it's Carly Fiorina being ejected from HP.. why they didn't do this sooner probably only comes down to how long it took for the board members to get their Meeelion dollars in bonuses for the Compaq merger..
Wow, goofy. you'd potentially have part of say april in march, etc. I like the weekly pay period; until we go to 13-month years of 4 x 7 day weeks it's the best option;0
Politics and EVERYTHING humans do are inextricably joined. Everything that matters to someone, who exists in a group of two or more people, has some political meaning..
If you are getting blue screens of death on XP, I'm going to have to say that it is something that you are doing (installed the improper drivers, got some kind of really messed spyware, etc).
/me pats young'n on head... That's what M$ would like you to think -- are you going for your MCSE so you can be smart, too? -- The response to your statement is, stuff in userspace should NEVER NEVER NEVER be able to take the whole system down. That's our whole point. Windows is SO poorly designed from the ground up, largely due to:
Compromising good software principles, OS design, etc for marketing reasons
Compromising needed design time for the sake of an arbitrarily promised release/ship date
So basically, the object of windows is not to be a good operating system, but a "just good *enough*" operating system.
Because a full 50% of my 'sessions' with linux require a reboot.
1) When I do an installation for the first time I typically have to reboot to load the new kernel from it's newly installed location
2) The next boot stays up for a long, long time.
8% is WAY less than 50%!
Clearly windows is better.
You're absolutely right -- and our political process sucks, and it's not because of people's failure to be involved and voice their opinion, but because of PAC's ability to drown out normal constituents' voices with their dollars. I was a McCain supporter all the way, even in 1999/2000, not because he's a republican, or a moderate, but because he was the first I've seen to champion *real* Campaign Finance Reform. He didn't get it of course, but I see that as one of the biggest bottlenecks in the political process right now. And as long as that cork is in the stopper, you won't have a candidate with a shot at winning who will help achieve any of those things you listed. Why? Because either party would crucify the person who tries, like they have quietly done with McCain. With the status quo, both republicans and democrats are essentially plutocrats; to the detriment of anyone who wants to rock the boat. This obviously also applies at all other governmental levels as well.
So, forgive me if my post made it sound like "it doesn't matter who you vote for", I guess it did. I was just pointing out that many people ask the government to fix problems in their own lives that they have power over themselves..
It's oil and water; religion and science just don't gel. Oh yeah, people say then can and do, but those people are usually of the religiously inclined, who are trying to stay true to their belief system without looking like a progress-hating ignoramous.
Wow, what staggering generalizations and overall ignorance. "religion and science don't gel" is simply too general of a statement to take seriously. Are you saying that people who say the two might be somewhat compatible are never the *scientifically inclined* who don't dismiss things out of hand without proper evidence? (I.e. like you probably are?) The truth is that science and religion occupy slightly different realms, and nothing precludes a person from participating fully in both at the same time. A person who completely excludes religion for nothing but science has made a religion of science, anyway.
we should only nominate and elect outgoing, well-versed, and apolitical scholars, with advanced degrees in areas pertinent to running a nation, such as economics, sociology, or whatnot.
Because nobody else exists or counts, right? Stop worshipping academia, lest it interfere with your education. Academia is as much of a Cathedral as the Catholic Church is, complete with sacred cows and scarlet letters. Hope you aren't fooling yourself about that. I also hope you don't belive that a "perfect political system" is achieveable. You only described your preferred political system. Also, please describe for me how an 'apolitical' person behaves. You clearly don't understand anything about human nature, politics, science, or religion, at any broad level. You sound like you might know more about some microcosm of science, but not in any larger sense.
Quite likely true. However, the enormous amount of harm they can do is just mind boggling....
Like The Onion said, "Many Americans Still Unsure Who to Vote Against".. People (mostly liberals) talk about all the irreparable harm Bush has done, but I think the idea that Democrats do less harm is quite debateable.. In that both parties are very similar, they are both going to do similar damage in certain ways (mostly economic).
Any president who reads the bible for help making presidential decisions cannot be pro-science,
As opposed to Kerry, who tries to affiliate himself with the Catholic Church to garner votes, only to be told by the Church itself to buzz off. Guess what? They're BOTH Politicians, and the parties really don't differ that much -- and the few things they differ on are divisive indeed. What they'd like you to ignore are all the similarities -- they're both plutocrats..
My point is, don't bank on a politician to be the source of change for the better. You can do more yourself, in a single day, to positively affect your own life and those around you than either Bush or Kerry can in 4 (or 8!) years.
Well of course it couldn't happen without the cars driving themselves, that's one of their main assumptions, and they list it in their background section.. I'd tell you to RTFA but I'm too nice.
I have to wonder if these simulations or plans account for bicycles or pedestrians?
They probably account for them by saying this is only for highways, where bicyclists and pedestrians aren't legally allowed (at least in the US) anyway. Besides, you have to start *somewhere*:). In their paper, they list assumptions even greater than !bicycles and !pedestrians:
no TURNS
everybody goes roughly the same speed (not a bad assumption on highway)
they had better modify the thing before actually rolling it out so that the cars don't go so damn close to each other
They may well have done so, just by making the 'length' of the cars longer. You could probably make a similar simulation with a minimum radius around each car, so nobody can be in your 'bubble'; maybe have a maximum number of cars in the intersection at a time. The obvious price is, longer delay. I could live with a 1.5 second 'delay' as opposed to 9.whatever seconds with traffic lights. There's negligible difference between a 1 second delay and 0.076 seconds anyway.
I've been writing my own groupware application after toying with many of the others out there and not liking them for one reason or another, and not liking their code (and thus it wasn't worth the time to mangle it to my purposes). I'll post a screenshot Here. I made a nice calendar with Date::Calc in about 20 lines that does day, week, and month views, and the todo list is integrated with it. I hadn't heard of mantis though, will check it out.
I think he was implying the argument arising from religion that "Christians/Muslims are good, therefore non-Christians/Muslims are bad."
Parent said:
White people are good, therefore black people are bad. Isn't that easy? Now you don't have to read either Mein Kampf or the Bible.
Muslims would have qualified as black people. Early Christians were almost certainly not white (or at least, most of them). Anybody (including the parent poster) who has twisted things so far as to think that
The Bible says only Christians are good
The Bible implies or says that non-Christians are bad
The Bible can be rationally compared to 'Mein Kampf'
is not basing their statement on any facts. Perhaps the poster has gotten these twisted ideas from other people, or from observing people who claim to identify as Christians but are horribly miscarrying that label. There have been than a few throughout history to do so.
I wasn't speaking (writing?) ignorantly, this is is a well known issue. The so called 'curse of ham' (which was really a curse on one of Ham's sons, Canaan) is found near the end Genesis 9, and doesn't make any reference to blackness. There is a really good book on the subject by David M. Golderberg, in which he examines how this misconception was formed. It's quite rigorous, very thorough research.
So like I said to the previous author, I can't find anyplace in the Bible that teaches me that Blacks are Bad and should be slaves. I think MLK was a prophet in every sense of the word.
Let me give you an example... White people are good, therefore black people are bad. Isn't that easy? Now you don't have to read either Mein Kampf or the Bible.
Yeah.. because the Bible is all about "Black people are bad", right? If you're going to delineate differences between logical statements, you could at least use accurate examples. Mein Kampf was a spot-on example, the Bible isn't.
There is a difference between being socially intelligent and driven by office politics.
Of course. But in my experience, political and professional success is more often a function of a good mix of social and technical abilities, rather than exclusively seeking to hurt other people for your own gain.. In other words, I don't think it's all doom and gloom everywhere as per your description. That said, I reiterate that starting your own business IS a good thing.
People who engage in office politics have the goal of destroying other people's careers to advance their own.
Politics aren't always dirty; it's really just the balancing of more than one person's wants, and it's a reality of the workplace. I agree that it can be really dirty. I despise the people who make it that way. It's usually from a lack of wanting to be honest with others out of fear of confrontation, weakness of character, etc..
I'm very socially intelligent. I have an above-average sense of humor and I am well spoken. I have many friends and I get along with people quite well.
I just don't participate in the greed-soaked cesspool of office politics, which disqualifies me from the race to the corner office.
Good! If those are the types of businesses you've had the bad luck to work for, I'd quit too. Your integrity is all you have, you can't justify bad decisions to the next employer, or yourself. But there are businesses that aren't like that, they just usually have 300 employees:) I hope you are either happy with your own business or find a better corporate culture to work in.
..But seriously, I agree with the statement that people ought to start their own businesses more than they do; but I take issue with the larger statement that 'intelligent people are not welcome' in society.. I'm an [E|I]NTP like the author, but it's important to recognize the many different kinds of 'intelligence' just beginning to gain wider recognition. If you don't think that being socially intelligent is both valuable, and a legitimate form of intelligence, then you are probably just being self-centric.. Other people DO matter, even if they sometimes do bad things. Guess what, you do too. Not only that, but just because you are not as strong with social issues as you are with technical issues doesn't mean you shouldn't try to develop that side of your person too..
On the whole it sounds like you've been badly abused (not physically, I hope) by the types of people you describe, in the past... Try not to stay jaded forever, if you don't make an effort to find the good in life, even among the bad, you're in for a miserable time.
Remind me why this is moderated "Insightful" instead of "Off-topic, Personal Soap Box That Nobody Else Gives A Crap About" or "Self-important Whining" ??
Slashdot Mirror
it's Carly Fiorina being ejected from HP .. why they didn't do this sooner probably only comes down to how long it took for the board members to get their Meeelion dollars in bonuses for the Compaq merger..
Wow, goofy. you'd potentially have part of say april in march, etc. ;0
I like the weekly pay period; until we go to 13-month years of 4 x 7 day weeks it's the best option
How many 35 day months do you know of ? :)
Typically we approximate them as four weeks, hence the =~ symbol.
(1 day a week or 1 week a month)?
One day a week = 20%
One week a month =~ 25%
I'll take one week a month, please!
Politics and EVERYTHING humans do are inextricably joined. Everything that matters to someone, who exists in a group of two or more people, has some political meaning..
So basically, the object of windows is not to be a good operating system, but a "just good *enough*" operating system.
Because a full 50% of my 'sessions' with linux require a reboot. 1) When I do an installation for the first time I typically have to reboot to load the new kernel from it's newly installed location 2) The next boot stays up for a long, long time. 8% is WAY less than 50%! Clearly windows is better.
I agree with you. My post did neglect that. I responded to someone else who pointed this out as well. I don't say it doesn't matter, at all. Cheers.
You're absolutely right -- and our political process sucks, and it's not because of people's failure to be involved and voice their opinion, but because of PAC's ability to drown out normal constituents' voices with their dollars. I was a McCain supporter all the way, even in 1999/2000, not because he's a republican, or a moderate, but because he was the first I've seen to champion *real* Campaign Finance Reform. He didn't get it of course, but I see that as one of the biggest bottlenecks in the political process right now. And as long as that cork is in the stopper, you won't have a candidate with a shot at winning who will help achieve any of those things you listed. Why? Because either party would crucify the person who tries, like they have quietly done with McCain. With the status quo, both republicans and democrats are essentially plutocrats; to the detriment of anyone who wants to rock the boat. This obviously also applies at all other governmental levels as well.
So, forgive me if my post made it sound like "it doesn't matter who you vote for", I guess it did. I was just pointing out that many people ask the government to fix problems in their own lives that they have power over themselves..
It's oil and water; religion and science just don't gel. Oh yeah, people say then can and do, but those people are usually of the religiously inclined, who are trying to stay true to their belief system without looking like a progress-hating ignoramous.
Wow, what staggering generalizations and overall ignorance. "religion and science don't gel" is simply too general of a statement to take seriously. Are you saying that people who say the two might be somewhat compatible are never the *scientifically inclined* who don't dismiss things out of hand without proper evidence? (I.e. like you probably are?) The truth is that science and religion occupy slightly different realms, and nothing precludes a person from participating fully in both at the same time. A person who completely excludes religion for nothing but science has made a religion of science, anyway.
we should only nominate and elect outgoing, well-versed, and apolitical scholars, with advanced degrees in areas pertinent to running a nation, such as economics, sociology, or whatnot.
Because nobody else exists or counts, right? Stop worshipping academia, lest it interfere with your education. Academia is as much of a Cathedral as the Catholic Church is, complete with sacred cows and scarlet letters. Hope you aren't fooling yourself about that. I also hope you don't belive that a "perfect political system" is achieveable. You only described your preferred political system. Also, please describe for me how an 'apolitical' person behaves. You clearly don't understand anything about human nature, politics, science, or religion, at any broad level. You sound like you might know more about some microcosm of science, but not in any larger sense.
Suckage begets suckage.
Which explains most of this thread..
Quite likely true. However, the enormous amount of harm they can do is just mind boggling....
Like The Onion said, "Many Americans Still Unsure Who to Vote Against".. People (mostly liberals) talk about all the irreparable harm Bush has done, but I think the idea that Democrats do less harm is quite debateable.. In that both parties are very similar, they are both going to do similar damage in certain ways (mostly economic).
Heh! You have a nice /. id# -- almost reminds me of 2^(1/2)...
Any president who reads the bible for help making presidential decisions cannot be pro-science,
As opposed to Kerry, who tries to affiliate himself with the Catholic Church to garner votes, only to be told by the Church itself to buzz off. Guess what? They're BOTH Politicians, and the parties really don't differ that much -- and the few things they differ on are divisive indeed. What they'd like you to ignore are all the similarities -- they're both plutocrats..
My point is, don't bank on a politician to be the source of change for the better. You can do more yourself, in a single day, to positively affect your own life and those around you than either Bush or Kerry can in 4 (or 8!) years.
'Organizing and displaying photographs based on time,'
ls -ltr
Bam.
Well of course it couldn't happen without the cars driving themselves, that's one of their main assumptions, and they list it in their background section .. I'd tell you to RTFA but I'm too nice.
They probably account for them by saying this is only for highways, where bicyclists and pedestrians aren't legally allowed (at least in the US) anyway. Besides, you have to start *somewhere*
Overall, a very worthy bit of research IMHO.
they had better modify the thing before actually rolling it out so that the cars don't go so damn close to each other
They may well have done so, just by making the 'length' of the cars longer. You could probably make a similar simulation with a minimum radius around each car, so nobody can be in your 'bubble'; maybe have a maximum number of cars in the intersection at a time. The obvious price is, longer delay. I could live with a 1.5 second 'delay' as opposed to 9.whatever seconds with traffic lights. There's negligible difference between a 1 second delay and 0.076 seconds anyway.
I've been writing my own groupware application after toying with many of the others out there and not liking them for one reason or another, and not liking their code (and thus it wasn't worth the time to mangle it to my purposes). I'll post a screenshot Here. I made a nice calendar with Date::Calc in about 20 lines that does day, week, and month views, and the todo list is integrated with it. I hadn't heard of mantis though, will check it out.
Parent said:
White people are good, therefore black people are bad. Isn't that easy? Now you don't have to read either Mein Kampf or the Bible.
Muslims would have qualified as black people. Early Christians were almost certainly not white (or at least, most of them). Anybody (including the parent poster) who has twisted things so far as to think that
- The Bible says only Christians are good
- The Bible implies or says that non-Christians are bad
- The Bible can be rationally compared to 'Mein Kampf'
is not basing their statement on any facts. Perhaps the poster has gotten these twisted ideas from other people, or from observing people who claim to identify as Christians but are horribly miscarrying that label. There have been than a few throughout history to do so.I wasn't speaking (writing?) ignorantly, this is is a well known issue. The so called 'curse of ham' (which was really a curse on one of Ham's sons, Canaan) is found near the end Genesis 9, and doesn't make any reference to blackness. There is a really good book on the subject by David M. Golderberg, in which he examines how this misconception was formed. It's quite rigorous, very thorough research.
So like I said to the previous author, I can't find anyplace in the Bible that teaches me that Blacks are Bad and should be slaves. I think MLK was a prophet in every sense of the word.
Let me give you an example... White people are good, therefore black people are bad. Isn't that easy? Now you don't have to read either Mein Kampf or the Bible.
Yeah.. because the Bible is all about "Black people are bad", right? If you're going to delineate differences between logical statements, you could at least use accurate examples. Mein Kampf was a spot-on example, the Bible isn't.
There is a difference between being socially intelligent and driven by office politics.
:) I hope you are either happy with your own business or find a better corporate culture to work in.
Of course. But in my experience, political and professional success is more often a function of a good mix of social and technical abilities, rather than exclusively seeking to hurt other people for your own gain.. In other words, I don't think it's all doom and gloom everywhere as per your description. That said, I reiterate that starting your own business IS a good thing.
People who engage in office politics have the goal of destroying other people's careers to advance their own.
Politics aren't always dirty; it's really just the balancing of more than one person's wants, and it's a reality of the workplace. I agree that it can be really dirty. I despise the people who make it that way. It's usually from a lack of wanting to be honest with others out of fear of confrontation, weakness of character, etc..
I'm very socially intelligent. I have an above-average sense of humor and I am well spoken. I have many friends and I get along with people quite well. I just don't participate in the greed-soaked cesspool of office politics, which disqualifies me from the race to the corner office.
Good! If those are the types of businesses you've had the bad luck to work for, I'd quit too. Your integrity is all you have, you can't justify bad decisions to the next employer, or yourself. But there are businesses that aren't like that, they just usually have 300 employees
Tell us how you really feel, cubicledrone... :)
..But seriously, I agree with the statement that people ought to start their own businesses more than they do; but I take issue with the larger statement that 'intelligent people are not welcome' in society.. I'm an [E|I]NTP like the author, but it's important to recognize the many different kinds of 'intelligence' just beginning to gain wider recognition. If you don't think that being socially intelligent is both valuable, and a legitimate form of intelligence, then you are probably just being self-centric.. Other people DO matter, even if they sometimes do bad things. Guess what, you do too. Not only that, but just because you are not as strong with social issues as you are with technical issues doesn't mean you shouldn't try to develop that side of your person too..
On the whole it sounds like you've been badly abused (not physically, I hope) by the types of people you describe, in the past... Try not to stay jaded forever, if you don't make an effort to find the good in life, even among the bad, you're in for a miserable time.
Remind me why this is moderated "Insightful" instead of "Off-topic, Personal Soap Box That Nobody Else Gives A Crap About" or "Self-important Whining" ??
" Three months were spent re-drawing the machine using CAD (Computer Aided Design) software on a computer with a 486 processor."
They could have saved 2 months by using a more recent machine.. ANYTHING...