Not all of those provide all these data. I'm not trying to say it's a big deal, just that it's a deal at all, which is now an extremist position, apparently.
You might be less inclined to think so if that information were provided to people who might want to kill you(as is more common for people in law enforcement than others).
Maybe? It's not like I'm deeply involved in the financial matters of every user on slashdot(though you need to watch your checking account, it's dropping a bit low there, a small transfer from the "secret from my wife" account you have would help).
I mean, every kind of facility that supplies any kind of service has a host of complicated logistics to take care of. What the review doesn't do, is make any claim about how well optimized to the many target variables the ideas in this book are. It just kinda goes "you should plan this shit, and this book tells you how to plan this shit" without actually addressing the relative quality of the information.
Or to put it another way: yet another 9/10 review that really is just a plug.
Well, I'm not assuming that so much as I am asserting that it could be construed to be a violation of privacy depending on deployment(while leaving that crucial context out of my original post like an ass).
I mean, I'd place my argument, but it honestly sounds like you posted this just to be an easily destroyed straw-man, and I don't want to contribute to trolling.
I can't argue against your absurd assumption that incremental improvements that make important headway aren't new. It's crazy in the face of the history of technology, but you've decided that point as an absolute fact, and I'm not going to convince you you're wrong, apparently.
I suspect the simple answer is that we have a constitution that forbids it(not that that stopped the NSA, but losing one battle doesn't mean we should surrender on the other)
James Watt didn't invent the steam engine, he made it pragmatically efficient. Edison didn't invent the light bulb, he (paid people to) improved the design to make it cheap to manufacture and relatively reliable. ENIAC wasn't the first computer, it was the first one to be able to do some tasks faster than a human.
Improvements in technology have almost never been sudden and game-changing, and it's completely disingenuous to pretend that advancement to the stage of usability isn't a big deal.
Please, electric motors aren't new, but lithium ion batteries and their absurd ability to hold a charge and recharge are only a couple decades old as usable tech.
1. Negative charisma means you are literally unable to communicate at all. I thought that was more important than the discussion at hand. 2. There are generic chargers outside the building I live. I've seen both leafs and teslas hooked up. I'm not sure whether that disproves your point or misses it, but there you go.
Big point-proving stunts don't help with people who go "my local gas station doesn't provide chargers. I'm doomed if I get one." Because that's really in their head, more than about any particular drive being possible. Tesla has to win market share the same way every new technology does: winning enough early adopters to seem normal(and creating a support market).
Slashdot Mirror
Those aren't really toxic. Not under EPA toxicity standards.
And... you think the difficulty of acquiring the information absolves professional writers of the duty of presenting it?
Not all of those provide all these data. I'm not trying to say it's a big deal, just that it's a deal at all, which is now an extremist position, apparently.
Is it so hard to accept that the flaw is present regardless of the motive?
You might be less inclined to think so if that information were provided to people who might want to kill you(as is more common for people in law enforcement than others).
Maybe? It's not like I'm deeply involved in the financial matters of every user on slashdot(though you need to watch your checking account, it's dropping a bit low there, a small transfer from the "secret from my wife" account you have would help).
What are you saying it is a plug for?
The book itself. Was that implication not clear?
I mean, every kind of facility that supplies any kind of service has a host of complicated logistics to take care of. What the review doesn't do, is make any claim about how well optimized to the many target variables the ideas in this book are. It just kinda goes "you should plan this shit, and this book tells you how to plan this shit" without actually addressing the relative quality of the information.
Or to put it another way: yet another 9/10 review that really is just a plug.
Who "invented" the personal computer, please.
Well, I'm not assuming that so much as I am asserting that it could be construed to be a violation of privacy depending on deployment(while leaving that crucial context out of my original post like an ass).
Too much E.
Well something has to keep those academic raves fun.
What exactly are punks saying that can be deconstructed with statistical sampling of published papers?
I mean, are there some really dumb people alleging that academics don't use enough words starting with K?
Who, exactly, is an insurgent?
I mean, I'd place my argument, but it honestly sounds like you posted this just to be an easily destroyed straw-man, and I don't want to contribute to trolling.
I can't argue against your absurd assumption that incremental improvements that make important headway aren't new. It's crazy in the face of the history of technology, but you've decided that point as an absolute fact, and I'm not going to convince you you're wrong, apparently.
Forbids government monitoring of every person in the area without warrant.
I suspect the simple answer is that we have a constitution that forbids it(not that that stopped the NSA, but losing one battle doesn't mean we should surrender on the other)
Look at me not doing what you say.
It wasn't "necessary" for the past 50 years, it just makes the terrible cold war the Koreas are in a little easier by means of technology.
Let me spoil some things for you:
James Watt didn't invent the steam engine, he made it pragmatically efficient.
Edison didn't invent the light bulb, he (paid people to) improved the design to make it cheap to manufacture and relatively reliable.
ENIAC wasn't the first computer, it was the first one to be able to do some tasks faster than a human.
Improvements in technology have almost never been sudden and game-changing, and it's completely disingenuous to pretend that advancement to the stage of usability isn't a big deal.
Please, electric motors aren't new, but lithium ion batteries and their absurd ability to hold a charge and recharge are only a couple decades old as usable tech.
1. Negative charisma means you are literally unable to communicate at all. I thought that was more important than the discussion at hand.
2. There are generic chargers outside the building I live. I've seen both leafs and teslas hooked up. I'm not sure whether that disproves your point or misses it, but there you go.
Big point-proving stunts don't help with people who go "my local gas station doesn't provide chargers. I'm doomed if I get one." Because that's really in their head, more than about any particular drive being possible. Tesla has to win market share the same way every new technology does: winning enough early adopters to seem normal(and creating a support market).
You think there's genuine free competition in the job market?
It's not entirely an untrue point, but: define "toxic things" because that's a pretty ambiguous term.
1. Put your badge back on
2. Update resume.