Told Comcast and SBC (now AT&T) to take a hike a bit more than two years ago. Got the equivalent Dish package and have been happy ever since - pitched the hard phone line in favor of a $60 two-phone cellular plan. My DSL is provided by a local carrier that does not offer telephone service - they don't care if I run a server on their line as long as I a) don't ask them why my web, mail or IRC daemons don't work and b) don't exceed their rather generous bandwidth limit - and they were kind enough to add a PTR record for free so AOL would quit bouncing my outbound mail;-)
There is life without Comcast. Dish charges me ten bucks a month for not having my pair of dual-tuner DVRs connected to a phone line but I don't think I can get a hard line for ten bucks. With the ten extra bucks a month I'm still paying them less than I was paying Comcast and the service is infinitely better. Life is good.
...In a psychological sense Fanboyism is a lot deeper than the article suggests, and it is a consequence of a culture as materialistic as Western culture tends to be.
Excellent.
Extending the parent poster's logic just a bit nobody wants to think they selected anything other than the best OS when in reality the best OS is the one that meets your needs. Some people have a lot of their personal self-worth tied up in their selection of computer platforms;-)
Nice straw men we've got lined up here;-)
Q1. Who does Random student B shoot at?
A1. No one. It's my opinion that when confronted with this situation RS B will either save his own skin or (at most) call 911 from his cell. You don't normally see people running to join in a bar fight and those folks have all had a couple of drinks and aren't using deadly force against each other;-)
Q2. Whats sort of lawsuit would Random Student B face for killing Random Student A?
A2. That depends on whether a reasonable person exercising due care would have killed RS A. If RS A had his gun pointed in RS B's direction it would be reasonable for RS B to fire.
Q3. Students A and B are teenagers. How excitable are teenagers?
A3. Now we've moved from the sublime to the ridiculous. Who's proposed arming teenagers?
Q4. How does the response scale up from 1 Gunman and 2 Random Students, to 1 Gunman and 50 Random students running around with guns? Note that the majority of the students will be acting independently, but multiple students acting together has been a tactic used in a previous school shooting.
A4. In the stated example multiple = 2 and 2 != 50.
Q5. What does law enforcement do when confronted with this situation? (Hint: See question 2)
A5. Slightly More Obvious Hint: Most likely what they've been trained to do.
Q6. Given studies have shown that even trained soldiers can have trouble firing at living humans, why should non-military trained civilians suddenly be able to throw aside all qualms about doing so? Or should first person shooter games be required study when getting a gun license?
A6. This directly contradicts the argument you present in Q1. Having actually been a trained solder and actually fired a weapon at another person I'd say that the scenario in Q6 is considerably more likely to occur than the one in Q1. Ever taken a college-level course in logic?;-)
Q7. Assuming that all people now carry guns to protect against rare forms of crime (ie school shootings), how will turning all civilians into people wth no qualms about killing change society? In your reply compare/contrast shootings with other more common forms of anti social behaviour such as "road rage'.
Again, the parent poster might benefit from a course in critical thinking. There's no basis for the argument that just because someone defends themself or someone else that we've turned "all civilians into people wth no qualms about killing". That's such a leap of logic I'm not even gonna entertain it - which makes the road rage question moot.
Not directed at anyone in particular but the parent started me thinking.
I also play electric bass and have for many years. I've always kinda looked down my nose at tabs, thinking that they teach someone how to play only one song while learning to read music will allow you to play anything you have the skill to reproduce.
My father, OTOH, probably *invented* tablature;-) He's 73 years old and has been writing and transposing pedal steel guitar parts for relatively modern music for more years than I've been around.
So - I guess they serve their purpose.
Just so this doesn't get modded OT, I got a nastygram from Warner Music several years ago for hosting a pdf copy of a Real Book. For the uninformed Real Books are big thick books full of jazz standards with melody and chord progression. Not having the wherewithal to fight that kind of a fight I decided to remove the Real Book from my website. A pity.
Can't read TFA because of a work web filter, dammit - hope this is relevant.
Have run MCE and currently run MythTV. I have a Dish setup and have ordered an IR Blaster to complete tha package and skip the need for a second DVR on my home network.
I have only one gripe about MythTV. There's no way I can see to switch from fullscreen to windowed operation and back again - which is something that's pretty easily done in MCE or even in plain old Windows with standard Hauppauge software. As it stands today I have two links to MythTV - one with "--geometry 704x480 --windowed" switches and one that just runs fullscreen. I run them on different workspaces since there's no way to switch between the two modes.
Well, two gripes - mythweather quit working when MSNBC moved their weather site. Rather than patch the application to fix this can't we just stick the location of the web feed in a config file? Please?
But - rather than just bringing an issue to the table it'd be nice to have a solution as well.
With all respect, we're gonna leave it to you to come up with an indicator that demonstrates a person is mature enough to
decide when his secular education is complete
consume alcohol or other mood-altering substances
support himself away from his parents' home
marry someone else
enter into an enforceable contract
without relying on the person's age. What indicator would you suggest we use? As an old boss told me long ago, don't bring a problem to the table without also bringing a solution;-)
That stupidity doesn't magically go away when they turn 18, but the "protection" they're afforded under the law does, so how do you reconcile those two things?
Easily. At 17 I'm legally responsible for your safety and well-being. At 18 I'm not.
I've raised three kids who now range in age from 24 to 31.
I'm not and never have been my child's peer or friend - I'm a parent and the relationship between me and my child is and always will be asymmetrical.
As a parent I reserved the right to investigate any aspect of my child's life when I had reason to believe that the child was at risk - and investigations into my child's sexual activity or drug or alcohol or internet use are IMO appropriate.
Minor children have an inherent right not to be physically, sexually or emotionally abused - every other right a child has is granted by that child's legal guardian. My responsibility as a parent is to protect that child until (s)he can fend for itself.
My house, my rules. Doesn't matter if the child is fifteen or thirty-five - as long as they're under my roof I will determine what does (and does not) go on in my house. For example my imaginary twenty-five year old kid is legally able to smoke cigarettes. He's still not gonna smoke them in my house. He can pretty much come and go as he pleases - with the caveat that if you're not gonna come home that night you give Mom and Dad a call so they don't stay up worrying about whether you've wrapped your car around a tree or something. Don't know about other parents but I can't go to sleep if I have a child unaccounted for.
I trust my children and always have - that doesn't mean I didn't verify where they are (and with whom) from time to time. The internet was really only an issue with my youngest but I can and have used tools to determine what he was doing on the net and wouldn't hesitate to do so again if I had a kid in the house.
The parent poster mentions spying on your children - monitoring is not spying. My kids knew their entire lives that I might call to verify their whereabouts from time to time, check their homework, call their teachers to see how they were doing in school, occasionally check the odometer in the car and yes, even monitor their internet use. As I said in the title, trust but verify.
My children also know how much I love them. They're not peers or friends and never will be - they are my children and that relationship brings both additional benefits and additional responsibilities. Doesn't mean I don't hoist a glass with my kids or seek their counsel sometimes - they're adults now and in charge of their own destiny and even though sometimes I don't agree with their decisions but I have learned to STFU and allow my kids to grow from their own choices - good or bad.
The company has developed a product that automatically re-formats text in a way that your brain can more easily comprehend. Pictures of Japanese schoolgirls?
Sorry, that would only work in the wonderland of informed customers that can actually make their own decisions. And as nature abhors a vacuum, I abhor the intellectually lazy.
OT, but I'm running for Emperor Of The Whole Damn World on a natural selection platform. I really don't think it's the gummint's responsibility to prevent morons from killing themselves off - people who are too lazy to make informed decisions need to quit pissing in my gene pool;-)
I figure people should be able to buy whatever they want - if they can afford the 300 horsepower 12 mpg Escalade than Goddess bless them - but they should be able to pay for the privilege. If gas goes up to $6 in the Colonies perhaps folks will rethink their personal energy consumption.
Folks wants their horsepower and are willing to pay for it so why shouldn't Detroit accomodate them? The Big Three haven't really increased corporate fuel economy in 20 years. It boggles the mind why consumers want the gummint (or the automakers) to enforce standards they could easily support by voting with their wallet. Don't want a 300 horsepower land yacht? Don't buy one. If enough people don't buy one Detroit will stop making them;-)
Gasoline in Europe is no more expensive than it is here in the Good Ol' USofA - they just tax hell out of it to pay for other stuff, like subsidizing public transportation. I think that's a good thing and it wouldn't bother me a bit to see $6 gas over here. If you wanna drive the land yacht, pay for the privilege. If you wanna drive a Prius you can reap the financial rewards (more on that later). I drive over 100 miles round trip to the office three days a week in a car that gets about 30 mpg on the highway - I work from home the other two days.
Speaking of that Prius - if you live in the city it's a good thing. If you have to drive far on the highway to get to the office the current crop of hybrid cars is a lousy idea. In my case it's 55 miles of freeway from the house to the office and less than three miles of in-town driving. In a situation like mine the Prius would be an exceptionally stupid choice since a gasoline engine pulling around a few hundred pounds of batteries is considerably *less* efficient than a car of equal weight with the same size gasoline engine.
The wannabe engineers can argue all they like, but using a gasoline engine to charge batteries to run an electric motor is considerably less efficient than using that same gasoline engine to drive the wheels on a vehicle. Regenerative braking helps, but the bottom line is that when you make a trip that starts and ends at the same place you'll spend exactly as much time going uphill expending energy as you will recovering that energy through the brakes.
But - it's good to recover energy if we can. In town hybrids are at least as efficient as their gasoline counterparts, but I'd offer that the American public still isn't eco-friendly enough to sit still for a car with a 1.3 liter 76 horsepower engine - even if the car was just as efficient as the Prius since it didn't have to haul around a couple hundred pounds of batteries and electric motors;-)
My dad is a diesel nut - there's been at least one diesel car in my parents' driveway since before I was born 50 years ago - I learned to drive on an old '53 Mercedes 170DS. Wish my dad still had that car - or that I did, but I digress.
Bottom line for me is that the majority of the American public is too lazy to conserve on their own, so they want the gummint or the automakers to solve the problem for them - anything as long as they don't have to make any personal sacrifice.
My amusing thought for the day - even the eco-friendly types wanted more horsepower. The original Prius had a 58 horsepower gasoline engine, a 30kw (40 hp) electric motor and a 0-60mph time of 14.1 seconds. The current Prius HSV has a 76 horsepower gasoline engine, a 50kw (67 hp) electric motor and a 0-60 time of 10.1 seconds. Why aren't Prius owners complaining that the technology was used to increase acceleration instead of efficiency?
...Recently, there has been a change of the wording to include when a "contingency operation" is going on.
I stand corrected;-)
I spent almost ten years in the Army and am currently a federal employee with an agency under DoD. Operationally this does make sense - but my gripe is still with Wired and the FUD. Military or civilian if you're deployed in support of troops in harm's way then OPSEC should apply - but the part about family members was still a little much;-)
Thanks for pointing out the change to the UCMJ - I hadn't seen that.
Civilians cannot be prosecuted for violating Army regulations - period. Saying the reg applies to contractors and family members is one of the best examples of journalistic disingenuousness I've seen in quite some time.
The Army can take action against a contractor up to and including cancelling the contract but they cannot take any action against an individual contract employee except to escort that employee off the installation and have him prosecuted by an agency that *does* have law enforcement capability - they also can't prevent family members from doing anything but can impose administrative sanctions against the family member. The Army has no law enforcement power against American civilians.
Simply put a civilian cannot be prosecuted for violating AR 530-1. There are other laws that *do* apply to civilians, but this ain't one of them.
But do most people know about these differences? Hell, I'll admit that even I have no idea what you're talking about. All I know is that mutations in cells's DNA can cause them to replicate uncontrollably, hence cancer. There are differences in lung/blod/colon/skin cancer? Sounds plausible!... but I have no idea what they are. To me, and to most normal people, "cancer" encompasses all cancers.
A common misconception. Cancer is a catch-all term for more than 100 diseases that display similar characteristics - the ability to mask itself from the host immune system, angiogenesis and some cell replication tricks that normal cells can't pull off.
The spousal unit has been undergoing treatment for Stage IV breast cancer for almost eight years - it had already metastasized to her lungs by the time she was diagnosed. Breast cancer in your lungs is still breast cancer and at least as far as medical oncology (as opposed to radiation or surgical oncology) is concerned the treatment is the same.
My father-in-law was treated with a drug called Gemzar for pancreatic cancer a couple of years ago. My wife just finished up Gemzar + Herceptin before we started the current Tykerb + Xeloda regime. Gemzar is first-line chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer but is only indicated in breast cancer after an anthracycline and a taxane have been tried and determined they were ineffective. The Xeloda she's doing now is on the bottom of the breast cancer treatment list but is first line treatment for Stage IV colon cancer.
Seriously, are you suggesting that desktop based code searches large data sets better than Google?
No, I'm suggesting that in my own environment the desktop based code meets my needs better.
I guess I did word the 'need more than a web client can provide' thing poorly. With a little UI work Gmail's search could be great, but I'd bet using my own PC I get a significantly bigger slice of processor time searching a smaller data set.
Congratulations, you found a single remote task that you had to do once which required the installation of a plug-in by a defunct third-party company that allowed you to search for a string (which you can also do with GMail) five seconds faster than you would with a webapp.
I search my email archive several times a day - I just provided one example.
I host my own personal mail and use horde exclusively - at work I use Outlook because I need considerably more horsepower than a web client is able to give me.
Today I had to pull page counts from ten HP 0299c digital senders and the scanners IP addresses were spread out through ten different work orders - using an outlook plugin called Lookout (this company was eaten by Microsoft but you can still find the plugin if you look around) I was able to search a bit less than 4gb of email archive in two different.psts for the string 'digital sender' in a bit more than half a second. 709 hits that I can browse because the word order number is in the subject line.
Isn't this like getting financial advice from someone with a hotmail address?
Although I host my own domain and have a perfectly good mail server I use a hushmail account for business correspondence. My real email address is reserved for family and friends.
Everyone else gets either hotmail or mailinator - and I never check my hotmail account;-)
I have to wonder what percentage of taxpayer dollars is purely wasted that way.
Billions. Of. Dollars.
I'd like to see some financial incentive for *not* blowing out your budget at the end of the year - like maybe an assurance that you wouldn't lose funds you didn't spend - or at least that you wouldn't lose all of them.
Unfortunately the budget people don't understand that your requirements can rise and fall from year to year - so they decide if you don't spend it one year you never need the money again.
It's easier to spend $10k 10 times than to spend $100k once.
It certainly is;-)
The feeding frenzy that is end-of-year procurement generally doesn't allow for that, though. What's more likely is someone will come up to you after lunch and tell you you have to spend a quarter of a million bucks by the end of the day and that it all has to be stuff that we really need - and the contracting office needs quotes to pull the thing together.
I digress, but in my mind the problem is there really isn't any incentive to save money - if you don't spend the money you lose it - and if you didn't need it this year we won't give it to you next year, so everybody scrambles to spend every dime to keep from getting their budget cut.
I think what needs to happen is if you don't spend all your money you get to keep part of it - or that turning money back in at the end of the year doesn't result in an automatic budget cut. Some years you need more money than others.
Uhm. Yes. And that's because you are spending somebody elses money (namely, the taxpayers money) which is why there are rules for buying from the lowest bidder as long as they meet the requirements.
Cheapest is not always least expensive and I'm fully aware of my fiscal responsibility to the taxpayer. My job is to keep this particular government agency from doing stupid shite and I save the taxpayer several times my annual compensation by doing sanity checks on IT procurements - it's what I do. This was a tough call and I understand the need for catchall rules but in most organizations this size hardware costs are insignificant - what *is* significant is the support infrastructure.
The off-brand printers were cheaper; the infrastructure to support them - acquring/making space for and cataloging a new line of consumables, training technicians and so on really makes one question whether there was any cost savings.
Slashdot Mirror
Told Comcast and SBC (now AT&T) to take a hike a bit more than two years ago. Got the equivalent Dish package and have been happy ever since - pitched the hard phone line in favor of a $60 two-phone cellular plan. My DSL is provided by a local carrier that does not offer telephone service - they don't care if I run a server on their line as long as I a) don't ask them why my web, mail or IRC daemons don't work and b) don't exceed their rather generous bandwidth limit - and they were kind enough to add a PTR record for free so AOL would quit bouncing my outbound mail ;-)
There is life without Comcast. Dish charges me ten bucks a month for not having my pair of dual-tuner DVRs connected to a phone line but I don't think I can get a hard line for ten bucks. With the ten extra bucks a month I'm still paying them less than I was paying Comcast and the service is infinitely better. Life is good.
...In a psychological sense Fanboyism is a lot deeper than the article suggests, and it is a consequence of a culture as materialistic as Western culture tends to be.Excellent.
Extending the parent poster's logic just a bit nobody wants to think they selected anything other than the best OS when in reality the best OS is the one that meets your needs. Some people have a lot of their personal self-worth tied up in their selection of computer platforms ;-)
A1. No one. It's my opinion that when confronted with this situation RS B will either save his own skin or (at most) call 911 from his cell. You don't normally see people running to join in a bar fight and those folks have all had a couple of drinks and aren't using deadly force against each other ;-)
Q2. Whats sort of lawsuit would Random Student B face for killing Random Student A?A2. That depends on whether a reasonable person exercising due care would have killed RS A. If RS A had his gun pointed in RS B's direction it would be reasonable for RS B to fire.
Q3. Students A and B are teenagers. How excitable are teenagers?A3. Now we've moved from the sublime to the ridiculous. Who's proposed arming teenagers?
Q4. How does the response scale up from 1 Gunman and 2 Random Students, to 1 Gunman and 50 Random students running around with guns? Note that the majority of the students will be acting independently, but multiple students acting together has been a tactic used in a previous school shooting.A4. In the stated example multiple = 2 and 2 != 50.
Q5. What does law enforcement do when confronted with this situation? (Hint: See question 2)A5. Slightly More Obvious Hint: Most likely what they've been trained to do.
Q6. Given studies have shown that even trained soldiers can have trouble firing at living humans, why should non-military trained civilians suddenly be able to throw aside all qualms about doing so? Or should first person shooter games be required study when getting a gun license?A6. This directly contradicts the argument you present in Q1. Having actually been a trained solder and actually fired a weapon at another person I'd say that the scenario in Q6 is considerably more likely to occur than the one in Q1. Ever taken a college-level course in logic? ;-)
Q7. Assuming that all people now carry guns to protect against rare forms of crime (ie school shootings), how will turning all civilians into people wth no qualms about killing change society? In your reply compare/contrast shootings with other more common forms of anti social behaviour such as "road rage'.Again, the parent poster might benefit from a course in critical thinking. There's no basis for the argument that just because someone defends themself or someone else that we've turned "all civilians into people wth no qualms about killing". That's such a leap of logic I'm not even gonna entertain it - which makes the road rage question moot.
Already had one of these things plus it could carry stuff. Additionally, in the first movie she was kinda hot.
Small, light, fast. That is all. ;-)
Not directed at anyone in particular but the parent started me thinking.
;-) He's 73 years old and has been writing and transposing pedal steel guitar parts for relatively modern music for more years than I've been around.
I also play electric bass and have for many years. I've always kinda looked down my nose at tabs, thinking that they teach someone how to play only one song while learning to read music will allow you to play anything you have the skill to reproduce.
My father, OTOH, probably *invented* tablature
So - I guess they serve their purpose.
Just so this doesn't get modded OT, I got a nastygram from Warner Music several years ago for hosting a pdf copy of a Real Book. For the uninformed Real Books are big thick books full of jazz standards with melody and chord progression. Not having the wherewithal to fight that kind of a fight I decided to remove the Real Book from my website. A pity.
Can't read TFA because of a work web filter, dammit - hope this is relevant.
Have run MCE and currently run MythTV. I have a Dish setup and have ordered an IR Blaster to complete tha package and skip the need for a second DVR on my home network.
I have only one gripe about MythTV. There's no way I can see to switch from fullscreen to windowed operation and back again - which is something that's pretty easily done in MCE or even in plain old Windows with standard Hauppauge software. As it stands today I have two links to MythTV - one with "--geometry 704x480 --windowed" switches and one that just runs fullscreen. I run them on different workspaces since there's no way to switch between the two modes.
Well, two gripes - mythweather quit working when MSNBC moved their weather site. Rather than patch the application to fix this can't we just stick the location of the web feed in a config file? Please?
Sorry to hear you're raising a special needs kid. That's got to be hard - kudos to you.
I agree completely.
But - rather than just bringing an issue to the table it'd be nice to have a solution as well.
With all respect, we're gonna leave it to you to come up with an indicator that demonstrates a person is mature enough to
- decide when his secular education is complete
- consume alcohol or other mood-altering substances
- support himself away from his parents' home
- marry someone else
- enter into an enforceable contract
without relying on the person's age. What indicator would you suggest we use? As an old boss told me long ago, don't bring a problem to the table without also bringing a solutionEasily. At 17 I'm legally responsible for your safety and well-being. At 18 I'm not.
I've raised three kids who now range in age from 24 to 31.
I'm not and never have been my child's peer or friend - I'm a parent and the relationship between me and my child is and always will be asymmetrical.
As a parent I reserved the right to investigate any aspect of my child's life when I had reason to believe that the child was at risk - and investigations into my child's sexual activity or drug or alcohol or internet use are IMO appropriate.
Minor children have an inherent right not to be physically, sexually or emotionally abused - every other right a child has is granted by that child's legal guardian. My responsibility as a parent is to protect that child until (s)he can fend for itself.
My house, my rules. Doesn't matter if the child is fifteen or thirty-five - as long as they're under my roof I will determine what does (and does not) go on in my house. For example my imaginary twenty-five year old kid is legally able to smoke cigarettes. He's still not gonna smoke them in my house. He can pretty much come and go as he pleases - with the caveat that if you're not gonna come home that night you give Mom and Dad a call so they don't stay up worrying about whether you've wrapped your car around a tree or something. Don't know about other parents but I can't go to sleep if I have a child unaccounted for.
I trust my children and always have - that doesn't mean I didn't verify where they are (and with whom) from time to time. The internet was really only an issue with my youngest but I can and have used tools to determine what he was doing on the net and wouldn't hesitate to do so again if I had a kid in the house.
The parent poster mentions spying on your children - monitoring is not spying. My kids knew their entire lives that I might call to verify their whereabouts from time to time, check their homework, call their teachers to see how they were doing in school, occasionally check the odometer in the car and yes, even monitor their internet use. As I said in the title, trust but verify.
My children also know how much I love them. They're not peers or friends and never will be - they are my children and that relationship brings both additional benefits and additional responsibilities. Doesn't mean I don't hoist a glass with my kids or seek their counsel sometimes - they're adults now and in charge of their own destiny and even though sometimes I don't agree with their decisions but I have learned to STFU and allow my kids to grow from their own choices - good or bad.
OT, but I'm running for Emperor Of The Whole Damn World on a natural selection platform. I really don't think it's the gummint's responsibility to prevent morons from killing themselves off - people who are too lazy to make informed decisions need to quit pissing in my gene pool ;-)
I figure people should be able to buy whatever they want - if they can afford the 300 horsepower 12 mpg Escalade than Goddess bless them - but they should be able to pay for the privilege. If gas goes up to $6 in the Colonies perhaps folks will rethink their personal energy consumption.
;-)
;-)
Folks wants their horsepower and are willing to pay for it so why shouldn't Detroit accomodate them? The Big Three haven't really increased corporate fuel economy in 20 years. It boggles the mind why consumers want the gummint (or the automakers) to enforce standards they could easily support by voting with their wallet. Don't want a 300 horsepower land yacht? Don't buy one. If enough people don't buy one Detroit will stop making them
Gasoline in Europe is no more expensive than it is here in the Good Ol' USofA - they just tax hell out of it to pay for other stuff, like subsidizing public transportation. I think that's a good thing and it wouldn't bother me a bit to see $6 gas over here. If you wanna drive the land yacht, pay for the privilege. If you wanna drive a Prius you can reap the financial rewards (more on that later). I drive over 100 miles round trip to the office three days a week in a car that gets about 30 mpg on the highway - I work from home the other two days.
Speaking of that Prius - if you live in the city it's a good thing. If you have to drive far on the highway to get to the office the current crop of hybrid cars is a lousy idea. In my case it's 55 miles of freeway from the house to the office and less than three miles of in-town driving. In a situation like mine the Prius would be an exceptionally stupid choice since a gasoline engine pulling around a few hundred pounds of batteries is considerably *less* efficient than a car of equal weight with the same size gasoline engine.
The wannabe engineers can argue all they like, but using a gasoline engine to charge batteries to run an electric motor is considerably less efficient than using that same gasoline engine to drive the wheels on a vehicle. Regenerative braking helps, but the bottom line is that when you make a trip that starts and ends at the same place you'll spend exactly as much time going uphill expending energy as you will recovering that energy through the brakes.
But - it's good to recover energy if we can. In town hybrids are at least as efficient as their gasoline counterparts, but I'd offer that the American public still isn't eco-friendly enough to sit still for a car with a 1.3 liter 76 horsepower engine - even if the car was just as efficient as the Prius since it didn't have to haul around a couple hundred pounds of batteries and electric motors
My dad is a diesel nut - there's been at least one diesel car in my parents' driveway since before I was born 50 years ago - I learned to drive on an old '53 Mercedes 170DS. Wish my dad still had that car - or that I did, but I digress.
Bottom line for me is that the majority of the American public is too lazy to conserve on their own, so they want the gummint or the automakers to solve the problem for them - anything as long as they don't have to make any personal sacrifice.
My amusing thought for the day - even the eco-friendly types wanted more horsepower. The original Prius had a 58 horsepower gasoline engine, a 30kw (40 hp) electric motor and a 0-60mph time of 14.1 seconds. The current Prius HSV has a 76 horsepower gasoline engine, a 50kw (67 hp) electric motor and a 0-60 time of 10.1 seconds. Why aren't Prius owners complaining that the technology was used to increase acceleration instead of efficiency?
...Recently, there has been a change of the wording to include when a "contingency operation" is going on.I stand corrected ;-)
I spent almost ten years in the Army and am currently a federal employee with an agency under DoD. Operationally this does make sense - but my gripe is still with Wired and the FUD. Military or civilian if you're deployed in support of troops in harm's way then OPSEC should apply - but the part about family members was still a little much ;-)
Thanks for pointing out the change to the UCMJ - I hadn't seen that.
Shame on you, Wired.
Civilians cannot be prosecuted for violating Army regulations - period. Saying the reg applies to contractors and family members is one of the best examples of journalistic disingenuousness I've seen in quite some time.
The Army can take action against a contractor up to and including cancelling the contract but they cannot take any action against an individual contract employee except to escort that employee off the installation and have him prosecuted by an agency that *does* have law enforcement capability - they also can't prevent family members from doing anything but can impose administrative sanctions against the family member. The Army has no law enforcement power against American civilians.
Simply put a civilian cannot be prosecuted for violating AR 530-1. There are other laws that *do* apply to civilians, but this ain't one of them.
A common misconception. Cancer is a catch-all term for more than 100 diseases that display similar characteristics - the ability to mask itself from the host immune system, angiogenesis and some cell replication tricks that normal cells can't pull off.
The spousal unit has been undergoing treatment for Stage IV breast cancer for almost eight years - it had already metastasized to her lungs by the time she was diagnosed. Breast cancer in your lungs is still breast cancer and at least as far as medical oncology (as opposed to radiation or surgical oncology) is concerned the treatment is the same.
My father-in-law was treated with a drug called Gemzar for pancreatic cancer a couple of years ago. My wife just finished up Gemzar + Herceptin before we started the current Tykerb + Xeloda regime. Gemzar is first-line chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer but is only indicated in breast cancer after an anthracycline and a taxane have been tried and determined they were ineffective. The Xeloda she's doing now is on the bottom of the breast cancer treatment list but is first line treatment for Stage IV colon cancer.
Different diseases, different treatment.
No, I'm suggesting that in my own environment the desktop based code meets my needs better.
I guess I did word the 'need more than a web client can provide' thing poorly. With a little UI work Gmail's search could be great, but I'd bet using my own PC I get a significantly bigger slice of processor time searching a smaller data set.
I search my email archive several times a day - I just provided one example.
Sorry, that's HP 9200c - that's what I get for not proofing before I post ;-)
I host my own personal mail and use horde exclusively - at work I use Outlook because I need considerably more horsepower than a web client is able to give me.
.psts for the string 'digital sender' in a bit more than half a second. 709 hits that I can browse because the word order number is in the subject line.
Today I had to pull page counts from ten HP 0299c digital senders and the scanners IP addresses were spread out through ten different work orders - using an outlook plugin called Lookout (this company was eaten by Microsoft but you can still find the plugin if you look around) I was able to search a bit less than 4gb of email archive in two different
You'd play hell doing that with a webmail client.
Although I host my own domain and have a perfectly good mail server I use a hushmail account for business correspondence. My real email address is reserved for family and friends.
Everyone else gets either hotmail or mailinator - and I never check my hotmail account ;-)
Billions. Of. Dollars.
I'd like to see some financial incentive for *not* blowing out your budget at the end of the year - like maybe an assurance that you wouldn't lose funds you didn't spend - or at least that you wouldn't lose all of them.
Unfortunately the budget people don't understand that your requirements can rise and fall from year to year - so they decide if you don't spend it one year you never need the money again.
It certainly is ;-)
The feeding frenzy that is end-of-year procurement generally doesn't allow for that, though. What's more likely is someone will come up to you after lunch and tell you you have to spend a quarter of a million bucks by the end of the day and that it all has to be stuff that we really need - and the contracting office needs quotes to pull the thing together.
I digress, but in my mind the problem is there really isn't any incentive to save money - if you don't spend the money you lose it - and if you didn't need it this year we won't give it to you next year, so everybody scrambles to spend every dime to keep from getting their budget cut.
I think what needs to happen is if you don't spend all your money you get to keep part of it - or that turning money back in at the end of the year doesn't result in an automatic budget cut. Some years you need more money than others.
Cheapest is not always least expensive and I'm fully aware of my fiscal responsibility to the taxpayer. My job is to keep this particular government agency from doing stupid shite and I save the taxpayer several times my annual compensation by doing sanity checks on IT procurements - it's what I do. This was a tough call and I understand the need for catchall rules but in most organizations this size hardware costs are insignificant - what *is* significant is the support infrastructure.
The off-brand printers were cheaper; the infrastructure to support them - acquring/making space for and cataloging a new line of consumables, training technicians and so on really makes one question whether there was any cost savings.