How is it that a sexual assault is now necessary and endorsed in order to board a plane?
Don't exaggerate. It isn't a sexual assault. It isn't an assault of any kind, as there is no violence or psychological manipulation. It is all horribly embarrassing, sure. But the body scanner is, at worst, a peeping tom, and the pat-down is, at worst, groping (voluntary groping, since one chooses the pat-down instead of the body scan).
Before OS X, Macs had a bit of trouble with version control. No command-line, see. In fact, I only knew of two that were reasonably-priced or free: MacCVS and Voodoo. I never got a chance to use Voodoo, but its approach and feature-set looked cool. Can anyone comment on how well it worked? Or what version-control system you used on classic Macs?
The emperical evidence of a quite immense amount of easily-findable hentai or Japanese-made drawings with quite immense amounts of breast in its characters, especially when said works were demonstrably not intended to be exported to America, seems to disagree with your assertion.
But they also have immense amounts of:
Dick-girls
Tentacle-guys
Jet-women
Groping
Vivisection
Ghosts
The correct conclusion is not so much that America's big breasteses have world-wide appeal, as that the Japanese have hella fetishes.
We are a long, long way from discovering an economic system which could handle some kind of replicator. We have not figured out how to manage an economy where two countries have vastly different views on human rights, pollution and such as well has having widely disparate wages.
Long before we can handle unlimited production of goods at low cost we need to figure out how we are going to deal with a non-working population because most of the people in such an environment aren't going to be working. Is it the responsibility of the working citizens to support (and entertain) the non-working ones? Or do we push real hard on some real Darwinism and Malthusian ethics and cut the population enough such that there simply aren't any people sitting around idle?
Science fiction authors have been pondering these questions for a long time, and have come up with many systems to do just this. Off the top of my head, we have the purple wage from Brin's Kiln People and the calorie system from Williams' The Green Leopard Plague.
Lockstep they do not have to be, but of course some updating might be needed if you are depending on packages which have been retired (but I suppose a repository ideally should provide all dependencies). Lockstep is only required if you are providing packages that the repository is also providing, and you want the main repository and yours to interact dynamically with this. That is, if you are doing more than provided old versions for compability reasons.
Really, we use this at work, and it is no trouble. Of course, you need a repository per distribution, and that IS a real bother, though I see no easy solution for it.
No updating is needed, and no repository is needed, and you have an easy solution. It is to use CDE or OS X bundles or static libraries.
Granted this is mostly because they don't know any better, but user education is a very slow process when you have a huge marketing machine uneducating them. It's like the henry ford quote, if he'd asked his customers what they wanted they would have asked for a faster horse because the horse was what they were familiar with.
Well, Henry Ford was right. But in this case, I think you guys are playing the role of his customers. You are familiar with traditional Unix package-management systems, and shared libraries, and building things from source. And you want that horse to be faster.
But that is a crappy way to do things. The only compelling advantage is that you can update a single shared library to fix, say, a security bug. Theoretically. Practically, that can and does go wrong. So, it does not actually have any compelling advantages, and everyone would be better off with using shared libraries for OS services (using a broader definition of OS than the "kernel" one) and isolated, static libraries for everything else.
I wonder if the outcome would be different if the testee had no fear. Both of their superior and of killing. I would assume that it would depend entirely on the morality of the test subject.
I would be very surprised if this amygdala circuitry dealt with social fears that may have factored in to the Milgram Experiment. By "social fears," I mean fears of being ostracized or punished for criminal behavior, disobedience, or failing to meet expectations. I feel those fears differently from how I feel physical fight-or-flight fears.
Imagine that one end of a seesaw is weighted and normally sits on a garden hose, preventing water -- in this analogy, the fear impulse -- from flowing through it. When a signal that triggers a fear response arrives, it presses down on the opposite end of the seesaw, lifting the first end off the hose and allowing fear, like water, to flow.
I like this analogy. It is a great analogy!
But do you know what would be better? If it were about cars.
Fear is good. Fear is healthy. Fear keeps you alive.... Fear itself is not wrong, only what stupid people fear is wrong. I have fears in my life, and I'm glad I do.
Yes. The litany the GP posted, below, is not about denying fear, but rather about keeping control when the fear instinct would get you killed. Paul Atreides was being tested. He had to keep his hand in the box even though it felt like his hand was being burned/shredded/destroyed; if he removed his hand, he'd get stuck with the poisoned needle and die. He knew (or could figure out) that his hand was not actually being destroyed. The litany was to clear away the unnecessary fear of losing his hand, so that he could concentrate on dealing with the pain and keeping his hand in place.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
That's why goat cheese in the US is always the same terrible crappy stuff and why you never see the variety of cheese you have in Europe. It has really grown to be a cultural thing.
No pun intended?
I don't mean to offend....but I don't understand how anyone can be so into cheese? Including apparently the French.
Go to a decent supermarket, and grab a weird-looking cheese from their cheese stand — the stand with the big individually-wrapped wedges, not the slices. The cheese may well have more blue and green in it than white. That's fine; it is still perfectly safe to eat. Grab some Triscuits or something. Try it out. Cheese tastes amazing.
Definitely. I went through a minor version of this a couple of years ago due to repetitive motion disorder... He'll start slow but if he practices he'll get good enough in no time.
The Seattle bus stops have timetables mounted on the poles, but they are for the nearest checkpointed station. For example, the stop at Yesler & 29th might list the timetable for the reasonably close Jackson & 35th, leaving it to the rider to guess the exact time.
But the Metro has an excellent web-site to find routes and schedules between any two points (even when changing services and modes, like catching the train part of the way) and there are several mobile apps that show current bus locations and ETAs based on GPS information that the Metro broadcasts.
Here is my query. As I mentioned, I received no response.
-----
Subject: Exchange_Adapter_Query Date: July 30, 2010, 1:23:07 PM PDT To: Sales_US_Technologies@nyx.com
Hello, NYSE.
Slashdot.org has a discussion on a Forbes.com article on high-frequency trading. We were wondering, how much it costs to sign up for your co-location services? I am just asking for a general range here.
with not a single #ifdef needed.... because all your #ifdefs are outsourced to other libraries that you have standardized upon. You've still got them, you just don't know it. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
If the IRS doesn't intend this to be legal, then they need to change the statutes and/or regulations; otherwise any money "lost" in this way is their fault.
You know it is not up to the IRS. Congress makes these laws and relies on the IRS to somehow make it work. I am sure every staffer there dreams of the day when the laws start making sense. I imagine they have an underground archive full of brilliant tax systems that would see the United States well-funded and the citizens happy, but those bright futures are gathering dust behind a door marked "beware of leopard," while their authors are aging 10 years every time Congress sends out a new round of "tax code revisions."
To say that "we've been doing this "progressive taxation" thing for quite a while now" is blatantly false, precisely because of all the loopholes. Capital gains taxed at 10%, the very loopholes as shown in this very article we are discussing, and a horde of other ways that the rich pay lower taxes.
He said that we've been doing it for a while, and it doesn't work. Now, if it doesn't work because no one lets it work and adds special cases and loopholes, rather than because the math is bogus, that still means it...doesn't work. Time to try something else that may succeed better.
There'd be huge winners and huge losers, and I've met quite a few people in favor of the system that didn't realize that they'd be by far on the losing team.
Are you sure about that? Seems to me that a lot of people who support a Flat Tax system are doing so on ideological grounds, and are willing to accept higher taxes if, in exchange, they get a country closer to what they want.
That is where I stand, anyway. I do not know whether I would be paying more or less, but I do not care. I want a fair tax system.
When I used to for the John D and Cathrine T MacArthur foundation I found it surprisingly does take a lot of time, and man-power to give away that much money (assuming you limit it to programs that actually help people and not get wasted, stolen, mis-used).
I am not surprised. I saw Brewster's Millions, and he was trying to waste money.
The IRS would refund the difference. (Assuming they caught the mistake)
As well they should. But since 1996, the generous have had another avenue to help the Treasury: a gift donation. I've sent them money, myself, but that was in happier times when I wasn't in danger of being flat broke.
Slashdot Mirror
Solipsism for the win!
Don't exaggerate. It isn't a sexual assault. It isn't an assault of any kind, as there is no violence or psychological manipulation. It is all horribly embarrassing, sure. But the body scanner is, at worst, a peeping tom, and the pat-down is, at worst, groping (voluntary groping, since one chooses the pat-down instead of the body scan).
Wait, cleavage? No wonder it wasn't working. I was swiping it through somewhere else.
That reminds me of SCP-173.
(It is actually a Dr. Who reference.)
Before OS X, Macs had a bit of trouble with version control. No command-line, see. In fact, I only knew of two that were reasonably-priced or free: MacCVS and Voodoo. I never got a chance to use Voodoo, but its approach and feature-set looked cool. Can anyone comment on how well it worked? Or what version-control system you used on classic Macs?
But they also have immense amounts of:
The correct conclusion is not so much that America's big breasteses have world-wide appeal, as that the Japanese have hella fetishes.
Science fiction authors have been pondering these questions for a long time, and have come up with many systems to do just this. Off the top of my head, we have the purple wage from Brin's Kiln People and the calorie system from Williams' The Green Leopard Plague.
In fact, most mainstream OSs are switching to package managers.
[citation needed]
Apple is doing a desktop app store; is that what you are referring to? But it is nothing like a package manager.
No updating is needed, and no repository is needed, and you have an easy solution. It is to use CDE or OS X bundles or static libraries.
Well, Henry Ford was right. But in this case, I think you guys are playing the role of his customers. You are familiar with traditional Unix package-management systems, and shared libraries, and building things from source. And you want that horse to be faster.
But that is a crappy way to do things. The only compelling advantage is that you can update a single shared library to fix, say, a security bug. Theoretically. Practically, that can and does go wrong. So, it does not actually have any compelling advantages, and everyone would be better off with using shared libraries for OS services (using a broader definition of OS than the "kernel" one) and isolated, static libraries for everything else.
I would be very surprised if this amygdala circuitry dealt with social fears that may have factored in to the Milgram Experiment. By "social fears," I mean fears of being ostracized or punished for criminal behavior, disobedience, or failing to meet expectations. I feel those fears differently from how I feel physical fight-or-flight fears.
I like this analogy. It is a great analogy!
But do you know what would be better? If it were about cars.
Yes. The litany the GP posted, below, is not about denying fear, but rather about keeping control when the fear instinct would get you killed. Paul Atreides was being tested. He had to keep his hand in the box even though it felt like his hand was being burned/shredded/destroyed; if he removed his hand, he'd get stuck with the poisoned needle and die. He knew (or could figure out) that his hand was not actually being destroyed. The litany was to clear away the unnecessary fear of losing his hand, so that he could concentrate on dealing with the pain and keeping his hand in place.
That's why goat cheese in the US is always the same terrible crappy stuff and why you never see the variety of cheese you have in Europe. It has really grown to be a cultural thing.
No pun intended?
I don't mean to offend....but I don't understand how anyone can be so into cheese? Including apparently the French.
Go to a decent supermarket, and grab a weird-looking cheese from their cheese stand — the stand with the big individually-wrapped wedges, not the slices. The cheese may well have more blue and green in it than white. That's fine; it is still perfectly safe to eat. Grab some Triscuits or something. Try it out. Cheese tastes amazing.
Yeah, he'll definitely get faster. Faster. Oh yeah, faster baby, faster! FASTER!!
Achievement unlocked: Master baiter
The Seattle bus stops have timetables mounted on the poles, but they are for the nearest checkpointed station. For example, the stop at Yesler & 29th might list the timetable for the reasonably close Jackson & 35th, leaving it to the rider to guess the exact time.
But the Metro has an excellent web-site to find routes and schedules between any two points (even when changing services and modes, like catching the train part of the way) and there are several mobile apps that show current bus locations and ETAs based on GPS information that the Metro broadcasts.
Here is my query. As I mentioned, I received no response.
-----
Subject: Exchange_Adapter_Query
Date: July 30, 2010, 1:23:07 PM PDT
To: Sales_US_Technologies@nyx.com
Hello, NYSE.
Slashdot.org has a discussion on a Forbes.com article on high-frequency trading. We were wondering, how much it costs to sign up for your co-location services? I am just asking for a general range here.
Thanks!
a spec so glorious, it's still commonly cited - yet so useless it's a 30 year old virgin, having never been implemented!
"Implemented." Is that what the kids are calling it these days?
Actually, it does sound kinda dirty.
with not a single #ifdef needed. ... because all your #ifdefs are outsourced to other libraries that you have standardized upon. You've still got them, you just don't know it. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
I sent the NYSE an e-mail asking for their prices for co-location services. No response. They aren't talking to the likes of me about this.
If the IRS doesn't intend this to be legal, then they need to change the statutes and/or regulations; otherwise any money "lost" in this way is their fault.
You know it is not up to the IRS. Congress makes these laws and relies on the IRS to somehow make it work. I am sure every staffer there dreams of the day when the laws start making sense. I imagine they have an underground archive full of brilliant tax systems that would see the United States well-funded and the citizens happy, but those bright futures are gathering dust behind a door marked "beware of leopard," while their authors are aging 10 years every time Congress sends out a new round of "tax code revisions."
He said that we've been doing it for a while, and it doesn't work. Now, if it doesn't work because no one lets it work and adds special cases and loopholes, rather than because the math is bogus, that still means it...doesn't work. Time to try something else that may succeed better.
There'd be huge winners and huge losers, and I've met quite a few people in favor of the system that didn't realize that they'd be by far on the losing team.
Are you sure about that? Seems to me that a lot of people who support a Flat Tax system are doing so on ideological grounds, and are willing to accept higher taxes if, in exchange, they get a country closer to what they want.
That is where I stand, anyway. I do not know whether I would be paying more or less, but I do not care. I want a fair tax system.
I am not surprised. I saw Brewster's Millions, and he was trying to waste money.
The IRS would refund the difference. (Assuming they caught the mistake)
As well they should. But since 1996, the generous have had another avenue to help the Treasury: a gift donation. I've sent them money, myself, but that was in happier times when I wasn't in danger of being flat broke.