1. Go to Goodwill and buy some really cheap used clothes. 2. Look for a SDC going in your direction. 3. Jump onto the side of the car. 4. When you get to your destination, squirm out of the clothes, and leave them stuck to the vehicle.
Uber will also have an optional discount for riding on the hood of the car.
But on the other hand doesn't that kind of boil down to "don't poorly review shows you don't like"?
No, not really. If there was a show about CNC machine tools, then I am the target audience, and I can give a useful review about whether the show was good or bad. But I would not like a show about single women in NYC with dysfunctional relationships, no matter how well it was made. So I could not provide useful feedback to a person that might be interested in that topic.
The interesting question is why men seem to go out of their way to review "chick shows" like Sex in the City, but women fail to go out of their way to review "guy shows" like Batman.
Because men don't force women to sit and watch guy shows.
...a guy would hammer a show about 4 whiney women.
Instead of "hammering" it, he should just realize he is not part of the target audience, and watch something else. I don't enjoy watching Teletubbies, but I don't give it a bad review because I am not a three year old.
If you care whether your texts are encrypted, you're either paranoid or cheating on your wife.
... or someone who has never read a history book. You may have no need for encryption today, but if someday in the future you realize you actually do need it, it may be too late.
encryption is not usually user friendly. You have to *do something* or several somethings to configure it to make it work.
This is not inherently true. A device can collect ambient randomness (from keystroke timing, thermal jitter, low bits of camera pixels, etc.), and use that to generate keys, without any action from the end user. There is no good reason that we cannot have effective end-to-end encryption in a user transparent way that even grandma can use, without even realizing she is using it.
Citation, please. I don't think the Bible says this.
It is right after the verse that says "God helps those who help themselves", which was selected in a poll of Christians as their favorite quote from the Bible.
Would it be too much to ask to just at least pretend to be sympathetic?
About 150,000 people die everyday. That is about two per second. Why do these 66 people deserve more sympathy from strangers than those than die in the next half a minute?
Just switch to nitrogen asphyxiation if you want a humane execution
Oklahoma has already legalized N2 asphyxiation as a backup to lethal injection. Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin signed it into law last year. In other news, Mary Fallin is supposedly on Donald Trump's short list for VP.
It takes a minute or two at the least. And the suffoccee will gasp ferociously while tearing at their throat during before unconsciousness ensues. It is a horror show.
This is wrong. Inert gas asphyxiation is quick and painless. The victim usually does not even detect that anything is wrong before losing consciousness. There is no sensation of suffocation because there is no CO2 buildup in the blood.
This isn't about forcing nitrogen into the body at high pressure
That would cause nitrogen narcosis, which would actually be a pleasurable way to die. I have felt it a bit when doing deep scuba dives, and it was a nice feeling. I have heard it compared to cocaine. Fortunately, I was still sober enough to start heading up before I did something stupid enough to kill myself.
Your "requests"... LOL... more like everything anyone says within earshot.
The Amazon Echo does not do that. You can use a network analyser to see for yourself. It is very unlikely that Google would do that either, since it would be a PR disaster, as well as illegal (at least in America and the EU). Voice recognition is done locally, and only actual queries are transmitted to the servers.
There are enough real problems to be cynical about, so you don't need to be so outraged about imaginary stuff. Or maybe I am being over cynical about cynicism.
Because the US has some outrageously high price points regarding installation and permitting costs.
I was quoted $30k to install solar on my roof, and $15k of that was for installation, permitting, and administration, which seemed ridiculously expensive. I didn't realize that other countries have better control over those extraneous costs.
There is no way that the petabytes of information needed for this device to operate will be stored locally, so yes, your requests will be transmitted back to a server farm. Echo works the same way.
Other questions:
1. Will it include a Z-Wave hub, or will it require an 3rd party bridge like the Echo? 2. Will there be an API? If it is hacker friendly, that would be really slick.
In the US, perhaps. In most parts of the world, however, your economic gains from higher-efficiency panels are going to be negative, and this is going to stay that way for quite some time.
What? I have heard of American Exceptionalism, but do basic economic principles really work differently in America? Why would better solar panels have negative economic consequences anywhere, other than a few gas exporting countries (Russia would be the biggest loser)?
While progress on efficiency is nice, the important criteria is watts/$, not watts/m^2. We have plenty of space on rooftops, over parking lots, and in deserts. But we need to continue to bring down the cost.
I am not even getting in the issues with people getting sued because GMOs spreading naturally into their crops...
This nonsense has been debunked repeatedly. Neither Monsanto, nor anyone else, has sued anyone for "GMO spreading naturally", and people claiming otherwise are never able to cite a single case of that happening.
Again, the internet cannot change or enforce laws; only people can do that.
Sure, bits flying through cables cannot directly change anything. But neither could the printing press, or writing, or language, or the discovery of fire. But it is equally silly to say that those "didn't change anything".
Soy lecithin and corn starch are excluded from the list of GMO ingredients for "USDA Organic".
That makes sense since soy lecithin and corn starch don't contain any DNA. It makes no sense to worry about them being GMO, unless you believe in homeopathy.
You mean, you didn't learn how to program on a single non-connected machine?
I did. But I am still at least 3 times as productive with access to Stackoverflow and online API docs. When the internet is down, I go for a run, or go out for lunch. Anything but trying to code.
Slashdot Mirror
It is not 0.50 USD. It is 0.50 RMB, or about 0.08 USD.
1. Go to Goodwill and buy some really cheap used clothes.
2. Look for a SDC going in your direction.
3. Jump onto the side of the car.
4. When you get to your destination, squirm out of the clothes, and leave them stuck to the vehicle.
Uber will also have an optional discount for riding on the hood of the car.
But on the other hand doesn't that kind of boil down to "don't poorly review shows you don't like"?
No, not really. If there was a show about CNC machine tools, then I am the target audience, and I can give a useful review about whether the show was good or bad. But I would not like a show about single women in NYC with dysfunctional relationships, no matter how well it was made. So I could not provide useful feedback to a person that might be interested in that topic.
The interesting question is why men seem to go out of their way to review "chick shows" like Sex in the City, but women fail to go out of their way to review "guy shows" like Batman.
Because men don't force women to sit and watch guy shows.
...a guy would hammer a show about 4 whiney women.
Instead of "hammering" it, he should just realize he is not part of the target audience, and watch something else. I don't enjoy watching Teletubbies, but I don't give it a bad review because I am not a three year old.
If you care whether your texts are encrypted, you're either paranoid or cheating on your wife.
... or someone who has never read a history book. You may have no need for encryption today, but if someday in the future you realize you actually do need it, it may be too late.
encryption is not usually user friendly. You have to *do something* or several somethings to configure it to make it work.
This is not inherently true. A device can collect ambient randomness (from keystroke timing, thermal jitter, low bits of camera pixels, etc.), and use that to generate keys, without any action from the end user. There is no good reason that we cannot have effective end-to-end encryption in a user transparent way that even grandma can use, without even realizing she is using it.
Citation, please. I don't think the Bible says this.
It is right after the verse that says "God helps those who help themselves", which was selected in a poll of Christians as their favorite quote from the Bible.
that can't be right. I can hold my breath for a minute, let alone 12 seconds, without passing out.
When you hold your breath, the air in your lungs is about 20% oxygen. When you breathe pure N2, the air in your lungs is 0% oxygen.
Would it be too much to ask to just at least pretend to be sympathetic?
About 150,000 people die everyday. That is about two per second. Why do these 66 people deserve more sympathy from strangers than those than die in the next half a minute?
Just switch to nitrogen asphyxiation if you want a humane execution
Oklahoma has already legalized N2 asphyxiation as a backup to lethal injection. Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin signed it into law last year. In other news, Mary Fallin is supposedly on Donald Trump's short list for VP.
It takes a minute or two at the least. And the suffoccee will gasp ferociously while tearing at their throat during before unconsciousness ensues. It is a horror show.
This is wrong. Inert gas asphyxiation is quick and painless. The victim usually does not even detect that anything is wrong before losing consciousness. There is no sensation of suffocation because there is no CO2 buildup in the blood.
This isn't about forcing nitrogen into the body at high pressure
That would cause nitrogen narcosis, which would actually be a pleasurable way to die. I have felt it a bit when doing deep scuba dives, and it was a nice feeling. I have heard it compared to cocaine. Fortunately, I was still sober enough to start heading up before I did something stupid enough to kill myself.
Your "requests"... LOL... more like everything anyone says within earshot.
The Amazon Echo does not do that. You can use a network analyser to see for yourself. It is very unlikely that Google would do that either, since it would be a PR disaster, as well as illegal (at least in America and the EU). Voice recognition is done locally, and only actual queries are transmitted to the servers.
There are enough real problems to be cynical about, so you don't need to be so outraged about imaginary stuff. Or maybe I am being over cynical about cynicism.
Because the US has some outrageously high price points regarding installation and permitting costs.
I was quoted $30k to install solar on my roof, and $15k of that was for installation, permitting, and administration, which seemed ridiculously expensive. I didn't realize that other countries have better control over those extraneous costs.
I thought the whole point of this was *not* having to look away from where you're driving? If not, dashboard it is.
Augmented reality goggles, or Google Glass 2.0, could accomplish the same thing, be more flexible and upgradable, and cost far less.
And now It's canceled.
Not yet. Google usually waits until a user base is firmly established before cancelling projects.
There is no way that the petabytes of information needed for this device to operate will be stored locally, so yes, your requests will be transmitted back to a server farm. Echo works the same way.
Other questions:
1. Will it include a Z-Wave hub, or will it require an 3rd party bridge like the Echo?
2. Will there be an API? If it is hacker friendly, that would be really slick.
In the US, perhaps. In most parts of the world, however, your economic gains from higher-efficiency panels are going to be negative, and this is going to stay that way for quite some time.
What? I have heard of American Exceptionalism, but do basic economic principles really work differently in America? Why would better solar panels have negative economic consequences anywhere, other than a few gas exporting countries (Russia would be the biggest loser)?
While progress on efficiency is nice, the important criteria is watts/$, not watts/m^2. We have plenty of space on rooftops, over parking lots, and in deserts. But we need to continue to bring down the cost.
I am not even getting in the issues with people getting sued because GMOs spreading naturally into their crops...
This nonsense has been debunked repeatedly. Neither Monsanto, nor anyone else, has sued anyone for "GMO spreading naturally", and people claiming otherwise are never able to cite a single case of that happening.
Again, the internet cannot change or enforce laws; only people can do that.
Sure, bits flying through cables cannot directly change anything. But neither could the printing press, or writing, or language, or the discovery of fire. But it is equally silly to say that those "didn't change anything".
Soy lecithin and corn starch are excluded from the list of GMO ingredients for "USDA Organic".
That makes sense since soy lecithin and corn starch don't contain any DNA. It makes no sense to worry about them being GMO, unless you believe in homeopathy.
Christ, the ISP I was working at in the dark ages switched from ISDN to a T1 back around 1999, and I'm a few hundred miles north in BC.
My company got a T1 in 1993. I didn't even know that ISDN still existed.
You mean, you didn't learn how to program on a single non-connected machine?
I did. But I am still at least 3 times as productive with access to Stackoverflow and online API docs. When the internet is down, I go for a run, or go out for lunch. Anything but trying to code.