no checking account? I think you went a bit far, there. CREDIT, yes. checking, no, that's not based on credit
Really? Show me a bank that doesn't do a credit check before opening an account for the first time. Checks are treated as a form of credit since you can write them without the money actually BEING in the account. Checking accounts are most certainly dependent on your credit history.
I walked into multiple banks with a $9500 cashier check and was denied due to my horrible credit. I was told flat out they would be happy to deal with me if I can back with proof that I had paid the debts I owed but they couldn't do business before that was done even though the amount of outstanding debt was 1/4 that.
Depends on whether it was civil or criminal. If it's criminal I'd sell out. If it's civil once you declare bankruptcy then it should be all over. You usually get to keep your house and cars in bankruptcy.
You clearly have no idea what happens in bankruptcy.
You might get to keep your house, depends on what state its in and how much its worth. You most certainly may be forced to sell it and move to something more modest. Same goes for the car and pretty much every other posession you own.
Bankruptcy is NOT a get of jail free card, and its been made worse recently to cut down on the number of idiots like yourself who try to use it as such. Its doubtful he would even qualify for it.
Then... to top it off... the court can simply say 'you don't get out of this by filing bankruptcy' and he's done. Depending on the laws where the trial was taking case, it may already legally be that way by state law.
He was a complete and total douche who got what he deserved. He wasn't clever, he didn't even do anything original, he just sucked enough to get caught. You need to learn a fair amount about his history if you think he's someone to be idolized. Get the real history about what happened and what a pussy he is and you'll be far better off picking someone else with skills to be impressed by.
Let me give you a hint, the leet hackers you want to be impressed by, aren't in the fucking news because they are good enough and smart enough not to get caught or draw attention to themselves. It takes years of being part of the scene to get to know the real artists and geniuses in this arena. Mitnick is a joke on a good day.
If you read the list you posted, those things are already illegal anyway, so all he did was agree not to break the law, which it would be rather stupid for him to not agree to, with the exception of maybe #4 which seems rather far reaching.
The 'facts' may have been 'on his side', but the team of multimillion dollar lawyers were not. He would have gotten his ass kicked all the way down the street and back again, several times, even if he was 100% right.
The wildlife dies of Chernobyl fallout so their capacity to care about that is a merely philosophical question.
Ahhh, popular ignorance at its best. The exclusion zone around Chernobyl is FULL of wildlife prospering without human contact. If anything, Chernobyl HELPED the wildlife in the area because it got rid of the humans who were fucking it up for them. Sucks for all the people that lived there and are no longer allowed to, but I bet if you could ask any of the animals they'd say thanks for getting the fuck out.
When a boat sinks with 20 people, it's still a capsized boat.
No. A boat that sinks with 20 people may have capsized, but it may not. Capsizing is the process of rolling over and taking on water until the vessel is disabled. Doesn't have to sink, though it might. I can capsize my bass boat right this instant and it won't sink as its full of alternate floation materials to ensure that a roll over or leak the bilge pumps can't keep up with will not sink it and leave me stranded. Also, if a boat just starts leaking and sinks, it doesn't have to capsize. As far as we know, the Titanic didn't capsize, it went down bow deep, then broke apart, never rolled over before it was well on its way to the bottom. Its rather common for a boat to capsize, roll over to belly up, then float very low in the water for considerable time before all the air is released or absorbed by the water before it sinks. There have been plenty of cargo vessels that have capsized due to improper loading, dumped there cargo in the process and happily floated until someone came along to salvage it and get it righted, never leaving the surface and providing a floating island for the crew until someone came to rescue them.
And your post proves the exact point you're trying to refute. Your ignorance about the words your using twists it around to make it sound different than reality. You're just being an irrational ignorant mouth piece. You're twisting facts by your lack of knowledge into something more than it really is, both in your example about a boat and in your thoughts about the plant accident.
Yes, its still a problem, no its NOT A FUCKING THING LIKE CHERNOBYL which exploded exposing the core nuclear material to the environment and blasting tons of burning irradiated graphite and other products of the reaction into the atmosphere to be carried by the wind across the continent. This is still a localized event, and even if they dump all there current waste water into the ocean right now, it'll dissipate to levels that no monitoring agency or government even considers 'on the graph' with in about 2 weeks... if they just dump it in the ocean right there. Even faster if they bothered to spread it out while dumping it at sea.
I wouldn't want to setup bunk beds and hang out at the plant for the next few years, but other than that... this is not a fucking thing like Chernobyl. Everyone is being EXTREMELY careful to keep people away from it. The Japanese government is in essence overreacting, to be safe rather than wrong. They are doing exactly what they should do, pull everyone the hell out of the area, take some time, get a REAL damage assessment and THEN make a decision after things are calmed down and under control. Unfortunately, for them to do the right thing means people who like to live in constant fear like yourself think the sky is falling and the media sensationalize the hell out of it to get more viewers and make more advertising money.
It doesn't have to be the worst to qualify for 'holy shit' but it also has to be something worthy of saying 'holy shit', this isn't. Its sad. Its bad. It really sucks for the people its displacing, but so far, thats where it ends. Come back in a year and we'll talk about how well it qualifies for 'holy shit', right now its just 'shit'. In the meantime go watch Glenn Beck or some other sensationalist nutjob.
If everyone was destined to be a mathematician or a teacher, learning all these tricks and details might be the most useful way to teach mathematics. In reality, most people will only ever need to be able to understand the basic theory behind math concepts, and asking them to prove all kinds of random stuff, derive expressions by hand, rewrite and simplify expressions, it does not help them at all, and it is more likely to scare them away from mathematics completely.
hahahah thats pretty funny.
No the reality of it is, the people who learned the more of the theory and understand it better will be more productive across the board in everything they do. Just because you don't recognize how Joe the plumber would utilize such things doesn't mean he wouldn't, it just means you don't have the required experience to realize it.
The idea is not that people will need to 'do things by hand' its that they will understand they idea and logic behind it so when they are out without a text book and calculator and need to figure something out they might have a snow balls chance in hell of recognizing what form of logic would be useful and be able to apply it.
Judging by your reply, I'm going to wager your in your early 20s or younger and think you know where your life is going to lead you.
Generally, people don't have fuck of a clue until at least 25, usually later than that in life, at which point you realize that all that stuff you thought was stupid and a waste of time in school was really freaking useful and would be a major help in your current lot in life as it likely could land you a better position in your career.
Just because the law says your an adult around those years, doesn't mean you have an actual maturity level worth mentioning. No 20 year old knows where his or her life is going unless they have a terminal illness. They may think they know what they are going to do, have a master plan and intend to execute it with precision... and then that never actually happens that way, or if it happens to, they generally realize they wish it hadn't worked out that way.
If you could put a 20 year old version of a person and the same person as a 30 year old side by side, you're going to find they are two incredibly different people. Unfortunately, most of us don't realize that fact until we're in our 40s or 50s or have kids of our own and begin to realize how little we knew about our selves at those ages and how we really should have listened to the advice of the old geezers which had far more wisdom and experience.
And finally, YES, the plumber should learn differential equations JUST because the teacher says so, not just because the value of being able to understand and know how and when to apply those skills, but more importantly, BECAUSE YOU WERE TOLD TO. Once you get into the working world you might as well get used to accepting that just because you don't think something is useful or important doesn't mean your opinion actually matters if you want to continue getting paid.
Of the top of my head, after remodeling our bathroom, I can think of at least 3 times when I was solving differential equations while doing the plumbing. The difference is, I could solve the problems because I recognized how I could solve them from my prior education. Just because your too ignorant to recognize how its going to help you in the future doesn't mean its not going to help you in the future, and everyone else with more WISDOM from age than you do pretty much does. Stop being such an arrogant fuck and save yourself a world of regret later and actually USE the wisdom your elders are trying to impart on you. Trust me, you'll thank yourself and them later in life if you do.
The product of a manufacturing process. Namely you're reading the output of a circuit etched in on a wafer or some (many many many years ago) transitors wired together in a specific pattern that gives you the output.
I guess you could consider the etching of the die to be the 'write' process, but for practical purposes you'd be the only one thinking that way.
Yeah, the 5+ second load times we still have on complex pages is totally acceptable. And on mobile devices, it's very relaxing to be able to pour a cup of coffee in the time it takes to load a page. I completely don't understand why every browser maker out there is working so hard to improve performance. I mean, what's the rush?
Not sure what YOU are using, but slashdot is the slowest loading site I use. On my iPhone 3g (not 3gs, not 4) it loads this page and its hundreds of ajax comments in under a second. So sorry I don't know what 5+ second load times look like, but I also have bandwidth that doesn't suck, which wouldn't be helped by this improvement anyway really considering how miniscule this improvement turns out in the real world, and by their own tests, its not always an improvement.
But if you are running a locked-down corp environment you are not allowing auto-updating software like Chrome or Firefox in the first place, right? You're probably running IE, which gives you tight control over versions and upgrades. And so this entire discussion is irrelevant to you. Am I missing something?
You are correct, Firefox and Chrome are not in the discussion... which was my point... because they have no reliable release which can point to and say 'this one works with our stuff and will be safe to use for a while'. I have things to do that don't involve me keeping up with Jones and their latest release.
My job is to create software for us by large corps, my company is EXTREMELY accepting when it comes to new software, our customers wouldn't allow half of what we do on a good day. You can choose to ignore the corp environment, but it more or less defines what people use. At home they can use what they choose, at work they use what they are told if they want a paycheck. Based on the two choices, some people will still run what they want at home, but most people who aren't computer geeks are going to just use the one they use at work so they don't have to learn something else. So go on with that attitude and see how far it gets you, I don't mind, I won't miss you in the least.
Early adopter? Maybe in 2000, its 2011 and it still holds true.
We remodeled one of our bathrooms, my wife decided on a low flow system... after about two months, and several thousand dollars later, we had tradition system installed... because the low flow crap is still fucking obnoxious, barely usable and... we had a higher freaking water bill.
Theory and practical implementation are entirely different, I prefer to base my life in reality, I find the fact that I have imperial evidence to prove the theory bunk to be far more useful than listening to armchair douche bags on slashdot.
The problem with your response is that... you've ignored the point the parent made... these changes to save water actually cause MORE water usage because they are so ridiculous. Double flush a low flow toilet and you're worse off than a single flush... and half the time a double isn't enough so you do 3.
I won't even get into the freaking shower heads, and let you continue to ignore the fact that the real problem is we're dumping too much water into direct paths to the ocean rather than putting it back in the ground for future use.
we've been working on it for over a year. You think that's rushed?
Yes, actually I do. While you guys may do upgrade cycles practically daily, most of the rest of us don't, so theres not much of a chance that within the next year, even if built into every browser right this instant, that its going to get a good beatdown in most corp environments in a year.
I love Google's work, I really do, but this is a typical example of Google being completely out of touch with upgrade cycles in businesses other than their own.
The rest of us don't really feel like being your crash test dummies or doing your work for you because you guys are in a rush to push something out... then considering the difference that this is going to make... well, its rather pointless to add the complexity it adds just to get... on a good day...a few percent... and in some cases a slow down.
Google continues to be obsessed with 'omg pages load faster' and seems to have missed that people stopped caring, slashdot geeks aside. You should take a step back and look at your own commercials... Really... how much freaking faster than the blink of an eye, or electrical arc does the browser need to be?
All of my webservers and all my internal proxies, as well as every web browser I use supports keep-alive/pipelining.
None of them support SPDY right now, except probably an instance of Chrome on some Windows VM somewhere... maybe, if it updated itself without asking again.
Failing to see how people are more likely to use something thats brand new with little to no support over something thats several years old and universally supported when the logic for not supporting the old flavor is that its not universally available.
SPDY is a solution to a non-existent problem.
I learned when Google started making commercials about how Chrome could load a page faster than lightning that the load time was no longer something I gave a shit about. We're beyond the point that load time matters to anyone, go work on something useful.
The way MS extended Kerberos was 100% within the specifications of Kerberos. It was designed to do EXACTLY what Microsoft did.
The problem is that most implementations of Kerberos in the unix world were based off the same broken implementation that didn't actually deal with the specification properly. Get your facts straight.
So assuming that most of stores have only 1 or 2 people in them, so we need on average 5 people per store to quadruple the number of people in the store... that means they can only do that in 200 stores with 1000 people... and while I've not been in a Sony store... I'm pretty sure that if they only have 1 person on average in them, they'd probably close them down pretty quickly to stop losing money. So while 1000 people might be able to make a difference in your area, they aren't all in your area, thats world wide... for one day...
It will probably enlighten at least a few people who will take the initiative to learn more about the issue.
I probably would if I saw it just out of curiosity.
However I'd also likely conclude that the protest was being done by a bunch of obnoxious douche bags who just got in my way that particular day. Not a group of people I particularly feel like being associated with. All of that assumes of course, that 1000 people spread out around the world, are going to make a difference that I would actually notice, which is unlikely.
Nope, just that its not going to take them any longer than they were already expecting to clean it up. When you build one of these things, you start out with the assumption that the area is going to be a nuclear plant location for AT LEAST 100 years. The plant will STILL be a profitable one, even going 12x over decommission costs, and the time frame doesn't matter as its the same as it was before any of this happened.
You can hate nuclear energy all you want, and point out VALID reasons to avoid it. That I can deal with. What I can't stand is when people try to turn things into something unexpected or bad when it really isn't. The cleanup time doesn't change a thing, it was going to be 30 years even if the Tsunami never happened so it shouldn't be weighed into the argument.
If you want to talk about the harm to the fishing industry in the immediate area, go ahead, thats a valid point. You can bring up any of the massive number of problems that are a direct result of what has happened, nothing wrong with that... but bringing up the clean up time like it is something unexpected or abnormal is being deceptive and makes it clear you don't have actual facts about why this is bad and are instead just spouting off when you read sensationalizing headlines. It makes it clear you're ignorant of the subject matter you are attempting to discuss. It makes you one of those annoying fucking people who stop progress because you're too lazy and ignorant to get the fucking facts right. The kind of idiot who thinks the world is 6000 years old and evolution is a lie.
Actually, Tuesday is the day everyone reads stuff after the weekend. Don't ask me why, but there some reason for it, hence why anyone 'in the know' publishes things on Tuesday, not Monday.
My guess would be that everyone is recovering from the weekend (either professionally or socially, i.e. the hang over) but I distinctly remember it being something entirely different.
You do realize that Kashima is not Dai-Ichi right? You're talking about a different power plant coming back online, not the one that is having all the issues, an entirely different plant.
The #1 and #2 reactor at Dai-Ichi is never coming back online, #3 is extremely unlikely as well.
1 and 2 were going to be decommissioned this month anyway, and #3 in the near future.
You might want to get your facts straightened out and less confused with each other.
Most of those plants are expected to cost close to a billion dollars to decommission after a normal planned shutdown... except no one actually expects it to be that cheap, they will all most certainly cost more, and those overruns have been in the past cases sometimes 5x as much as estimated. They'll take 30-50 years to decommission as well.
So this complete horrible disaster you'd like to use as an excuse to not use nuclear power... is not going to take any longer than a normal cleanup, and is going to cost about 12 times more than expected... for a 'horrible disaster'.
Long term the effect on the planet is nothing. In 50 years, no one will notice anything even at the site itself other than probably being obvious there was a structure there at some point, probably a plaque too. It will disturb the lives of a statistically irrelevant portion of the worlds population for less than one generation. Compare that to the current common power generation methods which if are doing what we think they are doing (global warming amoung other things) will most certainly kill our species off in the not too distant future...
Its been done, at least in the US long long ago... right up until the guy who started the whole thing basically had his lower jaw fall apart and died shortly there after... since then its been rather illegal:/
It was going to take them 15-20 years to shut down the reactor sites anyway, which they would have actually started by now anyway (remember, a couple of these were just a couple weeks away from decommissioning ANYWAY.
When you build a nuclear reactor, you're making a long term commitment from the start. Once its fueled and running, it can't just be turned off and torn down over night, the teardown process is slow by its very nature as you wait for things to 'cool down' from a radiological perspective to the point that its safe enough to do something to it... even when its a planned process.
Look at that list, most of these plants have planned decommissioning time frames from 30 to 50 years under normal shutdown conditions. Considering this is a 'disaster' and most of the plants on that list easily approach $1 billion to shut down anyway, $12 billion for clean up seems to be rather cheap.
If the tallboy is a 1954 original 16oz can, then it holds 0.473176473 liters, so you'd need ~121 million of those. If the tallboy is on of the odd ball 21oz cans, then it holds 0.621044121 liters, so you'd need ~92 million of those. If the tallboy is a newer variety, 24oz (which you're probably referring to), then it holds 0.70976471 liters, so you'd need at least 80,308,304 cans of Bud.
I'm fully for learning about and utilizing solar and wind power, but they are NOT risk free nor do we understand the environmental impact of either at any scale that matters.
If we had the same number of coal plants in the state I live in as there are solar/wind plants world wide, it would STILL probably be less impacting than what we have now. The point here is, a few plants don't make much of an impact on a gobal scale, so we don't REALLY know what the long term differences are for these things. We are currently VERY ignorant of what switching our power supply to wind/solar would do to the world.
Do I think its a bad idea to try solar and Wind farms? No, I seriously doubt they cause the same sort of impact as their fossil fuel burning cohorts, but I know for a fact that every large scale solar plant or wind farm makes an obvious MASSIVE visible impact on its environment. A visual impact that appears to the uneducated as far larger than a coal/gas plant. But thats visual, and experience has tought me that the visual impact is usually far different and far smaller than the actual total impact. Hydroelectric power for instance, makes a massive obvious visual impression of its impact, but its environmental impact is WAY bigger and effects the entire river system its part of in most cases, not just the land and river that are directly impacted from the newly formed lake.
My point is that we just don't ACTUALLY know the long term dangers of these types of power generation, just like we didn't know the problems with producing all our power from coal, gas and oil until we had them all over the place and started making enough pollution and doing enough paying attention to NOTICE the global changes.
Something tells me that changing the wind flow patterns because of a large wind farm or changing the heating pattern of a large chunk of desert in one area problem isn't going to cause global problems... but they have a local impact. We just don't have enough of them to know if there is a major global impact and what the tipping point is. I suspect, much like fossil fuels, we won't realize the problem until we're already well into it.
Lets try wind and solar power, but lets not say its 'risk free' and 'has little environmental' impact.
Slashdot Mirror
no checking account? I think you went a bit far, there. CREDIT, yes. checking, no, that's not based on credit
Really? Show me a bank that doesn't do a credit check before opening an account for the first time. Checks are treated as a form of credit since you can write them without the money actually BEING in the account. Checking accounts are most certainly dependent on your credit history.
I walked into multiple banks with a $9500 cashier check and was denied due to my horrible credit. I was told flat out they would be happy to deal with me if I can back with proof that I had paid the debts I owed but they couldn't do business before that was done even though the amount of outstanding debt was 1/4 that.
Depends on whether it was civil or criminal. If it's criminal I'd sell out. If it's civil once you declare bankruptcy then it should be all over. You usually get to keep your house and cars in bankruptcy.
You clearly have no idea what happens in bankruptcy.
You might get to keep your house, depends on what state its in and how much its worth. You most certainly may be forced to sell it and move to something more modest. Same goes for the car and pretty much every other posession you own.
Bankruptcy is NOT a get of jail free card, and its been made worse recently to cut down on the number of idiots like yourself who try to use it as such. Its doubtful he would even qualify for it.
Then ... to top it off ... the court can simply say 'you don't get out of this by filing bankruptcy' and he's done. Depending on the laws where the trial was taking case, it may already legally be that way by state law.
He didn't do anything original, everything he did was someone elses work
He got caught for trivial reasons that anyone with half a clue would have avoided.
He tried to throw it in the face of those he was abusing that he was doing it.
He cried like a little girl when the police interviewed him.
He's nothing more than attention whore who thinks the world should be handed to him because ... HE is Kevin Mitnick.
He's a nobody who got a bunch of publicity, thats it, nothing more.
So I'm guessing you know nothing about Mitnick?
He was a complete and total douche who got what he deserved. He wasn't clever, he didn't even do anything original, he just sucked enough to get caught. You need to learn a fair amount about his history if you think he's someone to be idolized. Get the real history about what happened and what a pussy he is and you'll be far better off picking someone else with skills to be impressed by.
Let me give you a hint, the leet hackers you want to be impressed by, aren't in the fucking news because they are good enough and smart enough not to get caught or draw attention to themselves. It takes years of being part of the scene to get to know the real artists and geniuses in this arena. Mitnick is a joke on a good day.
You're an idiot.
If you read the list you posted, those things are already illegal anyway, so all he did was agree not to break the law, which it would be rather stupid for him to not agree to, with the exception of maybe #4 which seems rather far reaching.
The 'facts' may have been 'on his side', but the team of multimillion dollar lawyers were not. He would have gotten his ass kicked all the way down the street and back again, several times, even if he was 100% right.
The wildlife dies of Chernobyl fallout so their capacity to care about that is a merely philosophical question.
Ahhh, popular ignorance at its best. The exclusion zone around Chernobyl is FULL of wildlife prospering without human contact. If anything, Chernobyl HELPED the wildlife in the area because it got rid of the humans who were fucking it up for them. Sucks for all the people that lived there and are no longer allowed to, but I bet if you could ask any of the animals they'd say thanks for getting the fuck out.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=wildlife+around+chernobyl
When a boat sinks with 20 people, it's still a capsized boat.
No. A boat that sinks with 20 people may have capsized, but it may not. Capsizing is the process of rolling over and taking on water until the vessel is disabled. Doesn't have to sink, though it might. I can capsize my bass boat right this instant and it won't sink as its full of alternate floation materials to ensure that a roll over or leak the bilge pumps can't keep up with will not sink it and leave me stranded. Also, if a boat just starts leaking and sinks, it doesn't have to capsize. As far as we know, the Titanic didn't capsize, it went down bow deep, then broke apart, never rolled over before it was well on its way to the bottom. Its rather common for a boat to capsize, roll over to belly up, then float very low in the water for considerable time before all the air is released or absorbed by the water before it sinks. There have been plenty of cargo vessels that have capsized due to improper loading, dumped there cargo in the process and happily floated until someone came along to salvage it and get it righted, never leaving the surface and providing a floating island for the crew until someone came to rescue them.
And your post proves the exact point you're trying to refute. Your ignorance about the words your using twists it around to make it sound different than reality. You're just being an irrational ignorant mouth piece. You're twisting facts by your lack of knowledge into something more than it really is, both in your example about a boat and in your thoughts about the plant accident.
Yes, its still a problem, no its NOT A FUCKING THING LIKE CHERNOBYL which exploded exposing the core nuclear material to the environment and blasting tons of burning irradiated graphite and other products of the reaction into the atmosphere to be carried by the wind across the continent. This is still a localized event, and even if they dump all there current waste water into the ocean right now, it'll dissipate to levels that no monitoring agency or government even considers 'on the graph' with in about 2 weeks ... if they just dump it in the ocean right there. Even faster if they bothered to spread it out while dumping it at sea.
I wouldn't want to setup bunk beds and hang out at the plant for the next few years, but other than that ... this is not a fucking thing like Chernobyl. Everyone is being EXTREMELY careful to keep people away from it. The Japanese government is in essence overreacting, to be safe rather than wrong. They are doing exactly what they should do, pull everyone the hell out of the area, take some time, get a REAL damage assessment and THEN make a decision after things are calmed down and under control. Unfortunately, for them to do the right thing means people who like to live in constant fear like yourself think the sky is falling and the media sensationalize the hell out of it to get more viewers and make more advertising money.
It doesn't have to be the worst to qualify for 'holy shit' but it also has to be something worthy of saying 'holy shit', this isn't. Its sad. Its bad. It really sucks for the people its displacing, but so far, thats where it ends. Come back in a year and we'll talk about how well it qualifies for 'holy shit', right now its just 'shit'. In the meantime go watch Glenn Beck or some other sensationalist nutjob.
If everyone was destined to be a mathematician or a teacher, learning all these tricks and details might be the most useful way to teach mathematics. In reality, most people will only ever need to be able to understand the basic theory behind math concepts, and asking them to prove all kinds of random stuff, derive expressions by hand, rewrite and simplify expressions, it does not help them at all, and it is more likely to scare them away from mathematics completely.
hahahah thats pretty funny.
No the reality of it is, the people who learned the more of the theory and understand it better will be more productive across the board in everything they do. Just because you don't recognize how Joe the plumber would utilize such things doesn't mean he wouldn't, it just means you don't have the required experience to realize it.
The idea is not that people will need to 'do things by hand' its that they will understand they idea and logic behind it so when they are out without a text book and calculator and need to figure something out they might have a snow balls chance in hell of recognizing what form of logic would be useful and be able to apply it.
Judging by your reply, I'm going to wager your in your early 20s or younger and think you know where your life is going to lead you.
Generally, people don't have fuck of a clue until at least 25, usually later than that in life, at which point you realize that all that stuff you thought was stupid and a waste of time in school was really freaking useful and would be a major help in your current lot in life as it likely could land you a better position in your career.
Just because the law says your an adult around those years, doesn't mean you have an actual maturity level worth mentioning. No 20 year old knows where his or her life is going unless they have a terminal illness. They may think they know what they are going to do, have a master plan and intend to execute it with precision ... and then that never actually happens that way, or if it happens to, they generally realize they wish it hadn't worked out that way.
If you could put a 20 year old version of a person and the same person as a 30 year old side by side, you're going to find they are two incredibly different people. Unfortunately, most of us don't realize that fact until we're in our 40s or 50s or have kids of our own and begin to realize how little we knew about our selves at those ages and how we really should have listened to the advice of the old geezers which had far more wisdom and experience.
And finally, YES, the plumber should learn differential equations JUST because the teacher says so, not just because the value of being able to understand and know how and when to apply those skills, but more importantly, BECAUSE YOU WERE TOLD TO. Once you get into the working world you might as well get used to accepting that just because you don't think something is useful or important doesn't mean your opinion actually matters if you want to continue getting paid.
Of the top of my head, after remodeling our bathroom, I can think of at least 3 times when I was solving differential equations while doing the plumbing. The difference is, I could solve the problems because I recognized how I could solve them from my prior education. Just because your too ignorant to recognize how its going to help you in the future doesn't mean its not going to help you in the future, and everyone else with more WISDOM from age than you do pretty much does. Stop being such an arrogant fuck and save yourself a world of regret later and actually USE the wisdom your elders are trying to impart on you. Trust me, you'll thank yourself and them later in life if you do.
The product of a manufacturing process. Namely you're reading the output of a circuit etched in on a wafer or some (many many many years ago) transitors wired together in a specific pattern that gives you the output.
I guess you could consider the etching of the die to be the 'write' process, but for practical purposes you'd be the only one thinking that way.
Yeah, the 5+ second load times we still have on complex pages is totally acceptable. And on mobile devices, it's very relaxing to be able to pour a cup of coffee in the time it takes to load a page. I completely don't understand why every browser maker out there is working so hard to improve performance. I mean, what's the rush?
Not sure what YOU are using, but slashdot is the slowest loading site I use. On my iPhone 3g (not 3gs, not 4) it loads this page and its hundreds of ajax comments in under a second. So sorry I don't know what 5+ second load times look like, but I also have bandwidth that doesn't suck, which wouldn't be helped by this improvement anyway really considering how miniscule this improvement turns out in the real world, and by their own tests, its not always an improvement.
But if you are running a locked-down corp environment you are not allowing auto-updating software like Chrome or Firefox in the first place, right? You're probably running IE, which gives you tight control over versions and upgrades. And so this entire discussion is irrelevant to you. Am I missing something?
You are correct, Firefox and Chrome are not in the discussion ... which was my point ... because they have no reliable release which can point to and say 'this one works with our stuff and will be safe to use for a while'. I have things to do that don't involve me keeping up with Jones and their latest release.
My job is to create software for us by large corps, my company is EXTREMELY accepting when it comes to new software, our customers wouldn't allow half of what we do on a good day. You can choose to ignore the corp environment, but it more or less defines what people use. At home they can use what they choose, at work they use what they are told if they want a paycheck. Based on the two choices, some people will still run what they want at home, but most people who aren't computer geeks are going to just use the one they use at work so they don't have to learn something else. So go on with that attitude and see how far it gets you, I don't mind, I won't miss you in the least.
Early adopter? Maybe in 2000, its 2011 and it still holds true.
We remodeled one of our bathrooms, my wife decided on a low flow system ... after about two months, and several thousand dollars later, we had tradition system installed ... because the low flow crap is still fucking obnoxious, barely usable and ... we had a higher freaking water bill.
Theory and practical implementation are entirely different, I prefer to base my life in reality, I find the fact that I have imperial evidence to prove the theory bunk to be far more useful than listening to armchair douche bags on slashdot.
The problem with your response is that ... you've ignored the point the parent made ... these changes to save water actually cause MORE water usage because they are so ridiculous. Double flush a low flow toilet and you're worse off than a single flush ... and half the time a double isn't enough so you do 3.
I won't even get into the freaking shower heads, and let you continue to ignore the fact that the real problem is we're dumping too much water into direct paths to the ocean rather than putting it back in the ground for future use.
we've been working on it for over a year. You think that's rushed?
Yes, actually I do. While you guys may do upgrade cycles practically daily, most of the rest of us don't, so theres not much of a chance that within the next year, even if built into every browser right this instant, that its going to get a good beatdown in most corp environments in a year.
I love Google's work, I really do, but this is a typical example of Google being completely out of touch with upgrade cycles in businesses other than their own.
The rest of us don't really feel like being your crash test dummies or doing your work for you because you guys are in a rush to push something out ... then considering the difference that this is going to make ... well, its rather pointless to add the complexity it adds just to get ... on a good day ...a few percent ... and in some cases a slow down.
Google continues to be obsessed with 'omg pages load faster' and seems to have missed that people stopped caring, slashdot geeks aside. You should take a step back and look at your own commercials ... Really ... how much freaking faster than the blink of an eye, or electrical arc does the browser need to be?
All of my webservers and all my internal proxies, as well as every web browser I use supports keep-alive/pipelining.
None of them support SPDY right now, except probably an instance of Chrome on some Windows VM somewhere ... maybe, if it updated itself without asking again.
Failing to see how people are more likely to use something thats brand new with little to no support over something thats several years old and universally supported when the logic for not supporting the old flavor is that its not universally available.
SPDY is a solution to a non-existent problem.
I learned when Google started making commercials about how Chrome could load a page faster than lightning that the load time was no longer something I gave a shit about. We're beyond the point that load time matters to anyone, go work on something useful.
like what they did with Kerberos.
The way MS extended Kerberos was 100% within the specifications of Kerberos. It was designed to do EXACTLY what Microsoft did.
The problem is that most implementations of Kerberos in the unix world were based off the same broken implementation that didn't actually deal with the specification properly. Get your facts straight.
So assuming that most of stores have only 1 or 2 people in them, so we need on average 5 people per store to quadruple the number of people in the store ... that means they can only do that in 200 stores with 1000 people ... and while I've not been in a Sony store ... I'm pretty sure that if they only have 1 person on average in them, they'd probably close them down pretty quickly to stop losing money. So while 1000 people might be able to make a difference in your area, they aren't all in your area, thats world wide ... for one day ...
It will probably enlighten at least a few people who will take the initiative to learn more about the issue.
I probably would if I saw it just out of curiosity.
However I'd also likely conclude that the protest was being done by a bunch of obnoxious douche bags who just got in my way that particular day. Not a group of people I particularly feel like being associated with. All of that assumes of course, that 1000 people spread out around the world, are going to make a difference that I would actually notice, which is unlikely.
Nope, just that its not going to take them any longer than they were already expecting to clean it up. When you build one of these things, you start out with the assumption that the area is going to be a nuclear plant location for AT LEAST 100 years. The plant will STILL be a profitable one, even going 12x over decommission costs, and the time frame doesn't matter as its the same as it was before any of this happened.
You can hate nuclear energy all you want, and point out VALID reasons to avoid it. That I can deal with. What I can't stand is when people try to turn things into something unexpected or bad when it really isn't. The cleanup time doesn't change a thing, it was going to be 30 years even if the Tsunami never happened so it shouldn't be weighed into the argument.
If you want to talk about the harm to the fishing industry in the immediate area, go ahead, thats a valid point. You can bring up any of the massive number of problems that are a direct result of what has happened, nothing wrong with that ... but bringing up the clean up time like it is something unexpected or abnormal is being deceptive and makes it clear you don't have actual facts about why this is bad and are instead just spouting off when you read sensationalizing headlines. It makes it clear you're ignorant of the subject matter you are attempting to discuss. It makes you one of those annoying fucking people who stop progress because you're too lazy and ignorant to get the fucking facts right. The kind of idiot who thinks the world is 6000 years old and evolution is a lie.
Actually, Tuesday is the day everyone reads stuff after the weekend. Don't ask me why, but there some reason for it, hence why anyone 'in the know' publishes things on Tuesday, not Monday.
My guess would be that everyone is recovering from the weekend (either professionally or socially, i.e. the hang over) but I distinctly remember it being something entirely different.
You do realize that Kashima is not Dai-Ichi right? You're talking about a different power plant coming back online, not the one that is having all the issues, an entirely different plant.
The #1 and #2 reactor at Dai-Ichi is never coming back online, #3 is extremely unlikely as well.
1 and 2 were going to be decommissioned this month anyway, and #3 in the near future.
You might want to get your facts straightened out and less confused with each other.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_decommissioning
Most of those plants are expected to cost close to a billion dollars to decommission after a normal planned shutdown ... except no one actually expects it to be that cheap, they will all most certainly cost more, and those overruns have been in the past cases sometimes 5x as much as estimated. They'll take 30-50 years to decommission as well.
So this complete horrible disaster you'd like to use as an excuse to not use nuclear power ... is not going to take any longer than a normal cleanup, and is going to cost about 12 times more than expected ... for a 'horrible disaster'.
Long term the effect on the planet is nothing. In 50 years, no one will notice anything even at the site itself other than probably being obvious there was a structure there at some point, probably a plaque too. It will disturb the lives of a statistically irrelevant portion of the worlds population for less than one generation. Compare that to the current common power generation methods which if are doing what we think they are doing (global warming amoung other things) will most certainly kill our species off in the not too distant future ...
Stop looking at things so short term.
Its been done, at least in the US long long ago ... right up until the guy who started the whole thing basically had his lower jaw fall apart and died shortly there after ... since then its been rather illegal :/
It was going to take them 15-20 years to shut down the reactor sites anyway, which they would have actually started by now anyway (remember, a couple of these were just a couple weeks away from decommissioning ANYWAY.
When you build a nuclear reactor, you're making a long term commitment from the start. Once its fueled and running, it can't just be turned off and torn down over night, the teardown process is slow by its very nature as you wait for things to 'cool down' from a radiological perspective to the point that its safe enough to do something to it ... even when its a planned process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_decommissioning
Look at that list, most of these plants have planned decommissioning time frames from 30 to 50 years under normal shutdown conditions. Considering this is a 'disaster' and most of the plants on that list easily approach $1 billion to shut down anyway, $12 billion for clean up seems to be rather cheap.
If the tallboy is a 1954 original 16oz can, then it holds 0.473176473 liters, so you'd need ~121 million of those.
If the tallboy is on of the odd ball 21oz cans, then it holds 0.621044121 liters, so you'd need ~92 million of those.
If the tallboy is a newer variety, 24oz (which you're probably referring to), then it holds 0.70976471 liters, so you'd need at least 80,308,304 cans of Bud.
is risk free and has little environmental impact.
Bullshit.
I'm fully for learning about and utilizing solar and wind power, but they are NOT risk free nor do we understand the environmental impact of either at any scale that matters.
If we had the same number of coal plants in the state I live in as there are solar/wind plants world wide, it would STILL probably be less impacting than what we have now. The point here is, a few plants don't make much of an impact on a gobal scale, so we don't REALLY know what the long term differences are for these things. We are currently VERY ignorant of what switching our power supply to wind/solar would do to the world.
Do I think its a bad idea to try solar and Wind farms? No, I seriously doubt they cause the same sort of impact as their fossil fuel burning cohorts, but I know for a fact that every large scale solar plant or wind farm makes an obvious MASSIVE visible impact on its environment. A visual impact that appears to the uneducated as far larger than a coal/gas plant. But thats visual, and experience has tought me that the visual impact is usually far different and far smaller than the actual total impact. Hydroelectric power for instance, makes a massive obvious visual impression of its impact, but its environmental impact is WAY bigger and effects the entire river system its part of in most cases, not just the land and river that are directly impacted from the newly formed lake.
My point is that we just don't ACTUALLY know the long term dangers of these types of power generation, just like we didn't know the problems with producing all our power from coal, gas and oil until we had them all over the place and started making enough pollution and doing enough paying attention to NOTICE the global changes.
Something tells me that changing the wind flow patterns because of a large wind farm or changing the heating pattern of a large chunk of desert in one area problem isn't going to cause global problems ... but they have a local impact. We just don't have enough of them to know if there is a major global impact and what the tipping point is. I suspect, much like fossil fuels, we won't realize the problem until we're already well into it.
Lets try wind and solar power, but lets not say its 'risk free' and 'has little environmental' impact.