Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Of course it doesn't. But if you're a libertarian and prioritize social issues, you might hold your nose and accept Sanders' economic policy rather than accept the Dominionist totalitarianism that the rest of the Republican candidates want.
Re:Hammerheads in Vermont
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Not true. Sanders and (for example) Rand Paul agree on a surprisingly large number of issues, especially on things like the PATRIOT Act.
Even those of us who are career programmers aren't necessarily git users, and I'm pretty sure "pull request" is a git-ism. I think it's kind of like a commit (or maybe branch merge) in more traditional version-control systems, except under the control of the project manager instead of the person submitting the code.
- Women take fewer risks, and thus are more likely to provide solutions that are accepted? The authors cite a study that claims women are, on average, more risk-averse than men. However, this is inconsistent with the observation that women change more lines of code.
"Taking fewer risks" can mean things other than reducing the scope of the change. In particular, it can mean testing more thoroughly instead. In true Slashdot tradition, I didn't read the article -- did it say anything about defect rates in code written by women as compared to code written by men?
Most excellent. I'm going to presume you'll not go stalking me? I've met a whole bunch of Slashdotters (well, at least a couple dozen) in real life and none of them have yet stalked me or harassed me. In fact, we got along quite well. I see you have me on your "foes" list. I don't mind that, that doesn't bother me at all.
Nah, I don't care who you are -- only if you're persuasive or not. Apparently, at some point in the past I found you to be offensively unpersuasive...
Let me try this and we'll see where it goes. I might as well at least demonstrate that I don't pull numbers out of my ass. I don't know when you where in the industry last but, here's a citation for that figure that I gave you about striping and the value of it:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publi...
Ah, that article talks about rural two-lane roads, arterials, freeways, and interstates. Urban collector and local streets are conspicuous by their absence from the article (rural collectors are mentioned, and local streets are mentioned only once to note that they're omitted from a chart).
That's some overzealous marking - and check the signage around Atlanta (around the 285 as I recall?) where they've got signs for everything. Some of them don't even make sense! In the days before GPS was ubiquitous, I once followed seemingly every sign in the area (on and around that bypass) to find a suburb that began with an M... It wasn't Marietta, I know where that is and I remember the name. I followed them all... I turns out, When I wasn't on the bypass, I was missing the correct options to take.
Morrow or Mableton, maybe?
Anyway, I'm from Metro Atlanta and don't get down to the coast very much, so I don't know about the excessive signage on I-95. I certainly know about how the signage stops being adequate when you get off the interstate, but I can't think of any that's wrong on it. I wish you were more specific in that example (and also that you had an example of excessive striping near Atlanta -- or alternatively, a Google Maps link of your example off I-95 so I could see what you're talking about).
Back on topic: it seems to me that the UK's strategy here is to remove striping on the roads that are the least like the ones your link addresses, urban collectors and local streets. In terms of Panama City Beach, think of applying it to places like Front Beach Road -- the part where all the tourist trap stuff is, that's too choked with pedestrians for traffic to move fast anyway -- not US 98 and not highway 30 outside of town. Or for perhaps a better example, whatever streets constitute "downtown" in Panama City itself, assuming it has a downtown.
Or in terms of Atlanta, think of applying it to Peachtree Street in Midtown or Downtown, but not a road like Northside Drive (which, as you can see, is so pedestrian-unfriendly that they have Jersey barriers to keep people from trying to cross).
Why is it salient as to what I might recommend? Well, that's up to you to judge but I was paid quite handsomely to do exactly that, and more, prior to selling and retiring. This is, quite specifically, something my company would have done. Well, they still do it - I'm just no longer the owner. They're still quite successful at it. I didn't do it on my own but I was kind of "the guy" who brought the industry forward to where we were modeling traffic fairly well and with increased accuracy - on a computer. (Those three words, again...) So, you can weight my opinion based on that, if you want.
I'm actually quite familiar with the motive, method, and use-case for this sort of change in traffic patterns. They are doing this on low-speed, bi-directional, surface streets and rural lanes. That doesn't make it safe. Painted lines actually have a return on investment. That return includes safety.
I can't quite the UK estimates (they're probably similar) but a study from 1993 (so likely higher now) indicates that the estimate is that a single dollar spent on painting lines is worth $60 in realized value through increased safety, productivity, etc... And, obviously, that's subject to the Law of Diminishing Returns. There's a point where too many lines is not helping a damned thing (I'm looking at you Georgia) and the number is based on best-practices at the time. It's probably higher today than it was, it had been trending up for some time and those are unadjusted figures.
As a former traffic engineer (now software engineer) in Georgia, I'd love for you to elaborate on this.
to avoid lockout, have machines emulate the phone and try every combination to unlock the phone (difficulty: developer)
It's not that it's difficult, it's just that it requires more time than the heat death of the universe to execute.
I don't deny the FBI director's assertion that they were unable to decrypt the phone; I deny his assertion that their failure constitutes any kind of problem.
The difference doesn't come from whether the line actually exists or not; the difference comes from the fact that when you remove the line, cars are no longer prohibited from driving across where it was. In other words, drivers slow down because they might have to yield to oncoming traffic where they didn't before. It turns the street into something closer to a shared space.
I'd expect drivers are slowing down because the road is less safe without the lines, and are adjusting their speed to reclaim that lost safety factor. So they are making a somewhat arbitrary adjustment to reduce road safety, so that people respond by making an equally arbitrary counter-adjustment. How they figure +x-y ends up being a lower value when x and y are completely unknown, is astonishing.
It's counter-intuitive, but it works.
More to the point, we're talking about urban streets here, not rural highways. The change in drivers' safety mostly cancels out, but pedestrians and cyclists get a net increase in safety from the lower automobile speeds.
The second thing I'll say is that I'd need some SERIOUS consideration before I'd recommend this step in any locale. I would want to see a whole lot of proof before I recommended anyone removing center line markings, at least not not systematically. There are a couple of areas where I can see not adding them if they do not already exist. (And I'd be unlikely to have been consulted on such a route.) If you want to go for maximum safety, should space and budget allow, then a few meridian design options are known to be the safest division.
If the width of the entire paved surface is smaller than two minimal sized lanes, I'd suggest not painting a center line if it does not already exist. However, center-lane *and* outer-lane markings are ideal, where applicable and in the US. I'd have to dredge up some very old paperwork (and it's probably on paper) to offer an opinion about that aspect specifically for the UK. But, I'd need to see a whole lot of research and evidence before I recommended that this be done - and the burden of proof increases greatly in order to recommend this as a unilateral change.
If you read the article, you'll see that they're talking about removing center lane markings on urban streets, not rural highways. In other words, we're talking about low-speed designs with a lot of driveways and intersections, restricted sight lines, and many non-automobile road users (i.e., cyclists and pedestrians). US-style divided highways with wide lanes are a wholly inappropriate solution for such situations because they are designed to be safe for cars traveling at high speed, to the exclusion of everything else. In contrast, in urban areas "worse is better" because making drivers "feel" unsafe causes them to slow down and drive more carefully, increasing safety for the cyclists and pedestrians.
GPS is not necessary (and more pointedly, lack of GPS is not an excuse!). The road was built and striped initially using traditional surveying techniques; there's no reason the people doing the re-striping couldn't refer back to the original plans, measure, and do their jobs properly. The only explanations for changing the lane markings during re-striping are (a) deliberate intent or (b) incompetence.
That's because it's only a vulnerability in retrospect -- it was intended as a feature.
(Linux shared libraries -- the fact that every application can use the same copy of, say, GTK instead of having to replicate it -- are the same kind of deal.)
I haven't read the article, but I suppose the countermeasure is that DLLs should be signed or have hashes checked before loading or something like that.
I like it -- and if the fake tech support person is smart enough, he'll be even more offended: when the father calls his child a S-O-B, he's really accusing himself of bestiality.
The prisoners in Gitmo were primarily captured in war zones. Miranda rights, warrants, and all manner of other requirements for due process have no place there.
Okay, fine -- in that case, the Geneva Convention applies instead.
Would be great if everyone in the world had the same cultural values.
No shit! And here in America, our cultural values are FREEDOM and JUSTICE! You can go take your sniveling, cowardly, authoritarian ass and fuck off to North Korea where you belong!
People like you are the enemy, and a greater threat to the American Way and whatnot than ISIS ever could be!
Yes, the military has prisons where they put their own. However, that's legally a totally different situation from an enemy combatant taken on the battle field. If you put the Gitmo detainees on American soil, they will demand due process as non-military personnel and would likely get it. If you run these cases though out civilian legal system, they are going to walk free.
So, let me get this straight: you're upset that the American justice system would work as designed, which would lead to a result you don't like. Did I get that right? Okay, in that case, I'll respond in the most patriotic way I know how:
FUCK YOU, YOU FREEDOM-HATING SOCIOPATH! YOU ARE WORSE THAN ANY TERRORIST!
The TPP might actually be a net financial gain for the United States
...at the cost of a net civil rights loss for United States Citizens. And that's the fucking problem! The whole goddamn thing is an omnibus bill of all the freedom-destroying shit the oligarchs and lobbyists can't jam through Congress halfway-legitimately.
Assange leaking documents was arguably doing the right thing. But he probably acted illegally doing so, and hence the US can reasonably charge him and demand his extradition.
THAT'S NOT EVEN WHAT THEY'RE "ALLEGEDLY" TRYING TO EXTRADITE HIM FOR! This fight isn't over Assange being extradited to the US for espionage; this fight is over him being extradited to Sweden for unrelated trumped-up rape charges, and then extraordinarily rendered to the US.
Even if you think he legitimately should be tried for espionage in the US, the CIA's actions are totally indefensible.
Cold ocean water transfers heat away from the container much more efficiently than warm air would. A cable might be more expensive than rent, but is it more expensive than rent + air conditioning?
Slashdot Mirror
Of course it doesn't. But if you're a libertarian and prioritize social issues, you might hold your nose and accept Sanders' economic policy rather than accept the Dominionist totalitarianism that the rest of the Republican candidates want.
Not true. Sanders and (for example) Rand Paul agree on a surprisingly large number of issues, especially on things like the PATRIOT Act.
Even those of us who are career programmers aren't necessarily git users, and I'm pretty sure "pull request" is a git-ism. I think it's kind of like a commit (or maybe branch merge) in more traditional version-control systems, except under the control of the project manager instead of the person submitting the code.
"Taking fewer risks" can mean things other than reducing the scope of the change. In particular, it can mean testing more thoroughly instead. In true Slashdot tradition, I didn't read the article -- did it say anything about defect rates in code written by women as compared to code written by men?
Nah, I don't care who you are -- only if you're persuasive or not. Apparently, at some point in the past I found you to be offensively unpersuasive...
Ah, that article talks about rural two-lane roads, arterials, freeways, and interstates. Urban collector and local streets are conspicuous by their absence from the article (rural collectors are mentioned, and local streets are mentioned only once to note that they're omitted from a chart).
Morrow or Mableton, maybe?
Anyway, I'm from Metro Atlanta and don't get down to the coast very much, so I don't know about the excessive signage on I-95. I certainly know about how the signage stops being adequate when you get off the interstate, but I can't think of any that's wrong on it. I wish you were more specific in that example (and also that you had an example of excessive striping near Atlanta -- or alternatively, a Google Maps link of your example off I-95 so I could see what you're talking about).
Back on topic: it seems to me that the UK's strategy here is to remove striping on the roads that are the least like the ones your link addresses, urban collectors and local streets. In terms of Panama City Beach, think of applying it to places like Front Beach Road -- the part where all the tourist trap stuff is, that's too choked with pedestrians for traffic to move fast anyway -- not US 98 and not highway 30 outside of town. Or for perhaps a better example, whatever streets constitute "downtown" in Panama City itself, assuming it has a downtown.
Or in terms of Atlanta, think of applying it to Peachtree Street in Midtown or Downtown, but not a road like Northside Drive (which, as you can see, is so pedestrian-unfriendly that they have Jersey barriers to keep people from trying to cross).
As a former traffic engineer (now software engineer) in Georgia, I'd love for you to elaborate on this.
Great list! Now try to expand it to include a large sedan, full-size pickup truck or minivan.
It's not that it's difficult, it's just that it requires more time than the heat death of the universe to execute.
I don't deny the FBI director's assertion that they were unable to decrypt the phone; I deny his assertion that their failure constitutes any kind of problem.
The difference doesn't come from whether the line actually exists or not; the difference comes from the fact that when you remove the line, cars are no longer prohibited from driving across where it was. In other words, drivers slow down because they might have to yield to oncoming traffic where they didn't before. It turns the street into something closer to a shared space.
Does "cheap" mean the same thing in a command economy?
It's counter-intuitive, but it works.
More to the point, we're talking about urban streets here, not rural highways. The change in drivers' safety mostly cancels out, but pedestrians and cyclists get a net increase in safety from the lower automobile speeds.
If you read the article, you'll see that they're talking about removing center lane markings on urban streets, not rural highways. In other words, we're talking about low-speed designs with a lot of driveways and intersections, restricted sight lines, and many non-automobile road users (i.e., cyclists and pedestrians). US-style divided highways with wide lanes are a wholly inappropriate solution for such situations because they are designed to be safe for cars traveling at high speed, to the exclusion of everything else. In contrast, in urban areas "worse is better" because making drivers "feel" unsafe causes them to slow down and drive more carefully, increasing safety for the cyclists and pedestrians.
GPS is not necessary (and more pointedly, lack of GPS is not an excuse!). The road was built and striped initially using traditional surveying techniques; there's no reason the people doing the re-striping couldn't refer back to the original plans, measure, and do their jobs properly. The only explanations for changing the lane markings during re-striping are (a) deliberate intent or (b) incompetence.
That's because it's only a vulnerability in retrospect -- it was intended as a feature.
(Linux shared libraries -- the fact that every application can use the same copy of, say, GTK instead of having to replicate it -- are the same kind of deal.)
I haven't read the article, but I suppose the countermeasure is that DLLs should be signed or have hashes checked before loading or something like that.
I like it -- and if the fake tech support person is smart enough, he'll be even more offended: when the father calls his child a S-O-B, he's really accusing himself of bestiality.
Yes, and that's a reason to fight against it even harder!
We have a law like that in the US too (and for all products -- which should include iPhones -- not just cars): the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.
Okay, fine -- in that case, the Geneva Convention applies instead.
No shit! And here in America, our cultural values are FREEDOM and JUSTICE! You can go take your sniveling, cowardly, authoritarian ass and fuck off to North Korea where you belong!
People like you are the enemy, and a greater threat to the American Way and whatnot than ISIS ever could be!
So, let me get this straight: you're upset that the American justice system would work as designed, which would lead to a result you don't like. Did I get that right? Okay, in that case, I'll respond in the most patriotic way I know how:
FUCK YOU, YOU FREEDOM-HATING SOCIOPATH! YOU ARE WORSE THAN ANY TERRORIST!
...at the cost of a net civil rights loss for United States Citizens. And that's the fucking problem! The whole goddamn thing is an omnibus bill of all the freedom-destroying shit the oligarchs and lobbyists can't jam through Congress halfway-legitimately.
THAT'S NOT EVEN WHAT THEY'RE "ALLEGEDLY" TRYING TO EXTRADITE HIM FOR! This fight isn't over Assange being extradited to the US for espionage; this fight is over him being extradited to Sweden for unrelated trumped-up rape charges, and then extraordinarily rendered to the US.
Even if you think he legitimately should be tried for espionage in the US, the CIA's actions are totally indefensible.
What word were you going for, doofus?
To where?
Cold ocean water transfers heat away from the container much more efficiently than warm air would. A cable might be more expensive than rent, but is it more expensive than rent + air conditioning?