Scanners have long solved the problem of transforming paper into electronic documents, and enforce an editing and record keeping discipline. Pen or pencil and paper (notebook or pad-folio style) are vastly more reliable input devices, and more flexible output devices in terms of visual real-estate and cost; it doesn't cost several thousand dollars to put together a 20' by 20' display with paper, instead maybe $20 if you use very nice paper. In many cases where content is digital first, practical use requires it be turned into paper (printed); displaying a five thousand step flow-chart process is much easier with a printout than anything digital.
Manufacturing quality isn't an accident, and failure of quality isn't an accident - it's a sign of short-sighted project development. Cars don't work like software projects so the typical slashdot geek has no concept for understanding this problem, and combined with popular support for "underdog" products many will try to sweep this under the rug. Reality is that this business model of pushing quality control onto the consumer is immoral because it puts those with the least power at the most risk. NHTSA and other groups in every country now needs to investigate everything regardless of the the media damage control.
The purpose isn't the same, so the mission isn't the same. Killing pirates when long-range communication at sea didn't exist, everything was powered by slow wind and navigation was guess-work isn't equivalent to killing them now, not by a long shot.
Who pays to retrofit all existing shipping tonnage? How is your new "modern" ship with those unnecesarily complex systems and failure points requiring increased maintenance competitive in the market? Hint: Nobody will, and it isn't.
Nope, all arming merchant ships did historically was increase costs. The best value in concentration of force is a Navy, and it's action is not for purely material protection without real risk to life. Despite your ultra-violent fantasies the real world works very differently, and the only outcome for what you propose is an arms race that results in more unnecessary deaths, and only increasing losses to shipping increasing insurance costs.
Why should your ambiguous navy board an automated ship where no human lives are at risk? I think you've been playing too many video games and have forgotten that soldiers are human too and have families, etc. Professionals are not for risk taking when human lives are not at stake.
Are you familiar with the notion of an intermodal container? TEUs are the opposite of small, and routinely are stacked on deck until the ship is barely above waterline. Building any "vault" around some adds weight that would reduce load capacity unacceptably.
Those were polls on vastly different groups, so the results can't be directly compared. There needs comparable percentage of electorate to be involved, and to have consistent campaigns held to task for promises.
Except Switzerland and Norway are in the EEA for trade advantages, are subject to all the freedom of movement rules and other policies of the EU absorbed into it (5000+), pay significant fees to Brussels anyway, and simply have no representation. EU membership is better.
Britain's exit is to the detriment of workers, financiers, and everybody who isn't just living on a pension or already among the political elite and wealthy in Britain. Britain will reenter the EU within a decade, as the demographics shift. The single benefit to the EU in the meantime is that removal of the xenophobic nationalists and their puppet masters (see previous description) is that it will allow more freedom to expand into the Balkans and simplify the ascension of Turkey. Farther in the future it may actually enable a greater European-Mediterranean union stabilizing the Levant and North Africa (which both have more in common historically and economically with Europe than with Sub-Saharan Africa). Only then when Europe is solid and joined with the territory formerly occupied in colonization can it face down Russia (who still retains colonized territory in Central Asia and Siberia, with large parts taken from China in the old Nerchinsk treaties).
Except that's wrong. To enter the single market of the EEA Norway and Switzerland both agreed to every regulation involving free movement (immigrants) and pay fees to Brussels that are effectively tribute because they forgo any representation and influence on their use.
OK, you're stuck in opinion, but regressive has a definition in economics. You don't get to make up one. You are shifting from theory to complaint but I will still respond to your issue. Someone in the wealthy group has gained advantage from the structure created by the taxes paid. That is why they are obligated to pay more. It is not some artificial virtual environment that created them and the opportunity used but rather the situation created by taxes.
Try some algebra - the key word is share as in % which explains the problem with all fantasy "flat" plans including this consumables one. If you are poor then you spend all of your paycheck on consumables to live and you pay 100% of whatever the fantasy rate is, while the wealthy buy such consumables with only a fraction of their paycheck and the rest put to other uses so they pay something lower than 100% of whatever rate is. That is regressive taxation where the wealthy pay a lower rate than the poor by design.
That's not just wrong it's a bad joke. Even supposing such limited sample was significant, statistical analysis requires a judgement call on the meaning of differences. I doubt every bit of data there compared to each other was collected in the same manner over the same time, and that the claimed differences are either traceable to other causes than those listed or will disappear into error.
Parent needs to be +5 Informative! Grandparent post is out of date by decades, and ignores the difference between analog broadcast on limited spectrum and the modern web with hypertext media.
Danger there is a return to Sega Saturn days with 8 individual processors - that complicates programming significantly, and kills 3rd-party developments.
I think you never experienced the days of separate hardware 2D and 3D video accelerators. It is entirely possible to have one built into the display for the normal display and TV functions, and another in a computer attached to it which is used for 3D acceleration.
Think interpolation - a lower quality signal doesn't change the hardware requirements to manipulate and control 15 million individual pixels for contrast and brightness regulation with ambient lighting; that is a feature advertised heavily for cinema displays.
I've hoped Apple would take this design route for years; their other existing product lines benefit from having a superior display provide independent capabilities. Think of the future where a more universal video connector allows everything from iPhones to MacAir, etc. to connect and display video on it seamlessly. That is the crucial issue with modern multi-device households - no single visual interface, even when all the devices are in the same room. That will change now.
Your claim is ambiguous and lacks any data to support it because you are ascribing a motivation to a group without defining that group in any clear terms, as well as continuing argument by hand-waving. I am the original poster of this thread, and I am the only one who has posted relevant, specific, and timely data to this thread. You claim data was biased which I refuted and explained by citing another objective source. Try again.
Suicide inclusion is not significant in ranking states because it effects each score equally. In this case for 2013 it was 6.7 per 100K, so take the QZ article chart and subtract 6.7 from every score. Notice something? That uniform subtraction doesn't change the order. See here . Basically your poor argument is based on you using the word "statistical" while having extremely low numerical literacy.
Slashdot Mirror
Scanners have long solved the problem of transforming paper into electronic documents, and enforce an editing and record keeping discipline. Pen or pencil and paper (notebook or pad-folio style) are vastly more reliable input devices, and more flexible output devices in terms of visual real-estate and cost; it doesn't cost several thousand dollars to put together a 20' by 20' display with paper, instead maybe $20 if you use very nice paper. In many cases where content is digital first, practical use requires it be turned into paper (printed); displaying a five thousand step flow-chart process is much easier with a printout than anything digital.
BSD is decades older than Linux, and both imitate classic Unix with some extensions.
Manufacturing quality isn't an accident, and failure of quality isn't an accident - it's a sign of short-sighted project development. Cars don't work like software projects so the typical slashdot geek has no concept for understanding this problem, and combined with popular support for "underdog" products many will try to sweep this under the rug. Reality is that this business model of pushing quality control onto the consumer is immoral because it puts those with the least power at the most risk. NHTSA and other groups in every country now needs to investigate everything regardless of the the media damage control.
The city of San Francisco receives federal funds (for something or another, I assure you).
Trump?
The purpose isn't the same, so the mission isn't the same. Killing pirates when long-range communication at sea didn't exist, everything was powered by slow wind and navigation was guess-work isn't equivalent to killing them now, not by a long shot.
Who pays to retrofit all existing shipping tonnage? How is your new "modern" ship with those unnecesarily complex systems and failure points requiring increased maintenance competitive in the market? Hint: Nobody will, and it isn't.
Nope, all arming merchant ships did historically was increase costs. The best value in concentration of force is a Navy, and it's action is not for purely material protection without real risk to life. Despite your ultra-violent fantasies the real world works very differently, and the only outcome for what you propose is an arms race that results in more unnecessary deaths, and only increasing losses to shipping increasing insurance costs.
Why should your ambiguous navy board an automated ship where no human lives are at risk? I think you've been playing too many video games and have forgotten that soldiers are human too and have families, etc. Professionals are not for risk taking when human lives are not at stake.
You're wrong.
Are you familiar with the notion of an intermodal container? TEUs are the opposite of small, and routinely are stacked on deck until the ship is barely above waterline. Building any "vault" around some adds weight that would reduce load capacity unacceptably.
Those were polls on vastly different groups, so the results can't be directly compared. There needs comparable percentage of electorate to be involved, and to have consistent campaigns held to task for promises.
Britain is guilty of plenty of that too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Except Switzerland and Norway are in the EEA for trade advantages, are subject to all the freedom of movement rules and other policies of the EU absorbed into it (5000+), pay significant fees to Brussels anyway, and simply have no representation. EU membership is better.
Britain's exit is to the detriment of workers, financiers, and everybody who isn't just living on a pension or already among the political elite and wealthy in Britain. Britain will reenter the EU within a decade, as the demographics shift. The single benefit to the EU in the meantime is that removal of the xenophobic nationalists and their puppet masters (see previous description) is that it will allow more freedom to expand into the Balkans and simplify the ascension of Turkey. Farther in the future it may actually enable a greater European-Mediterranean union stabilizing the Levant and North Africa (which both have more in common historically and economically with Europe than with Sub-Saharan Africa). Only then when Europe is solid and joined with the territory formerly occupied in colonization can it face down Russia (who still retains colonized territory in Central Asia and Siberia, with large parts taken from China in the old Nerchinsk treaties).
Except that's wrong. To enter the single market of the EEA Norway and Switzerland both agreed to every regulation involving free movement (immigrants) and pay fees to Brussels that are effectively tribute because they forgo any representation and influence on their use.
OK, you're stuck in opinion, but regressive has a definition in economics. You don't get to make up one. You are shifting from theory to complaint but I will still respond to your issue. Someone in the wealthy group has gained advantage from the structure created by the taxes paid. That is why they are obligated to pay more. It is not some artificial virtual environment that created them and the opportunity used but rather the situation created by taxes.
Try some algebra - the key word is share as in % which explains the problem with all fantasy "flat" plans including this consumables one. If you are poor then you spend all of your paycheck on consumables to live and you pay 100% of whatever the fantasy rate is, while the wealthy buy such consumables with only a fraction of their paycheck and the rest put to other uses so they pay something lower than 100% of whatever rate is. That is regressive taxation where the wealthy pay a lower rate than the poor by design.
That's not just wrong it's a bad joke. Even supposing such limited sample was significant, statistical analysis requires a judgement call on the meaning of differences. I doubt every bit of data there compared to each other was collected in the same manner over the same time, and that the claimed differences are either traceable to other causes than those listed or will disappear into error.
Parent needs to be +5 Informative! Grandparent post is out of date by decades, and ignores the difference between analog broadcast on limited spectrum and the modern web with hypertext media.
Danger there is a return to Sega Saturn days with 8 individual processors - that complicates programming significantly, and kills 3rd-party developments.
I think you never experienced the days of separate hardware 2D and 3D video accelerators. It is entirely possible to have one built into the display for the normal display and TV functions, and another in a computer attached to it which is used for 3D acceleration.
Think interpolation - a lower quality signal doesn't change the hardware requirements to manipulate and control 15 million individual pixels for contrast and brightness regulation with ambient lighting; that is a feature advertised heavily for cinema displays.
I've hoped Apple would take this design route for years; their other existing product lines benefit from having a superior display provide independent capabilities. Think of the future where a more universal video connector allows everything from iPhones to MacAir, etc. to connect and display video on it seamlessly. That is the crucial issue with modern multi-device households - no single visual interface, even when all the devices are in the same room. That will change now.
Your claim is ambiguous and lacks any data to support it because you are ascribing a motivation to a group without defining that group in any clear terms, as well as continuing argument by hand-waving. I am the original poster of this thread, and I am the only one who has posted relevant, specific, and timely data to this thread. You claim data was biased which I refuted and explained by citing another objective source. Try again.
Suicide inclusion is not significant in ranking states because it effects each score equally. In this case for 2013 it was 6.7 per 100K, so take the QZ article chart and subtract 6.7 from every score. Notice something? That uniform subtraction doesn't change the order. See here . Basically your poor argument is based on you using the word "statistical" while having extremely low numerical literacy.