I'm sure that "tracking" your activity comes into play on this one. Google doesn't do anything for the benefit of users, unless it also benefits their tracking ability. Chrome is just an effort to track all web activity of a user.
I was accounting for his assumed lack of coordination and wanting to keep his fingers intact. Some people just never get the knack for rapidly cutting vegetables, and onions are one of the easier things to dice.
You either don't have money, or you don't have time. Rarely will you not have both as a "poor" person.
Unless you are a industrious poor person instead of a lazy poor person. I know the common narrative is that people are poor because they are lazy but in reality a lot of poor people work multiple jobs to make ends meet and work a lot harder than their middle class counterparts. Many are single parents who need to provide for a family on their income alone. I know it may seem to moderately well-off people that they worked hard to get where they are but in the majority of cases it was the circumstances into which you were born that determines your eventual earning power.
I know the common narrative is that middle class people don't work hard and are married, with 2.5 children
So how to not wind up the poor single parent listed above -
a) don't get married early
b) don't have children early in a marriage and before you can afford them
c) don't spend more than you make
d) don't expect to have your own place right away (goes along with b)
e) save
None of that guarantees you won't be poor, but your odds go way up compared to those that don't follow them. That presupposes you don't marry into money, of course. Bad choices have consequences.
Except that movie was a bunch of horseshit, as are most of the rumors that float around about fast food ingredients.
You missed the part that this was a response to "industry is far better at and spend much more money on influencing your individual behaviour (those 'choices' that you think you are making) than governments or public bodies can", not an argument for/against fast food or anything of the sort.
You're doing it wrong - an onion can be peeled and chopped in less than 5 min, 2 min if you have one of those choppers, but then you're spending at least 3 min putting it together and taking it apart and cleaning it, dishwasher or not.
No, the medical establishment (who still have unconscious roots in medieval moralism, mind you) will eventually decree that the only healthy diet is cardboard and sewer water.
The food industry has far more say over what you eat than scientific/medical establishment, and industry is far better at and spend much more money on influencing your individual behaviour (those 'choices' that you think you are making) than governments or public bodies can.
I don't know about that - McDonalds, among others, was hurt pretty badly by Spurlock's SuperSize Me film. Also the "pink goo" chicken nuggets, "parts is parts", etc stories/rumors that went around. Or Taco Bell's "it's less than 30% beef" beef taco lawsuit.
Regarding the cardboard being served for lunch at schools, I think that's already been achieved. It's all processed crap, at least locally, I don't think there's even an oven in the "kitchen".
There's a cremation service in the US that you can sign up for that will be... aggressive... in seeing your body cremated according to your wishes, (relatively) cheaply and quickly. Their market is precisely people who want to trump their family on this issue. But I'm blocking on the company name - anyone?
FTFY - nothing Reagan did really helped the individual, but did set into motion a whole bunch of stuff that lead ultimately to a second depression, or damn near enough. Maybe he was nostalgic? I used to think Reagan was good, but in analyzing his actions and the results with the benefit of hindsight, that is no longer the case. Was he the worst president? That would have been open to debate, except "W" takes the crown by a long long long shot there, across the board.
AFAIK, the statements of law enforcement are treated as fact, unless they can be proven false. So if an officer says he smelled marijuana, he smelled marijuana unless you can prove he did not. I'm not a fan of that either, but it is the way it is.
I can assuredly tell you that is not the case without corroborating evidence, at least not everywhere, even in the US. While an officer's word may unjustly carry more weight in a he said, she said situation, any secondary statement or evidence will negate solely the officer's word in my experience. And that is as it should be. I'm sure there are cases where this is not true, several I'm aware of are now being vacated because the officers in question have been charged with evidence tampering, calling into question every case they've been involved with.
In a separate issue, upon pulling the truck over the officer could recognize a potent marijuana smell, which under the Plain View Doctrine (that includes smell) allowed them to search the truck.
Hmm, is there any proof of this smell? If not, it is equivalent to hearsay, wouldn't you say? And no, 2 policemen do not make 2 separate witnesses, especially for this case. You only have to point to lots and lots of historical lying by police to invalidate that argument on reasonable doubt grounds. But then again, "smell" by itself doesn't do much for them, they need something tangible. In this case, they found plenty.
Sapphire is *not* the second hardest material known. Yes, it's written in the linked article, but it is also definitely wrong. It is hard, and it is harder than glass. That is all there is. Besides diamond. many other materials, such as some forms of boronnitride, rhenium and osmium borides, and a collection of carbon/boron/nitrogen mixed compounds are all far harder than sapphire.
So the hackintosh community benefits us again. I'll have to see about the video drivers for my MBP. If they're available in 10.9, I'll upgrade it someday. For now, it's fine on SL.
On the other hand, I could never go back to Snow Leopard after Mountain Lion, and especially not after Mavericks.
Why? (I'm honestly curious)
Note: I'm running SL, ML, and Mavericks, and I have to say, SL is the most stable, followed by Mavericks, ML is "ok", and my brief experience with Lion was only because ML came out and I decided to jump directly to it even though I had had a Lion disk for a year. (Yes, the "bad" stories made me hold off long enough for the "fix" to come out.)
I'm still not 100% happy with the effects of Grand Central, only because the stability has not been returned to SL standards. However, Mavericks is quite usable. The occasional "crash" is mediated by a 500+MB/s SSD, so restarts are sub 15s and used to occur maybe once every 30-45 days. The 10.9.1 patch has actually allowed me to reboot for reasons other than a crash. Oh, and I should mention that these crashes do not come with a dump, just blammo - restart. That never happened in SL, at least you got the infamous crash screen, if you ever had a crash that is. (You will occasionally if you're running a slew of PPC software)
All that said, for me, the main benefit of Grand Central is better handling of messaging and performance for applications that have the ability to be run in parallel. This is a major plus. I have barely changed my interface habits since panther, primarily because I use QuickSilver for launching apps and Cmd[-SHFT]-Tab and Cmd[-SHFT]-` to navigate apps and windows within an app. So all the Launchpad, Mission Control, Expose, Dashboard, Dockbar etc garbage don't even figure in my daily computer use. I minimize and hide the dockbar right after installing QuickSilver, and pretty much never see it again.
I was pretty sure that Vista was EOL'd already. W7 is scheduled for next year. Win8 is ended this year, all of course as far as "free" patches go.
Snow Leopard was still getting patches until Mar 2014. As for it being on sale, it's only there as a gateway for pre- Snow Leopard systems to get to Mavericks, however small that number may be. It's also a way to run PPC software on newer macs via Parallels or the like. Yes you can run that (accidentally) free copy of Adobe PS 2 you downloaded.
Yes, everything prior to the Santa Rosa machines circa 2009 I believe have essentially a hamstrung memory controller. Intel wasn't fully into the game yet, still playing catchup to AMD. I have a pre Santa Rosa MBP running SL still, because Lion/ML really aren't stable enough to warrant an upgrade. Yes, I have(had) machines running every thing from panther on up to mavericks, and Grand Central, while a great idea, was a massive architectural change that caused quite a few instabilities in the OS. Mavericks seems to be about as stable as Leopard, which isn't terrible, but even it isn't yet quite at the SL level yet.
True - being able to manage your browser recognized CAs should be a core function of IT anyways, along with cert replacements. The real cost will be born by customers who largely are unschooled and don't know enough to install new CAs (the worst case scenario where CA certs are replaced across the board and no SSL/TLS CA certs are valid.) On the other hand, it might be enough to do a quick browser check and get them to finally upgrade to a decent browser version that does include the latest CAs. Which, in retrospect, will wind up being a zero-cost item since they should be doing this anyways.
I definitely agree that we need to know more about what causes autism. The problem with the anti-vax crowd is that they are trying to force researchers to focus on vaccines (to some degree of success) which takes resources away from finding the real cause.
The anti-vax crowd should be segregated from society as a whole, and then exposed to everything they don't want to be vaccinated against "naturally" as there's still polio, measles, mumps, etc out there. Those that survive and are disease free may then rejoin society. I don't think too many would want to take that route.
Technically you're allowed to use large A roads (not motorways) for all sorts of things because they're public rights of way, so you are allowed to walk down them, ride (either bike or horse) down them, even drive geese down them. The speed limit is 70mph, but generally people drive up to 80.
Also, where ever practible, around on- and off-ramps.
I personally don't see the point in having lights on most highways given that cars carry around their own illumination, and going straight and changing lanes doesn't need too much effort without lamps. But given the shuffling about just before, and just after, ramps, it's worth spending the resources to improve safety.
For the rest of the length of most highways (even those through urban areas): meh.
The purpose of lights is to improve safety on high speed roads. Hence lighted highways. Otherwise, night time driving would have to be slowed significantly to be safe, unless you're driving with high beams. The oncoming traffic or the guy in front of you may not like that much, and even then, it's probably significantly slower max safe speed as compared to a lighted road.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure that "tracking" your activity comes into play on this one. Google doesn't do anything for the benefit of users, unless it also benefits their tracking ability. Chrome is just an effort to track all web activity of a user.
TIL CTRL+INS, SHIFT+INS works the same way as CTRL+C, CTRL+V. Who knew!
Anyone who is aware of CUA
and yet getting that energy into a rotational mechanical energy is where there is a large amount of loss.
I was accounting for his assumed lack of coordination and wanting to keep his fingers intact. Some people just never get the knack for rapidly cutting vegetables, and onions are one of the easier things to dice.
You are aware that vegetables / fruits also have proteins and carbohydrates and can be present in salads?
You either don't have money, or you don't have time. Rarely will you not have both as a "poor" person.
Unless you are a industrious poor person instead of a lazy poor person. I know the common narrative is that people are poor because they are lazy but in reality a lot of poor people work multiple jobs to make ends meet and work a lot harder than their middle class counterparts. Many are single parents who need to provide for a family on their income alone. I know it may seem to moderately well-off people that they worked hard to get where they are but in the majority of cases it was the circumstances into which you were born that determines your eventual earning power.
I know the common narrative is that middle class people don't work hard and are married, with 2.5 children
So how to not wind up the poor single parent listed above -
None of that guarantees you won't be poor, but your odds go way up compared to those that don't follow them. That presupposes you don't marry into money, of course. Bad choices have consequences.
Spurlock's SuperSize Me
Except that movie was a bunch of horseshit, as are most of the rumors that float around about fast food ingredients.
You missed the part that this was a response to "industry is far better at and spend much more money on influencing your individual behaviour (those 'choices' that you think you are making) than governments or public bodies can", not an argument for/against fast food or anything of the sort.
The previous post was discussing the problems of not having enough money or time to cook (because you are poor).
You either don't have money, or you don't have time. Rarely will you not have both as a "poor" person.
You're doing it wrong - an onion can be peeled and chopped in less than 5 min, 2 min if you have one of those choppers, but then you're spending at least 3 min putting it together and taking it apart and cleaning it, dishwasher or not.
No, the medical establishment (who still have unconscious roots in medieval moralism, mind you) will eventually decree that the only healthy diet is cardboard and sewer water.
The food industry has far more say over what you eat than scientific/medical establishment, and industry is far better at and spend much more money on influencing your individual behaviour (those 'choices' that you think you are making) than governments or public bodies can.
I don't know about that - McDonalds, among others, was hurt pretty badly by Spurlock's SuperSize Me film. Also the "pink goo" chicken nuggets, "parts is parts", etc stories/rumors that went around. Or Taco Bell's "it's less than 30% beef" beef taco lawsuit.
Regarding the cardboard being served for lunch at schools, I think that's already been achieved. It's all processed crap, at least locally, I don't think there's even an oven in the "kitchen".
There's a cremation service in the US that you can sign up for that will be ... aggressive ... in seeing your body cremated according to your wishes, (relatively) cheaply and quickly. Their market is precisely people who want to trump their family on this issue. But I'm blocking on the company name - anyone?
Soylent.
"get-the-government-off-the-backs-of-the-wealthy/industry-Reagan"
FTFY - nothing Reagan did really helped the individual, but did set into motion a whole bunch of stuff that lead ultimately to a second depression, or damn near enough. Maybe he was nostalgic? I used to think Reagan was good, but in analyzing his actions and the results with the benefit of hindsight, that is no longer the case. Was he the worst president? That would have been open to debate, except "W" takes the crown by a long long long shot there, across the board.
AFAIK, the statements of law enforcement are treated as fact, unless they can be proven false. So if an officer says he smelled marijuana, he smelled marijuana unless you can prove he did not. I'm not a fan of that either, but it is the way it is.
I can assuredly tell you that is not the case without corroborating evidence, at least not everywhere, even in the US. While an officer's word may unjustly carry more weight in a he said, she said situation, any secondary statement or evidence will negate solely the officer's word in my experience. And that is as it should be. I'm sure there are cases where this is not true, several I'm aware of are now being vacated because the officers in question have been charged with evidence tampering, calling into question every case they've been involved with.
In a separate issue, upon pulling the truck over the officer could recognize a potent marijuana smell, which under the Plain View Doctrine (that includes smell) allowed them to search the truck.
Hmm, is there any proof of this smell? If not, it is equivalent to hearsay, wouldn't you say? And no, 2 policemen do not make 2 separate witnesses, especially for this case. You only have to point to lots and lots of historical lying by police to invalidate that argument on reasonable doubt grounds. But then again, "smell" by itself doesn't do much for them, they need something tangible. In this case, they found plenty.
While it may have worked out ok in this situation it is a very bad president.
It might be better than last few presidents we've had.
Sapphire is *not* the second hardest material known. Yes, it's written in the linked article, but it is also definitely wrong. It is hard, and it is harder than glass. That is all there is. Besides diamond. many other materials, such as some forms of boronnitride, rhenium and osmium borides, and a collection of carbon/boron/nitrogen mixed compounds are all far harder than sapphire.
But how many of those are transparent?
So the hackintosh community benefits us again. I'll have to see about the video drivers for my MBP. If they're available in 10.9, I'll upgrade it someday. For now, it's fine on SL.
On the other hand, I could never go back to Snow Leopard after Mountain Lion, and especially not after Mavericks.
Why? (I'm honestly curious)
Note: I'm running SL, ML, and Mavericks, and I have to say, SL is the most stable, followed by Mavericks, ML is "ok", and my brief experience with Lion was only because ML came out and I decided to jump directly to it even though I had had a Lion disk for a year. (Yes, the "bad" stories made me hold off long enough for the "fix" to come out.)
I'm still not 100% happy with the effects of Grand Central, only because the stability has not been returned to SL standards. However, Mavericks is quite usable. The occasional "crash" is mediated by a 500+MB/s SSD, so restarts are sub 15s and used to occur maybe once every 30-45 days. The 10.9.1 patch has actually allowed me to reboot for reasons other than a crash. Oh, and I should mention that these crashes do not come with a dump, just blammo - restart. That never happened in SL, at least you got the infamous crash screen, if you ever had a crash that is. (You will occasionally if you're running a slew of PPC software)
All that said, for me, the main benefit of Grand Central is better handling of messaging and performance for applications that have the ability to be run in parallel. This is a major plus. I have barely changed my interface habits since panther, primarily because I use QuickSilver for launching apps and Cmd[-SHFT]-Tab and Cmd[-SHFT]-` to navigate apps and windows within an app. So all the Launchpad, Mission Control, Expose, Dashboard, Dockbar etc garbage don't even figure in my daily computer use. I minimize and hide the dockbar right after installing QuickSilver, and pretty much never see it again.
Except the version of the OS on his machine isn't affected by that bug...
I was pretty sure that Vista was EOL'd already. W7 is scheduled for next year. Win8 is ended this year, all of course as far as "free" patches go.
Snow Leopard was still getting patches until Mar 2014. As for it being on sale, it's only there as a gateway for pre- Snow Leopard systems to get to Mavericks, however small that number may be. It's also a way to run PPC software on newer macs via Parallels or the like. Yes you can run that (accidentally) free copy of Adobe PS 2 you downloaded.
Yes, everything prior to the Santa Rosa machines circa 2009 I believe have essentially a hamstrung memory controller. Intel wasn't fully into the game yet, still playing catchup to AMD. I have a pre Santa Rosa MBP running SL still, because Lion/ML really aren't stable enough to warrant an upgrade. Yes, I have(had) machines running every thing from panther on up to mavericks, and Grand Central, while a great idea, was a massive architectural change that caused quite a few instabilities in the OS. Mavericks seems to be about as stable as Leopard, which isn't terrible, but even it isn't yet quite at the SL level yet.
True - being able to manage your browser recognized CAs should be a core function of IT anyways, along with cert replacements. The real cost will be born by customers who largely are unschooled and don't know enough to install new CAs (the worst case scenario where CA certs are replaced across the board and no SSL/TLS CA certs are valid.) On the other hand, it might be enough to do a quick browser check and get them to finally upgrade to a decent browser version that does include the latest CAs. Which, in retrospect, will wind up being a zero-cost item since they should be doing this anyways.
I definitely agree that we need to know more about what causes autism. The problem with the anti-vax crowd is that they are trying to force researchers to focus on vaccines (to some degree of success) which takes resources away from finding the real cause.
The anti-vax crowd should be segregated from society as a whole, and then exposed to everything they don't want to be vaccinated against "naturally" as there's still polio, measles, mumps, etc out there. Those that survive and are disease free may then rejoin society. I don't think too many would want to take that route.
Technically you're allowed to use large A roads (not motorways) for all sorts of things because they're public rights of way, so you are allowed to walk down them, ride (either bike or horse) down them, even drive geese down them. The speed limit is 70mph, but generally people drive up to 80.
So I guess those that drive geese down them at midnight wind up with lots of pate if this is any guide to effective lighting distances?
Also, where ever practible, around on- and off-ramps.
I personally don't see the point in having lights on most highways given that cars carry around their own illumination, and going straight and changing lanes doesn't need too much effort without lamps. But given the shuffling about just before, and just after, ramps, it's worth spending the resources to improve safety.
For the rest of the length of most highways (even those through urban areas): meh.
The purpose of lights is to improve safety on high speed roads. Hence lighted highways. Otherwise, night time driving would have to be slowed significantly to be safe, unless you're driving with high beams. The oncoming traffic or the guy in front of you may not like that much, and even then, it's probably significantly slower max safe speed as compared to a lighted road.