The United States is very good at estimating military casualties
The large numbers soldiers that froze to death in Korea not long after due to a failure to supply equipment demonstrate that the reality is far, far less than the omnipotence suggested. The death toll may well have been enormous, especially if it ended up with US vs USSR squabbles on Japanese soil as was expected by some, but ultimately we can only really guess today based on far more information that was available at the time. They just did not know. It may have been like the allies in Italy with very little local resistance or it may have been Stalingrad style house to house fighting all the way.
Murray Peshkin does not have to take pride in his work, but he should not feel that he is party to a war crime either.
It was Truman and his advisors that made the choice for both bombs, so if there is any fault it lies there. There is plenty to justify the first bombing, even against civilians, since to be frank it was supposed to be a blatant demonstration the the USA would go as far as the mass slaughter of innocents to get the job done if that is what it took. The second is argued over at length on both sides of the issue by people who know far more about the topic than anyone on this site.
"Our system will work once we get rid of the bad people." Sorry, but I'm only interested in systems that work even when you can't do that.
No such thing. All you can do is stop them getting into places where they can game the system and ignore those rules designed to stop "the bad people". You should have noticed by now that "the bad people" are not big on following rules.
Not as such. Sorry but you spectacularly dropped the ball on this one and rate well below normal general knowledge on this matter, which makes this entire thread rather pathetic don't you think? What's with trying to start a battle of wits while totally unarmed?
It was between the ladies that either liked it very warm, or very cool.
Cultural factors and dress codes come into play in that case - as men we are not expected to dress for appearance as much as comfort so the women exposing more bare skin are feeling the temperature more. Thus the ones who feel the effects more mess about with the settings - often deliberately setting too high or too low in the hope of a quicker response.
Big multi office building HVAC is not like controlling the temperature in your car.
If you had been a mechanical engineering student in the late 1990s I could have been teaching you some details about that:)
No, fraid not. In case you haven't noticed, the dress code in the IT industry is already very informal. There's still plenty of us who want it cooler than 72F.
Do we adjust it to another lady who likes it at 68 degrees?
Yes many offices end up with airconditioning wars, it's part of life with an open plan office. Since truly even heating and cooling isn't that common it can work itself out depending on where vents are. I don't even have my server room as low as 20C so that sounds a bit extreme to me.
Correct. Pants should normally be worn as well. On especially cold days socks are necessary too. Oh, you mean for places where white stuff that is not hailstones falls out of the sky? Madness! In such places you'd even have to close the windows!
Remember typing pools - oh that's right, you don't. There were a LOT of women in office workplaces earlier as well. It's very likely to have been a greater percentage of female office workers back then. Maybe this is a storm in a teacup due to the comfort of one Danish guy alone being considered thus just a very poor model to start with.
Well there must be a lot of us about since it appears that suggesting that rape is a bad thing is enough for some people to start screaming SJW at us.
The reality is some editors thought they would stir things up by putting in a few emotive articles about women in IT and the readership emotionally, thus lots of potential "ad-views" even if people were too busy posting comments to read the ads. Mix in political astroturf shills (sorry - "social media workers"), guys who have been fucked over by a screwed up family court system, guys that didn't get everything in a non-screwed up family court system and some troll drawn to the scent of blood and you have the whole artificial slashdot SJW shitstorm that used to be scheduled for every Friday evening.
So in my opinion the act of "SJWs started shitting all over it" was a deliberate aim of the editors, or at least one of them.
That's because MS Word and L/OO Writer are not word processors anymore. They're WYSIWYG document creation tools, i.e. they attempt to combine text input, text management, and document layout into one tool.
They attempt to do it but still fall short of the desktop publishing stuff of the early 1990s, which is probably just as well because a lot of features to tweak can be a serious time sink. That leaves it neither fish nor fowl, a kitchen sink full of parts that has way more than you need for one task but not quite enough to do a decent job at another, mostly just as a feature list for box art. To use a car analogy, it's a fairly normal family car with automatic transmission on a small engine with a spoiler and other racing parts glued on as an afterthought. Try to go fast and bits fall off.
While I've been asking MS for a "show codes" feature in MS Word since before 1995. Some things that people think will be very useful are just not cared about by the people releasing software.
But LibreOffice remains nothing more than the generic stand-alone office suite of the nineties
We're doing the same shit with these things that we were doing in the 1990s. "MS Word" is still no match for a dedicated desktop publishing program of the 1990s either, despite creeping featurism that's not what it's for. A spreadsheet is a spreadsheet and "MS Excel" is still just as shitty at graphing as "MS Works" was, but it gets the job done for non-technical stuff, and "scalc" is in the same situation. "MS Access" was never more than a toy database, "MS Project" really has the same feature set it had in 1992 when I first saw it - and "MS Outlook" has gone BACKWARDS since 2005. Ask a typical "MS Outlook" user to search for an old email to see how crippled the new interface is.
conspicuously absent is a credible, full-featured, open source alternative to Outlook
There's good reasons for that - it's a slow piece of shit that deliberately breaks standards and has an interface that confuses users. How slow? I've spent the last three days migrating a former employee's email to IMAP folders so the people who have taken up his role can read it. "Thunderbird" syncs to all the stuff it's exported in a few minutes, as would dozens of other email clients. The only place where "MS Outlook" is the best option is on a misconfigured "MS Exchange" server. Fix that server and the users can run any mail client they like, and in the age of email on phones a broken "MS Exchange" server that isn't set up to do it will get you fired. As you wrote above it's not the 1990s - we don't even need "MS Outlook" for the calendar thing in the age of iPhones etc, so that just leaves us with a slow as shit email client that confuses the fuck out of users. With the interface change a migration to "Thunderbird", or anything else, was a lot less painful for them than the new interface. If you haven't seen a better email client than "MS Outlook" then you haven't even tried to look. There are dozens.
It was club level politics with people who wanted to be in charge but didn't have the time to run the project in one camp and others that wanted to get stuff done in another. With open source if you take your ball and go home the game still continues.
Instead of "robot cabs" how about something a bit bigger that fits more people - maybe run it on rails so it doesn't take much energy. Lots of little things going everywhere are going to clog the streets if they are robot or not because the control system is not the problem. Robot cabs are like trying to solve the 19th century horseshit problem with a better horse instead of using a different way to get around. So the answer, as it was in the 19th century, is to get the people who are going to the same places on some sort of mass transit and that frees things up for the people who are going to other places. It's only framed as a difficult problem because of evasion of responsibility and blame shifting.
You are clearly playing a different and rather pathetic one where the actual topic does not matter but some kind of pointless childish yapping to get people angry does. An epic failure in a normal discussion is probably a triple word score in the pathetic little game you are playing while others are attempting to seriously discuss and issue. Being a psychopath is normal? WTF? Clearly you are either playing with us or trying to justify something in your own life that I doubt matters to anyone other than yourself. I've run across a couple of psychopaths - normal is something they really have to work hard at and is not a word that fits them.
Slashdot Mirror
It's an example of a gross failure to estimate casualties via a major failure in intelligence gathering.
The large numbers soldiers that froze to death in Korea not long after due to a failure to supply equipment demonstrate that the reality is far, far less than the omnipotence suggested.
The death toll may well have been enormous, especially if it ended up with US vs USSR squabbles on Japanese soil as was expected by some, but ultimately we can only really guess today based on far more information that was available at the time. They just did not know. It may have been like the allies in Italy with very little local resistance or it may have been Stalingrad style house to house fighting all the way.
It was Truman and his advisors that made the choice for both bombs, so if there is any fault it lies there. There is plenty to justify the first bombing, even against civilians, since to be frank it was supposed to be a blatant demonstration the the USA would go as far as the mass slaughter of innocents to get the job done if that is what it took. The second is argued over at length on both sides of the issue by people who know far more about the topic than anyone on this site.
No such thing. All you can do is stop them getting into places where they can game the system and ignore those rules designed to stop "the bad people". You should have noticed by now that "the bad people" are not big on following rules.
Not as such. Sorry but you spectacularly dropped the ball on this one and rate well below normal general knowledge on this matter, which makes this entire thread rather pathetic don't you think? What's with trying to start a battle of wits while totally unarmed?
Cultural factors and dress codes come into play in that case - as men we are not expected to dress for appearance as much as comfort so the women exposing more bare skin are feeling the temperature more. Thus the ones who feel the effects more mess about with the settings - often deliberately setting too high or too low in the hope of a quicker response.
If you had been a mechanical engineering student in the late 1990s I could have been teaching you some details about that :)
If you are that ignorant of history then you shouldn't have refuted the poster above on the basis of a laughably wild guess.
It's a handy little flag to show that the person using it is attacking a strawman.
No, fraid not. In case you haven't noticed, the dress code in the IT industry is already very informal. There's still plenty of us who want it cooler than 72F.
So you can ice skate?
Yes many offices end up with airconditioning wars, it's part of life with an open plan office. Since truly even heating and cooling isn't that common it can work itself out depending on where vents are.
I don't even have my server room as low as 20C so that sounds a bit extreme to me.
t shirt is not indoor winter clothes.
Correct. Pants should normally be worn as well. On especially cold days socks are necessary too.
Oh, you mean for places where white stuff that is not hailstones falls out of the sky? Madness! In such places you'd even have to close the windows!
Remember typing pools - oh that's right, you don't. There were a LOT of women in office workplaces earlier as well. It's very likely to have been a greater percentage of female office workers back then. Maybe this is a storm in a teacup due to the comfort of one Danish guy alone being considered thus just a very poor model to start with.
Typo: the readership REACTED emotionally
Well there must be a lot of us about since it appears that suggesting that rape is a bad thing is enough for some people to start screaming SJW at us.
The reality is some editors thought they would stir things up by putting in a few emotive articles about women in IT and the readership emotionally, thus lots of potential "ad-views" even if people were too busy posting comments to read the ads. Mix in political astroturf shills (sorry - "social media workers"), guys who have been fucked over by a screwed up family court system, guys that didn't get everything in a non-screwed up family court system and some troll drawn to the scent of blood and you have the whole artificial slashdot SJW shitstorm that used to be scheduled for every Friday evening.
So in my opinion the act of "SJWs started shitting all over it" was a deliberate aim of the editors, or at least one of them.
It's to stop those pesky governments that try to limit cigarettes and asbestos.
Prominence?
He has no power other than to attract attention to himself with things like a filibuster that was never going to work.
They attempt to do it but still fall short of the desktop publishing stuff of the early 1990s, which is probably just as well because a lot of features to tweak can be a serious time sink. That leaves it neither fish nor fowl, a kitchen sink full of parts that has way more than you need for one task but not quite enough to do a decent job at another, mostly just as a feature list for box art. To use a car analogy, it's a fairly normal family car with automatic transmission on a small engine with a spoiler and other racing parts glued on as an afterthought. Try to go fast and bits fall off.
While I've been asking MS for a "show codes" feature in MS Word since before 1995.
Some things that people think will be very useful are just not cared about by the people releasing software.
LibreOffice 5.0, the tenth major release
Version 5 = 10th major release? Were they using excel to calculate their version number?
It's almost as bad as going 3.11, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, Vista, 7, 8, 10.
We're doing the same shit with these things that we were doing in the 1990s. "MS Word" is still no match for a dedicated desktop publishing program of the 1990s either, despite creeping featurism that's not what it's for. A spreadsheet is a spreadsheet and "MS Excel" is still just as shitty at graphing as "MS Works" was, but it gets the job done for non-technical stuff, and "scalc" is in the same situation. "MS Access" was never more than a toy database, "MS Project" really has the same feature set it had in 1992 when I first saw it - and "MS Outlook" has gone BACKWARDS since 2005. Ask a typical "MS Outlook" user to search for an old email to see how crippled the new interface is.
There's good reasons for that - it's a slow piece of shit that deliberately breaks standards and has an interface that confuses users. How slow? I've spent the last three days migrating a former employee's email to IMAP folders so the people who have taken up his role can read it. "Thunderbird" syncs to all the stuff it's exported in a few minutes, as would dozens of other email clients. The only place where "MS Outlook" is the best option is on a misconfigured "MS Exchange" server. Fix that server and the users can run any mail client they like, and in the age of email on phones a broken "MS Exchange" server that isn't set up to do it will get you fired. As you wrote above it's not the 1990s - we don't even need "MS Outlook" for the calendar thing in the age of iPhones etc, so that just leaves us with a slow as shit email client that confuses the fuck out of users. With the interface change a migration to "Thunderbird", or anything else, was a lot less painful for them than the new interface.
If you haven't seen a better email client than "MS Outlook" then you haven't even tried to look. There are dozens.
It was club level politics with people who wanted to be in charge but didn't have the time to run the project in one camp and others that wanted to get stuff done in another. With open source if you take your ball and go home the game still continues.
I think we need a sarcasm tag for stuff like the bus thing from "furgle" that appears to have been misinterpreted as being serious.
Instead of "robot cabs" how about something a bit bigger that fits more people - maybe run it on rails so it doesn't take much energy.
Lots of little things going everywhere are going to clog the streets if they are robot or not because the control system is not the problem. Robot cabs are like trying to solve the 19th century horseshit problem with a better horse instead of using a different way to get around.
So the answer, as it was in the 19th century, is to get the people who are going to the same places on some sort of mass transit and that frees things up for the people who are going to other places. It's only framed as a difficult problem because of evasion of responsibility and blame shifting.
So Stalin referred to above was not a real psychopath?
Epic fail.
Journalists are lazy - hence 1 hero not 100 when it's a massive group effort.
You are clearly playing a different and rather pathetic one where the actual topic does not matter but some kind of pointless childish yapping to get people angry does. An epic failure in a normal discussion is probably a triple word score in the pathetic little game you are playing while others are attempting to seriously discuss and issue.
Being a psychopath is normal? WTF? Clearly you are either playing with us or trying to justify something in your own life that I doubt matters to anyone other than yourself.
I've run across a couple of psychopaths - normal is something they really have to work hard at and is not a word that fits them.