It seems a large amount of the shitshow is our fault. If you find that one grain of truth in the owner of less abouth about bent bananas, you'll find that it was actually British rules that the EU as adopting. Apparently this is reason to leave.
May still doesn't seem to have worked out yet what she wants.
I think what she wants is besides the point.
Half of her party are fucking nutcases who'd be happy to crash out with no deal. Even the most assholeish of those, Reese-Mogg, has conceded that we'll et benefits in 50 years (i.e. never). And yet he wants to leave anyway, because personal power is the number one goal.
The other half won't accept a deal which makes us worse off which in practice means no deal.
Oh and Corbyn and his fucking idiotic "6 tests": he's just as bad. He knows full well that no exit deal could ever pass. But he wan't the chaos of a hard brexit since he knows that's the only chance he has of winning power.
And the nyou've got the idiots who insist it's undemocratic to ask "the people" what they actually want. The government held a referendum and listened to the result. They filed Article 50, and neotiated the best deal they were capable of.
But somehow it's wrong to ask people if this is what they had in mind even thouh they never specified it?
In all circumstances it's the people's choice. Bottom line people vote or refuse to vote and they get what they get.
You don't seme to realise this is Florida we're talking about. 10% of the adult population are (were? did they fix it this time round?) denied the right to vote. You can hardly blame people for the outcome when bullshit laws prevent them from affecting it.
Well thanks for illustrating my point about Brexiteers being ignorant of facts and hard of thinking.
er the incomprehensible truth that people in general are smart enough to not vote against their own best interest, no matter how hard you pout.
Truth lol. Well that's demonstrably not true. Take Wales for instance. Abandoned by successive governments since it's annexation by England in 1282. They did however get av lot of regional development funds from the EU. Now they're gong to go back to being ignored and unfunded.
Well you just managed to successfully define "globalist" as "someone who isn't an utter fuckwit".
Here's the thing. I've engaged a few Brexiteers in debate. Every single one of them had been both ignorant of the facts, hard of reasoning and really addicted to slogans.
The stupid thing is that the"London elites" who voted remain will be hit least hard and the poorer regions who voted leave will be utterly screwed over. Morons like you will still blame on everyone else.
You've been watching too many movies.. Cell tower triangulation isn't nearly as good as it is depicted in the movies (former cell tower tech here).
That's certainly true.
At best you can narrow the target to a sector of 90 or 120 degrees.. Maybe you can work out distance. but if the person is far away from the tower, at best you're narrowing it down to a few blocks.. or tens of blocks..
You can certainly narrow it down to 120 degrees, because that's generally the shape of a cell. You do also get rough distance but it's not very good. But cellphones are almost always negotating with two, often more towers at the same time.
You then take the intersection of all the very wide swathes to get a narrower region. It's still ont very good, but it's enough t otake it down from many square kilometers to under one in many cases.
You get much better precision in cities where cell towers are much closer. On the other hand so is everything else so you need much better precision. All things being equal it's pretty much a wash.
Your estimate of a few 10s of city blocks sounds about right.
I cannot understand why anyone would be on the SJW side.
Well indeed. That's because the "SJW" side is something that exists in the head of you, Mashiki, lgw and a few other assortd individuals. Even you lot can't agree between yourselves precisely what an SJW is except to acknowledge that they're really really bad.
Like really bad.
The reason that you can't understand why anyone would want to be on the side of an extreme straw man that exists only in fevered imaginations should be obvious: no one does. Your fantasies are not reality.
But you're still usually putting out around a $1000 investment by the time you buy your drone accessories and the drone itself. The real cheap stuff out there doesn't even have enough battery life to be relevant. Those are just toys to fly around your house for 5 minutes at a time, basically.
Either way it's a lot less time and effort and money than how it used to be. I also think you're making the mistake of assuming compentence in these people. You can buy a drone for a few hundred quid with enough range to fly over an airport.
It might not be a great experience and you might be liable to lose it, but remember we're not talking about competent people making sensible choices here.
I really think this is a case of a small minority of bad actors ruining things for 99% of the owners/users.
If my dad was still alive to see this, I'm sure he'd be really agitated about all the regulations. He grew up building gasoline powered model airplanes and later, got his pilot's license
Well that's the thing isn't it. In your dad's era it wasn't a game for weekend warriors. It required a lot of time, knowledge and money to engage in the hobby. Even if you bought an off the shelf plane, chances are you'd still spend a lot of time fixing and modifying it.
And then there's learning to fly and land. Those things were not so easy to fly and mistakes were not cheap.
People who dedicate that much effort to something are going to be really serious about it and therefore know the rules and act sensibly. Your dad clearly was knowledgable and dedicated since he got an actual pilot's license.
There were few rules because legislation is like a giant, never endng game of whac-a-mole. There were no moles to whack back then. No one caused problems, or at least it was sufficiently rare that it wasn't worth figuring out then passing legislation.
Today, any asshat with a hundred bucks can walk into a shop, walk out with a dronw and fly it out of line of sight within the hour. The field is now wide open enough that people who have never strung two thoughts together about flying can operate a drone and take pictures. This means they do stupid things and piss people off. And the existing rules and structures that were adequate when your dad and his ilk were in the game aren't adequate becuase the common case has gone from sensible person to idiot.
Yep it is why we can't have nice things. On the other hand the idiots will keep being idiots until the the regulations stop them most of the time.
Sounds like someone trying to force the regulators hand.
I think probably not. I mean it could be but on the one hand you've got someone being machevellian, on the other hand yu have a stupid action from a colossal army of fuckwits. My money is on the fuckwits, personally.
You're basically saying then that the constitution is the ultimate guide to everything. The only thing people seem to think that about is religious texts.
It was written by some of the best educated and intelligent men of the day who had an incredible understanding in political science, sociology, and economics. They had insight into our bickering and partisanship that persists to this day. The Constitution has been the standard bearer of governance around the world.
Even if I agree with your premise, so? It's still not the ultimate guide to everything. Treating it as such is particularly stupid because the authors were trying to write a constitution, not a guide to absolutely everything. And they did not consider it either complete or infallible which is why they left in an amendment process.
Look, I'm not here to defend the F35 program, but the promise of the program was (and still is) a common platform that will be the mass produced airborne weapons delivery truck for decades. They will be stamping out thousands of these for decades. The promise here is that instead of having a hundred platforms to support with parts, tooling, software, logistics, training, maintenance and R&D, there will be really only one.
I expect the Army could do much the same by standardising on precisely one actual truck. The reason they don't is you want different ground vehicles for different situations.
Being arrested for drugs versus being arrested for the wrong religion. Seems comparable.
Indeed. It's mostly religious puritaism responsible for the laws.
What people are arrested for is far more important than total quantity and per capita.
For individuals yes. For population statistics, no. Uless you have some reason to believe that Americans are much worse people than just about every country on the planet. I've lived there and I don't believe that.
Most of the incarcerations in the US are for drug offenses. People voted for those laws and have the power to repeal those laws, as many are doing. Enforcing laws with the consent of the governed via elections is a good thing.
And yes if you're inprisioning more people than deeply repressive regimes, then you've fucked up and your democracy broke somewhere along the way.
ven if the laws are bad. As long as it doesn't violate the Constitution the
The constitution is not the fucking ultimate ethical guide to everything. It outlines somethines and misses plenty of others. Imprisioning more people per capita than China means you fucked up, whether in a consitutionally approved way or not.
Show me a country that cannot outlaw hate speech that allows unrestricted self defense
No conutry has unrestrited self defense: prisoners don't get that right. No matter hw many people are imprison or how enethical the imprisonment.
We may be seeing Microsoft getting a taste of its own medicine.
Well whoop-de-doo.
I mean don't get me wrong. the old 90s era Micro$oft basher in me feels some sense of glee at them getting their comeuppance. But there's a bit of a problem here. While they are getting a taste of their own medicine, we're also getting a taste of their medicine all over again.
Wow yeah the right wing "muh freeze speech" crowd censors are out in force. Fir all your complaints about being silenced by JW hoo boy do you leap at the oppotunity when you have the chance!
Claiming pew die pie isn't racist: +4
Pointing out a bunch of racist things he's said: -1
Well aren't you just the most sensitive little snowflake on the planet.
Yeah I criticised someone you apparently like. You're response is to clutch your pearls and shriek all sorts of extreme things. For someone who love free speech so much you sure seem to hate it when someone deviates from your echo chamber.
Now, I fully expect to be silenced by your fellow free speech warriors for this.
They agree with Google that being able to speak your mind is a great blight and must be done away with.
Liberals also understand that google isn't obliged to host anyone's content in particular. At that point you usually just shit yourself and start ranting about SJW.
he''s not actually racist though, try not to spread lies m'kay?
Yes he is, so try not to whitewash, m'kay?
Or is this a whole "oh he uses racial slurs but he's not racist" sort of deal. If you call someone a "fucking black person" except you spell "black person" with two g's, then yeah you're pretty racist.
Paying people to say racist shit? Yeah kinda heading in the racist direction and then on a bit there. It's not exactly controversial or news that you can pay people to do that.
And then there's him promoting the pretty racist channel E;R.
Maybe one or the other could be excused, but there's a pattern of behaviour here.
Oh and it's not satire simply to do racist shit just because you can.
Those metal and woodworking is advertiser unfriendly so those channels got demonitized
Yeah bullshit. There is nothing advertiser unfriendly about This Old Tony, ABom79 and so on.
The ones that are advertiser unfriendly are not because of the shop stuff, it's because of what they say. In fact it seems a good guess that AvE intantionally says things to demonetise his videos given what he's said about in the past.
So take your endless stream of paranoid drivel elsewhere.
enter and right wing political commentators first and so on
P.S. My wife's phone has no headphone jack, but there's a little cable that plugs into the USB C port and then gives an analog headphone jack. Spare cables are something like $9. I would have no problem buying one of those cables for each of my telephone-capable headphones or ear buds.
Question is though how long is the port going to last? I can put my phone in my pocket with the headphones in and not worry about a small tweak wrecking the headphone port.
USB-micro was a heap of junk and auto-wrecked almost instantly by looking at it wrong. USB-C is a lot better but it's a way more complex port than a headphone one, and so likely much less robust as well.
Regardless, my main point was that Windows has had a farther reach and a larger impact, thus trely bringing the desktop to the masses.
Meh.
I think it was more of an emergent property than anything else.
I mean, an awful lot of stuff we seem to regard as groundbreaking is in fact an idea who's time has come. This is not to say that the people involved are not much more skilled and smarter than average. They are, but there's usually a bunch of them and history only remembers the winners.
This is actually somewhat common with Nobel prizes. Sure those 3 people get the prize. Look deeply and you find there was maybe a larger pool of deserving people, all of whom had seen the potential and were working those few years ahead of everyone else.
Computing was clearly coming to the masses. And desktops were clearly coming to the masses. All you have to do is look at the mass of excellent also-rans present at the time. I think if you were to knock out either Microsoft, Apple or both from the equation we'd be in a pretty similar place tech wise today with differences only in the details.
Regardless of what you think of the relative metits of those two, there was feirce competition in the market in the 80s and early 90s.
On the top end you had the various unix (and other! remember apollo?) vendors pushing their solutions. I doubt they'd ever have won since winning was hitting the commodity end, not the top end but you nver know. Someone might have had that realisation.
But on the low end there were also lots. Remember what the Amiga looked like in 1987, compared to Windows 2? Or the Atari? Unless you're British you probably won't remember Acorn's RiscOS which was yet another phenomenal one. There were tons of more obscure ones too.
Any of them could have brought computing to the masses, and in fact Acorn arguably did, given it (well it's spinout's) utter dominance these days.
My point is, the people who won were very good at their jobs, and only someone that good was going to win. But there were also 10x as many people but for a small quirk of history didn't win, or won something else. Desktop computing would have come either way and at the same time with or without any of the winners.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems a large amount of the shitshow is our fault. If you find that one grain of truth in the owner of less abouth about bent bananas, you'll find that it was actually British rules that the EU as adopting. Apparently this is reason to leave.
May still doesn't seem to have worked out yet what she wants.
I think what she wants is besides the point.
Half of her party are fucking nutcases who'd be happy to crash out with no deal. Even the most assholeish of those, Reese-Mogg, has conceded that we'll et benefits in 50 years (i.e. never). And yet he wants to leave anyway, because personal power is the number one goal.
The other half won't accept a deal which makes us worse off which in practice means no deal.
Oh and Corbyn and his fucking idiotic "6 tests": he's just as bad. He knows full well that no exit deal could ever pass. But he wan't the chaos of a hard brexit since he knows that's the only chance he has of winning power.
And the nyou've got the idiots who insist it's undemocratic to ask "the people" what they actually want. The government held a referendum and listened to the result. They filed Article 50, and neotiated the best deal they were capable of.
But somehow it's wrong to ask people if this is what they had in mind even thouh they never specified it?
In all circumstances it's the people's choice. Bottom line people vote or refuse to vote and they get what they get.
You don't seme to realise this is Florida we're talking about. 10% of the adult population are (were? did they fix it this time round?) denied the right to vote. You can hardly blame people for the outcome when bullshit laws prevent them from affecting it.
Well thanks for illustrating my point about Brexiteers being ignorant of facts and hard of thinking.
er the incomprehensible truth that people in general are smart enough to not vote against their own best interest, no matter how hard you pout.
Truth lol. Well that's demonstrably not true. Take Wales for instance. Abandoned by successive governments since it's annexation by England in 1282. They did however get av lot of regional development funds from the EU. Now they're gong to go back to being ignored and unfunded.
Well you just managed to successfully define "globalist" as "someone who isn't an utter fuckwit".
Here's the thing. I've engaged a few Brexiteers in debate. Every single one of them had been both ignorant of the facts, hard of reasoning and really addicted to slogans.
The stupid thing is that the"London elites" who voted remain will be hit least hard and the poorer regions who voted leave will be utterly screwed over. Morons like you will still blame on everyone else.
You've been watching too many movies.. Cell tower triangulation isn't nearly as good as it is depicted in the movies (former cell tower tech here).
That's certainly true.
At best you can narrow the target to a sector of 90 or 120 degrees.. Maybe you can work out distance. but if the person is far away from the tower, at best you're narrowing it down to a few blocks.. or tens of blocks..
You can certainly narrow it down to 120 degrees, because that's generally the shape of a cell. You do also get rough distance but it's not very good. But cellphones are almost always negotating with two, often more towers at the same time.
You then take the intersection of all the very wide swathes to get a narrower region. It's still ont very good, but it's enough t otake it down from many square kilometers to under one in many cases.
You get much better precision in cities where cell towers are much closer. On the other hand so is everything else so you need much better precision. All things being equal it's pretty much a wash.
Your estimate of a few 10s of city blocks sounds about right.
People want child porn and the cure is to stop that desire. Pedophilia is a sexual preference.
The social structure is similar to America's need for drugs: Stop the desire for drugs and Bob's yer uncle,
Whereas if you stop peadophilia, Bob stops being your "uncle". It wasn't like he was a real uncle anyway.
I cannot understand why anyone would be on the SJW side.
Well indeed. That's because the "SJW" side is something that exists in the head of you, Mashiki, lgw and a few other assortd individuals. Even you lot can't agree between yourselves precisely what an SJW is except to acknowledge that they're really really bad.
Like really bad.
The reason that you can't understand why anyone would want to be on the side of an extreme straw man that exists only in fevered imaginations should be obvious: no one does. Your fantasies are not reality.
Looks like the reality distortion field has turned into a physical distortion field.
But you're still usually putting out around a $1000 investment by the time you buy your drone accessories and the drone itself. The real cheap stuff out there doesn't even have enough battery life to be relevant. Those are just toys to fly around your house for 5 minutes at a time, basically.
Either way it's a lot less time and effort and money than how it used to be. I also think you're making the mistake of assuming compentence in these people. You can buy a drone for a few hundred quid with enough range to fly over an airport.
It might not be a great experience and you might be liable to lose it, but remember we're not talking about competent people making sensible choices here.
I really think this is a case of a small minority of bad actors ruining things for 99% of the owners/users.
It usually is.
If my dad was still alive to see this, I'm sure he'd be really agitated about all the regulations. He grew up building gasoline powered model airplanes and later, got his pilot's license
Well that's the thing isn't it. In your dad's era it wasn't a game for weekend warriors. It required a lot of time, knowledge and money to engage in the hobby. Even if you bought an off the shelf plane, chances are you'd still spend a lot of time fixing and modifying it.
And then there's learning to fly and land. Those things were not so easy to fly and mistakes were not cheap.
People who dedicate that much effort to something are going to be really serious about it and therefore know the rules and act sensibly. Your dad clearly was knowledgable and dedicated since he got an actual pilot's license.
There were few rules because legislation is like a giant, never endng game of whac-a-mole. There were no moles to whack back then. No one caused problems, or at least it was sufficiently rare that it wasn't worth figuring out then passing legislation.
Today, any asshat with a hundred bucks can walk into a shop, walk out with a dronw and fly it out of line of sight within the hour. The field is now wide open enough that people who have never strung two thoughts together about flying can operate a drone and take pictures. This means they do stupid things and piss people off. And the existing rules and structures that were adequate when your dad and his ilk were in the game aren't adequate becuase the common case has gone from sensible person to idiot.
Yep it is why we can't have nice things. On the other hand the idiots will keep being idiots until the the regulations stop them most of the time.
Sounds like someone trying to force the regulators hand.
I think probably not. I mean it could be but on the one hand you've got someone being machevellian, on the other hand yu have a stupid action from a colossal army of fuckwits. My money is on the fuckwits, personally.
You're basically saying then that the constitution is the ultimate guide to everything. The only thing people seem to think that about is religious texts.
It was written by some of the best educated and intelligent men of the day who had an incredible understanding in political science, sociology, and economics. They had insight into our bickering and partisanship that persists to this day. The Constitution has been the standard bearer of governance around the world.
Even if I agree with your premise, so? It's still not the ultimate guide to everything. Treating it as such is particularly stupid because the authors were trying to write a constitution, not a guide to absolutely everything. And they did not consider it either complete or infallible which is why they left in an amendment process.
You appear to have forgotten that little bit.
Look, I'm not here to defend the F35 program, but the promise of the program was (and still is) a common platform that will be the mass produced airborne weapons delivery truck for decades. They will be stamping out thousands of these for decades. The promise here is that instead of having a hundred platforms to support with parts, tooling, software, logistics, training, maintenance and R&D, there will be really only one.
I expect the Army could do much the same by standardising on precisely one actual truck. The reason they don't is you want different ground vehicles for different situations.
Being arrested for drugs versus being arrested for the wrong religion. Seems comparable.
Indeed. It's mostly religious puritaism responsible for the laws.
What people are arrested for is far more important than total quantity and per capita.
For individuals yes. For population statistics, no. Uless you have some reason to believe that Americans are much worse people than just about every country on the planet. I've lived there and I don't believe that.
Most of the incarcerations in the US are for drug offenses. People voted for those laws and have the power to repeal those laws, as many are doing. Enforcing laws with the consent of the governed via elections is a good thing.
And yes if you're inprisioning more people than deeply repressive regimes, then you've fucked up and your democracy broke somewhere along the way.
ven if the laws are bad. As long as it doesn't violate the Constitution the
The constitution is not the fucking ultimate ethical guide to everything. It outlines somethines and misses plenty of others. Imprisioning more people per capita than China means you fucked up, whether in a consitutionally approved way or not.
Show me a country that cannot outlaw hate speech that allows unrestricted self defense
No conutry has unrestrited self defense: prisoners don't get that right. No matter hw many people are imprison or how enethical the imprisonment.
The NSA doesn't care about Chinese spying.
Since when? Espionage is definitely better when only you have it. Caring about foreign entities spying is literally half of their job.
They care about people using network gear they can't get a foothold in.
Doubtful. They've always been able to lean on the peering providers so they can tap the big fat pipes regardless of who's routers are in use.
We may be seeing Microsoft getting a taste of its own medicine.
Well whoop-de-doo.
I mean don't get me wrong. the old 90s era Micro$oft basher in me feels some sense of glee at them getting their comeuppance. But there's a bit of a problem here. While they are getting a taste of their own medicine, we're also getting a taste of their medicine all over again.
Yes, with the latest AVX. AVX didn't exist 20 years ago.
No but 128 bit wide SSE did. As did the 128 bit wide cache lines (the inner most memory bus) to go with it.
Wow yeah the right wing "muh freeze speech" crowd censors are out in force. Fir all your complaints about being silenced by JW hoo boy do you leap at the oppotunity when you have the chance!
Claiming pew die pie isn't racist: +4
Pointing out a bunch of racist things he's said: -1
Anyway I've got karma to burn.
Well aren't you just the most sensitive little snowflake on the planet.
Yeah I criticised someone you apparently like. You're response is to clutch your pearls and shriek all sorts of extreme things. For someone who love free speech so much you sure seem to hate it when someone deviates from your echo chamber.
Now, I fully expect to be silenced by your fellow free speech warriors for this.
They agree with Google that being able to speak your mind is a great blight and must be done away with.
Liberals also understand that google isn't obliged to host anyone's content in particular. At that point you usually just shit yourself and start ranting about SJW.
he''s not actually racist though, try not to spread lies m'kay?
Yes he is, so try not to whitewash, m'kay?
Or is this a whole "oh he uses racial slurs but he's not racist" sort of deal. If you call someone a "fucking black person" except you spell "black person" with two g's, then yeah you're pretty racist.
Paying people to say racist shit? Yeah kinda heading in the racist direction and then on a bit there. It's not exactly controversial or news that you can pay people to do that.
And then there's him promoting the pretty racist channel E;R.
Maybe one or the other could be excused, but there's a pattern of behaviour here.
Oh and it's not satire simply to do racist shit just because you can.
Those metal and woodworking is advertiser unfriendly so those channels got demonitized
Yeah bullshit. There is nothing advertiser unfriendly about This Old Tony, ABom79 and so on.
The ones that are advertiser unfriendly are not because of the shop stuff, it's because of what they say. In fact it seems a good guess that AvE intantionally says things to demonetise his videos given what he's said about in the past.
So take your endless stream of paranoid drivel elsewhere.
enter and right wing political commentators first and so on
Liks Alex Jones, that wll known centrist.
P.S. My wife's phone has no headphone jack, but there's a little cable that plugs into the USB C port and then gives an analog headphone jack. Spare cables are something like $9. I would have no problem buying one of those cables for each of my telephone-capable headphones or ear buds.
Question is though how long is the port going to last? I can put my phone in my pocket with the headphones in and not worry about a small tweak wrecking the headphone port.
USB-micro was a heap of junk and auto-wrecked almost instantly by looking at it wrong. USB-C is a lot better but it's a way more complex port than a headphone one, and so likely much less robust as well.
Regardless, my main point was that Windows has had a farther reach and a larger impact, thus trely bringing the desktop to the masses.
Meh.
I think it was more of an emergent property than anything else.
I mean, an awful lot of stuff we seem to regard as groundbreaking is in fact an idea who's time has come. This is not to say that the people involved are not much more skilled and smarter than average. They are, but there's usually a bunch of them and history only remembers the winners.
This is actually somewhat common with Nobel prizes. Sure those 3 people get the prize. Look deeply and you find there was maybe a larger pool of deserving people, all of whom had seen the potential and were working those few years ahead of everyone else.
Computing was clearly coming to the masses. And desktops were clearly coming to the masses. All you have to do is look at the mass of excellent also-rans present at the time. I think if you were to knock out either Microsoft, Apple or both from the equation we'd be in a pretty similar place tech wise today with differences only in the details.
Regardless of what you think of the relative metits of those two, there was feirce competition in the market in the 80s and early 90s.
On the top end you had the various unix (and other! remember apollo?) vendors pushing their solutions. I doubt they'd ever have won since winning was hitting the commodity end, not the top end but you nver know. Someone might have had that realisation.
But on the low end there were also lots. Remember what the Amiga looked like in 1987, compared to Windows 2? Or the Atari? Unless you're British you probably won't remember Acorn's RiscOS which was yet another phenomenal one. There were tons of more obscure ones too.
Any of them could have brought computing to the masses, and in fact Acorn arguably did, given it (well it's spinout's) utter dominance these days.
My point is, the people who won were very good at their jobs, and only someone that good was going to win. But there were also 10x as many people but for a small quirk of history didn't win, or won something else. Desktop computing would have come either way and at the same time with or without any of the winners.