I strongly believe the crutches will greatly increase the probability that a person won't quit smoking.
Yes, lots of people strongly believe stupid shit despite all available evidence to the contrary that makes them feel better about themselves. See SUVs and anti-vaxxers.
Well obviously the editors are not going to be experts in every subject, now should they be expected to heavily edit every contribution, so what's so wrong about a site in which if some people have a question, they can ask, and it gets answered?
The notion that this entire pattern of bitching and moaning about "lousy" summaries, "terrible" editing wasn't daily in the earliest days of/. is romantic rose coloured glasses bullshit. If people have questions, some people ask those questions, some people answer those questions, and some people whine and complain and falsely claim that things used to be so much better in some sorry attempt at seeming senior. Nothing is new, there were whiny dipshits back then and there are whiny dipshits today.
You would think you have better things to do, like eat, drink, work, sleep than comment on a/. story.
Actually not too many people would think that because they'd recognize that we can do lots of things. In your code bases, do minor and easy to address bugs never get addressed on the basis that there 'should be more important bugs'? See how stupid that sounds?
Humans enjoy entertainment and games as forms of engagement just as they enjoy work and getting things done. I don't think it's a controversial stance to say that video games, board games, sports, or other types of games have value.
You should stand in science centers and museums where they write large numbers like this on displays to make it easier to visualize how large a number it is, and point out to passing people that there's a shorter way of writing it. Hell, you could dedicate your entire life to being a tedious bore on a mission to educate nobody!
I've been to Taipei (and Kaohsiung) multiple times. The subway system is nice, but it's awfully easy to ignore that the first line opened in 1996. It's still new by major infrastructure standards. It's not really fair to just compare systems between Taipei and NYC. Public transit is good, important, and does indeed work, but it presents serious challenges to the public's appetite for investment in transit when those systems reach a point where they require massive injections of capital which happens much later in a subway systems lifetime than where Taipei is at.
For smarter people, they will KNOW whether it's actually dangerous or not.
I see this time and time again, the notion that dumber people will get what's coming to them, but everyone affects everyone else. We all vote, we share the same civic spaces, we share infrastructure, tax base, etc. You want protections in place that protect the dumber people, not the smarter people. By the very nature of the definition of smarter people, they don't need protection. But that protection isn't for the sake of the individual, it's for the sake of the society and nation state.
Probably the thing that reflects poorest on the USA in my decades of living is that that enough Americans elected that sentient As Seen on TV sticker to office. *sad trombone*
What the fuck are you arguing against? Somebody said move to your job rather than care about the improvement of roads and transportation. The other person said that's not a practical solution for huge swaths of people when there's two jobs and kids. Your point is, apparently, "Yes, you're right, it's not a solution, stop whining about it."
Like somebody saying, "Hey this could make things better" and your answer is "My perceived experience with this inconvenience means you shouldn't be interested in whether the conditions dealing with it deteriorate or improve." You're a dumbfuck, cayenne8. Every fucking day.
Some people certainly believe it's an appropriate solution, which is why I was asking. There are even replies to my comment from people who assert it's a logical line of action.
It ends with extinguish. First used over 20 years ago, used to describe microsoft's approach to a wealth of product categories (browser, email, messaging, java... the list goes on) none of which it managed to extinguish (and at a managerially distinct Microsoft for all intents and purposes.)
The people who are overly concerned with it don't seem to really know their tech history and/or are giving Microsoft a lot of credit it hasn't earned in 20 years of trying.
Slashdot Mirror
I strongly believe the crutches will greatly increase the probability that a person won't quit smoking.
Yes, lots of people strongly believe stupid shit despite all available evidence to the contrary that makes them feel better about themselves. See SUVs and anti-vaxxers.
The Mac Pro was not a laptop.
Well obviously the editors are not going to be experts in every subject, now should they be expected to heavily edit every contribution, so what's so wrong about a site in which if some people have a question, they can ask, and it gets answered?
The notion that this entire pattern of bitching and moaning about "lousy" summaries, "terrible" editing wasn't daily in the earliest days of /. is romantic rose coloured glasses bullshit. If people have questions, some people ask those questions, some people answer those questions, and some people whine and complain and falsely claim that things used to be so much better in some sorry attempt at seeming senior. Nothing is new, there were whiny dipshits back then and there are whiny dipshits today.
being subsidized should be familiar to lots of people outside of major urban areas
that should have felt as dumb to type as it was to read
What a load of horseshit, but I understand why people are compelled to believe this malarkey.
Deliberate ignorance is the dumbest ignorance.
You would think you have better things to do, like eat, drink, work, sleep than comment on a /. story.
Actually not too many people would think that because they'd recognize that we can do lots of things. In your code bases, do minor and easy to address bugs never get addressed on the basis that there 'should be more important bugs'? See how stupid that sounds?
lol
Humans enjoy entertainment and games as forms of engagement just as they enjoy work and getting things done. I don't think it's a controversial stance to say that video games, board games, sports, or other types of games have value.
You should stand in science centers and museums where they write large numbers like this on displays to make it easier to visualize how large a number it is, and point out to passing people that there's a shorter way of writing it. Hell, you could dedicate your entire life to being a tedious bore on a mission to educate nobody!
Better at saying stuff, sure.
I've been to Taipei (and Kaohsiung) multiple times. The subway system is nice, but it's awfully easy to ignore that the first line opened in 1996. It's still new by major infrastructure standards. It's not really fair to just compare systems between Taipei and NYC. Public transit is good, important, and does indeed work, but it presents serious challenges to the public's appetite for investment in transit when those systems reach a point where they require massive injections of capital which happens much later in a subway systems lifetime than where Taipei is at.
Most of those problems are just engineering issues
Yes, that's the point engineering issues so challenging that they will not be solved in a 'for pratical purposes' future.
The issue with noise and error is, as it turns out, already a basically solved problem
I assume Mikhail Dyakonov knows more about this stuff than you do and thus that you know not the devil in the details.
For smarter people, they will KNOW whether it's actually dangerous or not.
I see this time and time again, the notion that dumber people will get what's coming to them, but everyone affects everyone else. We all vote, we share the same civic spaces, we share infrastructure, tax base, etc. You want protections in place that protect the dumber people, not the smarter people. By the very nature of the definition of smarter people, they don't need protection. But that protection isn't for the sake of the individual, it's for the sake of the society and nation state.
Probably the thing that reflects poorest on the USA in my decades of living is that that enough Americans elected that sentient As Seen on TV sticker to office. *sad trombone*
This is the kind of overreaction porn I come to slashdot for.
It's not miserable if you have something more than tissue-paper thin skin.
The Dunning–Kruger effect, ladies and gentlemen!
I don't even *own* an Internet!
What the fuck are you arguing against? Somebody said move to your job rather than care about the improvement of roads and transportation. The other person said that's not a practical solution for huge swaths of people when there's two jobs and kids. Your point is, apparently, "Yes, you're right, it's not a solution, stop whining about it."
Like somebody saying, "Hey this could make things better" and your answer is "My perceived experience with this inconvenience means you shouldn't be interested in whether the conditions dealing with it deteriorate or improve." You're a dumbfuck, cayenne8. Every fucking day.
things you can do with linux:
- open a browser
- configure linux
- tinker with linux
the end
Some people certainly believe it's an appropriate solution, which is why I was asking. There are even replies to my comment from people who assert it's a logical line of action.
some might wonder if the horrible quality of Internet Explorer wasn't actually an attempt to kill the whole internet in the same way
Some people who have comically distorted senses of proportion and perception might, sure.
It ends with extinguish. First used over 20 years ago, used to describe microsoft's approach to a wealth of product categories (browser, email, messaging, java ... the list goes on) none of which it managed to extinguish (and at a managerially distinct Microsoft for all intents and purposes.)
The people who are overly concerned with it don't seem to really know their tech history and/or are giving Microsoft a lot of credit it hasn't earned in 20 years of trying.