaving the EU isn't going to give us the ability to do something we already had the freedom to choose to do but din't do.
And asylum seekers are going to keep coming no matter how hard we shoot ourselves in the foot. OK techincally that's not true, if we make ourselves third-world enough they'll stop coming.
So the TL;DR of your reply is we'll get worse trade details, different restrictions on what we can do and still get lots of migration.
even as you continue to fail miserably at justifying staying in the EU
I was waiting for you to answer my question first. You've finally done it.
Well, firstly the European project has presided over the longest period of peace since Pax Romana. That has a certain appeal.
We get much greater individual freedom in the EU: people can move around to different countries, do business freely, live where they choose and so on. We have better worker rights as a result. So much more freedom to live, move, marry, work and so on.
There's the awkward fact that an open border is key to the peace deal we drew up in Ireland.
We get excellent trade deals because the EU has immense financial clout and very experienced negotiators.
Our economy is better, much better, in the EU. A good economy means more money for things like the NHS, transport, infrastructure, wellfare state and so on. The shrinking of the economy will harm the NHS budget and reduce the quality of care for example. That will have an actual literal death toll.
We're total shit at taking care of deprived regions of the country, because we keep electing tory asshats to power. The EU is much better at regional developement. Wales is full of things with little EU emblems on them. They are going to be so badlly screwed when we l
Ah typical Brexiteer, misrepresent reality them blame remain.
You provided boy reason beyond a long-winded way of saying you don't want to leave.
The reason you refuse to spell out clearly what you think we will gain us because you have no idea.
No deal. I'll take 'no deal'. It's not a disaster, it's a blip.
Even Reese-let's-leave-but-I've-moved-my-money-to-Ireland-Mogg thinks it will take at least 50 years for that "blip" to pass.
And let's see...
I don't want...
Thought so. All you ve done is answer "why leave the EU" with "I don't want to be in the EU".
There, that's choerent.
You've failed to give a reason at all. You haven't even remotely said what you expect to get/change as a result of leaving.
Typical Brexiter bullshit. You voted for a disaster and can't admit it. When the disaster unfolds you'll most likely blame everyone else except yourself.
One it has to do with falsifiable predictions for the future (which currently they are not - or have been proved wildly inaccurate.)
No that's bullshit denialism. Go look at the first IPCC report. It has predictions with error bars. The current measurements fit within those error bars.
Since you dey reality off the bad, everything else you say lacks credibility. I can't really be bothered to wade through it to see how else you're going to misrepresent reality.
Oh? I voted to leave the EU
Fucking idiot.
Every day we see more and more how the reality of the disaster is going to play out. Project fear is turning out to be project reality. Why just today a major car manufacturer decided to leave the UK, and with is removing 3,500 jobs from a Brexit-heavy area.
I have yet to see anything approchaing a choerent argument for leaving the EU.