Assuming the price comes down once the economy of scale kicks in, this would be a far less destructive staple than traditional meat.
You claim you have pangs of guilt for supporting the realities of the meat industry.
Yet you would reject the product unless it tastes nearly identical (and has additional nutritional advantages).
Basically you're saying, if it doesn't taste exactly like what I'm used to eating, I don't give a fuck how many billions of gallons of water are wasted raising cattle, I don't care how much pollution modern industrial farming produces, I don't care how many billions of animals will experience cramped, noisy conditions for their brief, unpleasant lives, I am going to continue to demand traditional meat.
Yes I deliberately used a term that was just as charged as the common "anti-choice" term that you've heard so much on news media and in pop political-culture... The phrase "Pro Choice" is not descriptive. (Pro choice about what? iPod vs Android, Republican vs Democrat?, Beans vs Carrots?)
This smacks of intellectual dishonesty. When you hear a politician describe themselves as "pro-choice" do you actually find yourself confused as to what issue they're referring?
As to the question of descriptiveness, "pro-life" is decidedly less descriptive than "pro-choice". People who identify as pro-choice support the idea that women should be able to choose whether or not to terminate their pregnancy. People who identify as pro-life don't oppose ALL deaths. (In fact I suspect the majority of them support capital punishment, at least here in the U.S.) They are specifically opposed to abortion so their position is more accurately described as anti-abortion. "Anti-choice" is lacking since that term could be used to describe someone who supported mandatory abortions. (But then I personally haven't heard that term "on news media and in pop political-culture".)
Nor does the phrase "Pro Choice" accurately describe the plight of women in places where abortion is not only permissible, it is mandatory.
Who exactly is claiming that regions with mandatory abortions are "pro-choice"?
Because you don't know how to use Linux or Mac OS?
Or because your mother's need to look at seasonal wallpaper and screensavers is more important than tens of hours of your time every year and more important than keeping her e-mail and other credentials secure?
Except founders of BSides had contacted them about the conferences before that
Assumes facts not in evidence, or in newspeak, citation needed.
Ada's defense piece states:
By coincidence, the Ada Initiative happened to have been put in contact with a co-founder of the BSides conferences (not BSides SF) a few weeks previously, to discuss a potential anti-harassment policy that individual BSides conferences could choose to adopt.
(Emphasis mine.)
That's certainly more ambiguous than "By coincidence a co-founder of the BSides conferences had contacted the Ada Initiative a few weeks previously," which, if true, would cast the Ada Initiative in a better light in this matter. The fact that they chose to use the more ambiguous "put in contact with" suggests this is not the case.
==========
For what it's worth: Even if BSides did truly initiate their interaction with the Ada Initiative, that doesn't excuse their behavior.
If it was never their intention to allow presentations about sexuality, they should have documented that somehow and made that documentation available to potential presenters.
If, prior to their interaction with Ms. Aurora, the topic of sexuality was permissible, why did BSides reject the presenter's offer to move the talk to a small venue with no sound leakage and ample warnings about the content, thus presumably ensuring no one was exposed to content they wished to avoid?
I happen to agree that the content appears to have zero relevance to information security (the nominal purpose of BSides, not "hacking") and had I been in charge of booking presenters I would have rejected this presentation in favor of someone with more relevant material.
The conference organizers *asked* the Ada Initiative what they thought about this
Actually, per the link in the fine summary (emphasis mine):
Ada Initiative Executive Director Valerie Aurora was attending the BSides SF conference, and saw this update to the title of the talk. By coincidence, the Ada Initiative happened to have been put in contact with a co-founder of the BSides conferences (not BSides SF) a few weeks previously, to discuss a potential anti-harassment policy that individual BSides conferences could choose to adopt. When the title of the talk was updated, Valerie emailed the BSides co-founder with the title of the talk and an explanation of why it would be unwelcoming to women, with the intention of giving an example of situations which having a policy in place would help. The co-founder replied to the email and cc’d a BSides SF organizer, Ian Fung, which resulted in Ian asking Valerie for more information.
Later on the same page:
It is true that warning people of a potential bad effect of their actions is a common method of threatening people; that’s one reason why we wait for conference organizers to contact us first. If someone requests our opinion, as BSides SF did in this case, then it is more difficult to mistake sharing our expertise as threats.
Right. BSides initiated this exchange... so long as you ignore the fact that Valerie Aurora initiated it.
The whole idea of campaign contributions as speech is based upon a court interpretation of the Constitution. As such, it would require an amendment to separate the concept of slipping someone a few bucks from that of petitioning the government for a redress of grievances.
Issues like, "Hey, I have dual monitors and steam blacks one out and it never comes back" are going to be pretty well ignored because the console is unlikely to support dual monitors.
Steambox won't support the oculus rift? Has netcraft confirmed this?
"A credit freeze, also known as a credit report freeze, a credit report lock down, a credit lock down, a credit lock or a security freeze, allows an individual to control how a U.S. consumer reporting agency (also known as credit bureau: Equifax, Experian, TransUnion) is able to sell his or her data. The credit freeze locks the data at the consumer reporting agency until an individual gives permission for the release of the data."
You have to pay each of these companies $10 for the privilege, but it's worth it.
Of course, any time you need to do something that requires a credit check (take out a loan, apply to lease an apartment, apply for a job (sometimes)...), you'll have to temporarily lift the freeze, which is another fee.
Slashdot Mirror
no text
Assuming the price comes down once the economy of scale kicks in, this would be a far less destructive staple than traditional meat.
You claim you have pangs of guilt for supporting the realities of the meat industry.
Yet you would reject the product unless it tastes nearly identical (and has additional nutritional advantages).
Basically you're saying, if it doesn't taste exactly like what I'm used to eating, I don't give a fuck how many billions of gallons of water are wasted raising cattle, I don't care how much pollution modern industrial farming produces, I don't care how many billions of animals will experience cramped, noisy conditions for their brief, unpleasant lives, I am going to continue to demand traditional meat.
Fuck you, you self-centered piece of shit.
Postal service stops delivering door-to-door and instead delivers to curbside mailbox.
Postal service stops delivering to curbside mailboxes and instead delivers to cluster box a block away.
Postal service stops delivering to cluster boxes. Postal customers must go to local post office to send or receive mail.
Postal service closes post offices. Postal customers must travel to The Post Office in Lebanon, Kansas to exchange mail with other customers.
(P.S. I hate cluster boxes.)
Yes I deliberately used a term that was just as charged as the common "anti-choice" term that you've heard so much on news media and in pop political-culture ... The phrase "Pro Choice" is not descriptive. (Pro choice about what? iPod vs Android, Republican vs Democrat?, Beans vs Carrots?)
This smacks of intellectual dishonesty. When you hear a politician describe themselves as "pro-choice" do you actually find yourself confused as to what issue they're referring?
As to the question of descriptiveness, "pro-life" is decidedly less descriptive than "pro-choice". People who identify as pro-choice support the idea that women should be able to choose whether or not to terminate their pregnancy. People who identify as pro-life don't oppose ALL deaths. (In fact I suspect the majority of them support capital punishment, at least here in the U.S.) They are specifically opposed to abortion so their position is more accurately described as anti-abortion. "Anti-choice" is lacking since that term could be used to describe someone who supported mandatory abortions. (But then I personally haven't heard that term "on news media and in pop political-culture".)
Nor does the phrase "Pro Choice" accurately describe the plight of women in places where abortion is not only permissible, it is mandatory.
Who exactly is claiming that regions with mandatory abortions are "pro-choice"?
The park would be comprised of all artifacts left on the surface of the moon from the Apollo 11 through 17 missions.
Including bags of astronaut shit? Yeah, it just wouldn't be the same if someone cleaned those up...
I wonder how many megatons of CO2 will be put into the atmostphere due to people mining bitcoins by the time it's no longer profitable.
n/t
Moving to Linux or a Mac is not an option.
Because you don't know how to use Linux or Mac OS?
Or because your mother's need to look at seasonal wallpaper and screensavers is more important than tens of hours of your time every year and more important than keeping her e-mail and other credentials secure?
Except founders of BSides had contacted them about the conferences before that
Assumes facts not in evidence, or in newspeak, citation needed.
Ada's defense piece states:
By coincidence, the Ada Initiative happened to have been put in contact with a co-founder of the BSides conferences (not BSides SF) a few weeks previously, to discuss a potential anti-harassment policy that individual BSides conferences could choose to adopt.
(Emphasis mine.)
That's certainly more ambiguous than "By coincidence a co-founder of the BSides conferences had contacted the Ada Initiative a few weeks previously," which, if true, would cast the Ada Initiative in a better light in this matter. The fact that they chose to use the more ambiguous "put in contact with" suggests this is not the case.
==========
For what it's worth: Even if BSides did truly initiate their interaction with the Ada Initiative, that doesn't excuse their behavior.
If it was never their intention to allow presentations about sexuality, they should have documented that somehow and made that documentation available to potential presenters.
If, prior to their interaction with Ms. Aurora, the topic of sexuality was permissible, why did BSides reject the presenter's offer to move the talk to a small venue with no sound leakage and ample warnings about the content, thus presumably ensuring no one was exposed to content they wished to avoid?
I happen to agree that the content appears to have zero relevance to information security (the nominal purpose of BSides, not "hacking") and had I been in charge of booking presenters I would have rejected this presentation in favor of someone with more relevant material.
The conference organizers *asked* the Ada Initiative what they thought about this
Actually, per the link in the fine summary (emphasis mine):
Ada Initiative Executive Director Valerie Aurora was attending the BSides SF conference, and saw this update to the title of the talk. By coincidence, the Ada Initiative happened to have been put in contact with a co-founder of the BSides conferences (not BSides SF) a few weeks previously, to discuss a potential anti-harassment policy that individual BSides conferences could choose to adopt. When the title of the talk was updated, Valerie emailed the BSides co-founder with the title of the talk and an explanation of why it would be unwelcoming to women, with the intention of giving an example of situations which having a policy in place would help. The co-founder replied to the email and cc’d a BSides SF organizer, Ian Fung, which resulted in Ian asking Valerie for more information.
Later on the same page:
It is true that warning people of a potential bad effect of their actions is a common method of threatening people; that’s one reason why we wait for conference organizers to contact us first. If someone requests our opinion, as BSides SF did in this case, then it is more difficult to mistake sharing our expertise as threats.
Right. BSides initiated this exchange... so long as you ignore the fact that Valerie Aurora initiated it.
Thanks for that.
I thought one of the complaints about the e-mail was that the password reset link was to a third-party site... ?
So... this story is about an e-mail which allegedly resembled a phishing attempt.
Yet TFA doesn't include the text of the e-mail...
BRILLIANT!
From the fine article:
"Because there is blood and guns, we’ve marked the download with an adult content sticker."
It's not the ESRB's AO rating.
I'd chastise the editor for failing to edit but at slashdot that would be a pretty empty gesture.
The whole idea of campaign contributions as speech is based upon a court interpretation of the Constitution. As such, it would require an amendment to separate the concept of slipping someone a few bucks from that of petitioning the government for a redress of grievances.
Indeed, and people are working on that.
Issues like, "Hey, I have dual monitors and steam blacks one out and it never comes back" are going to be pretty well ignored because the console is unlikely to support dual monitors.
Steambox won't support the oculus rift? Has netcraft confirmed this?
Have you ever seen a film in a theater?
Try it and you'll see you've been misled.
24 fps is ass.
2x slower?
Is that the same thing as being "twice as cold" or "twice as thin"?
You don't measure slowness, you measure speed.
You don't measure coldness, you measure temperature.
You don't measure thinness, you measure thickness.
n/t
Man, I'm really going to have to really evaluate my life after you put in my place like that.
I really wish there was a law about saying "100 times as thin" or "100 times colder" or "100 times slower"...
Actually they all have web forms available:
Experian
Equifax
TransUnion
Credit freeze
"A credit freeze, also known as a credit report freeze, a credit report lock down, a credit lock down, a credit lock or a security freeze, allows an individual to control how a U.S. consumer reporting agency (also known as credit bureau: Equifax, Experian, TransUnion) is able to sell his or her data. The credit freeze locks the data at the consumer reporting agency until an individual gives permission for the release of the data."
You have to pay each of these companies $10 for the privilege, but it's worth it.
Of course, any time you need to do something that requires a credit check (take out a loan, apply to lease an apartment, apply for a job (sometimes)...), you'll have to temporarily lift the freeze, which is another fee.
Sadly once First-To-File kicks in, the question of prior art will be moot. Then the quality of patents will truly drop through the floor.
I find it difficult to believe that the patent trolls are greasing up the politicians more than the industry players who would prefer reform.
Actually Memory Stick is a Sony trademark for their proprietary flash media.
per wikipedia
If you refer to DIMMs as "memory sticks" you're just as guilty as the submitter and editor are of promulgating confusion.
Coal mining is completely different to seam gas extraction.
Did I miss a memo?
When did it change from "different from" to "different to"?