I mean, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that US police are far from perfect. They don't always do everything they need to, a small some are actively corrupt, and there's definitely bias in enforcement.
But at the same time, it's not nearly as bad here as it is in some other places.
That's totally true, but Facebook has been making numerous attempts to get out of the "being facebook" game recently. I think that they're executives know as well as we do that individual social networks don't last forever, and they're trying to find long-term high tech areas to operate in too.
It'd take more than my 10 fingers to count all the major tech companies that could be counted as "social networks" that are now mostly defunct.
Oh, India's government totally has a large (and corrupt) bureaucracy: As usual, basic information courtesy of Wikipedia.
Say what you want about the US(and there's plenty to say), you won't be paying "facilitation fees" to report a crime in the US, and none of our national elected officials are currently under any serious suspicion of murder.
Now, I'm not sure what exactly this means about the interaction between space research and cost, but the "lack of bureaucracy" is a bit out of touch with the reality in India.
I'd lean towards: A. Everything being more expensive in the US. That's the first world for you. Everyone involved here wants a decent standard of living. B. We have a hugely entrenched corporate aerospace industry, that has their hooks in every space project.
Could be something else too, the world's complicated, but "bureaucracy" is a bumper-sticker explanation that doesn't accurately describe differences between the US and India.
"The system" is an arbitrary notion. Some systems can have positive effects. For example, I'd rather have a democratic system than the historically apparent de-facto social default of petty demi-feudal tyrants.
And I'd rather have a court based justice system, then a personally run petty revenge based justice system.
You can take that as generically accepting "The system", and all the things that aren't so-great if you want, but it's going have to be willful ignorance on your part, and not an active belief on mine.
Right, and dying also limits your personal freedom. Your freedom, does come at the expense of those who are willing to personally sacrifice to varying to degrees to keep it.
The headline is part of the submission. Editors sucking at editing submissions has been an eternal Slashdot problem, but the person to blame is schwit1.
And then immediately asking your city to take away for you, to a landfill, that they have to not only manage and use the space for, but be responsible for the environmentla stewardship of for decades afterwards.
You buy and safely manage your own private dump, and then you can throw as much compost out as you want.
A follow up. The abstract for the second paper is linked in the summary, and the conclusion of the paper I'm referencing above suggests that the second paper(which we only have the abstract to) will attempts to address some of the concerns of simplistic assumptions. I think I'd need to do some really hard math, and pay for the full paper to determine if I personally agree with it justifying those assumptions, which I think is better left to experts who aren't supposed to be doing some programming right now.
And there's also a reallllllllllllly telling quote in the actual paper I'm still reading to make sure I understood the context right, but,
Consider a spherically symmetric, uniform density, perfect-fluid star, undergoing gravitational collapse. The stress energy tensor of the fluid is...
Looks like a hell of assumption to make about stellar density. We know the cores are way more dense than the rest of the star, that's the magic that makes the fusion happen.
Now if this assumption is qualified and addressed later in the paper, I'll be guilty of not being careful enough, but I haven't found that clue yet.
Of course I'm fucking conflating them. They're caused by the same phenomenon. People perceiving women as being incapable of taking care of themselves in war.
"Oh it's so unfair, that women don't have to register for the draft, in spite of the fact that volunteer female soldiers have been fighting for decades to even have the chance at front-line combat duties"
Come on man. Selective service is pretty outdated as a concept and should probably be binned for men, but this is an argument that just ignores the pragmatic reality that it's sexism against women not "for" them that creates the situation you're whining about.
Pragmatically, almost no one actually codes software with that aspect of the target platform in mind. Unless you're writing drivers, OSes or something else that might need to know EXACTLY how many cycles an op is going to take, your cache behavior, e.g. is never going to be part of what you're building your code around.
And RAM sizes are large enough that a "large" input is easily contained entirely within even smallish RAM.
As long as they used a consistent testbed between languages, it's an excellent heuristic for language effects on performance in the real world.
Yeah, this falls into the category of "Things where text is more useful/interesting than video". Not to mention people who just don't want noise/video.
Everything blizzard has done that's been online only has just completely disinterested me. I miss their games that were designed to be games, rather than continuous profit centers.
Starcraft 2, was probably okay, but online only DRM, changed out for online only multiplayer was still enough to sour me on the idea.
People who say "throw money at [X]" usually tend to rankle me. The phrase can have uses, and I don't want to completely dismiss it, but a lot of times, like, in particular, this time, you just use it without consideration to what it means.
Containing and treating a disease is a logistically complicated task. Procuring appropriate medical equipment, temporary sterile environments, available medical manpower, and transporting those are all operations that actually require money and organization.
Now I'm all for bringing in western expertise where it's useful, the CDC is pretty heavily western, and so are a lot of ebola experts. American military assets are good at fast response, and operating in difficult areas. That's good. They need that too. But there's a lot that can and should be done locally that those governments maybe can't afford to do.
Yeah, the CDC says it's possible, and I trust their judgement more than my own.
But, in spite of that, I have a question: How can something with a 90% fatality rate really become endemic? It'd imply a near complete depopulation of the affected areas.
Epidemic makes sense. People hide out, move around, spread the disease, huge, rapid expansion into new populations occurs. I don't know how they'd model a endemic ebola.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that US police are far from perfect. They don't always do everything they need to, a small some are actively corrupt, and there's definitely bias in enforcement.
But at the same time, it's not nearly as bad here as it is in some other places.
That's totally true, but Facebook has been making numerous attempts to get out of the "being facebook" game recently. I think that they're executives know as well as we do that individual social networks don't last forever, and they're trying to find long-term high tech areas to operate in too.
It'd take more than my 10 fingers to count all the major tech companies that could be counted as "social networks" that are now mostly defunct.
Does the internet shut off at night, then?
Oh, India's government totally has a large (and corrupt) bureaucracy: As usual, basic information courtesy of Wikipedia.
Say what you want about the US(and there's plenty to say), you won't be paying "facilitation fees" to report a crime in the US, and none of our national elected officials are currently under any serious suspicion of murder.
Now, I'm not sure what exactly this means about the interaction between space research and cost, but the "lack of bureaucracy" is a bit out of touch with the reality in India.
I'd lean towards:
A. Everything being more expensive in the US. That's the first world for you. Everyone involved here wants a decent standard of living.
B. We have a hugely entrenched corporate aerospace industry, that has their hooks in every space project.
Could be something else too, the world's complicated, but "bureaucracy" is a bumper-sticker explanation that doesn't accurately describe differences between the US and India.
Oh, you seem to be completely mistaken.
"The system" is an arbitrary notion. Some systems can have positive effects. For example, I'd rather have a democratic system than the historically apparent de-facto social default of petty demi-feudal tyrants.
And I'd rather have a court based justice system, then a personally run petty revenge based justice system.
You can take that as generically accepting "The system", and all the things that aren't so-great if you want, but it's going have to be willful ignorance on your part, and not an active belief on mine.
Faster, Cheaper, Better, Contractors
Pick any two....
(Contractors count as 2)
Honestly, is there no lever the Indian government won't sink to to save money?
Right, and dying also limits your personal freedom. Your freedom, does come at the expense of those who are willing to personally sacrifice to varying to degrees to keep it.
The headline is part of the submission. Editors sucking at editing submissions has been an eternal Slashdot problem, but the person to blame is schwit1.
And then immediately asking your city to take away for you, to a landfill, that they have to not only manage and use the space for, but be responsible for the environmentla stewardship of for decades afterwards.
You buy and safely manage your own private dump, and then you can throw as much compost out as you want.
A follow up. The abstract for the second paper is linked in the summary, and the conclusion of the paper I'm referencing above suggests that the second paper(which we only have the abstract to) will attempts to address some of the concerns of simplistic assumptions. I think I'd need to do some really hard math, and pay for the full paper to determine if I personally agree with it justifying those assumptions, which I think is better left to experts who aren't supposed to be doing some programming right now.
And there's also a reallllllllllllly telling quote in the actual paper I'm still reading to make sure I understood the context right, but,
Consider a spherically symmetric, uniform density, perfect-fluid star, undergoing gravitational collapse. The stress energy tensor of the fluid is ...
Looks like a hell of assumption to make about stellar density. We know the cores are way more dense than the rest of the star, that's the magic that makes the fusion happen.
Now if this assumption is qualified and addressed later in the paper, I'll be guilty of not being careful enough, but I haven't found that clue yet.
You have got to be kidding me.
Of course I'm fucking conflating them. They're caused by the same phenomenon. People perceiving women as being incapable of taking care of themselves in war.
Better that than "worm"holes into the goatse universe.
"Oh it's so unfair, that women don't have to register for the draft, in spite of the fact that volunteer female soldiers have been fighting for decades to even have the chance at front-line combat duties"
Come on man. Selective service is pretty outdated as a concept and should probably be binned for men, but this is an argument that just ignores the pragmatic reality that it's sexism against women not "for" them that creates the situation you're whining about.
Pragmatically, almost no one actually codes software with that aspect of the target platform in mind. Unless you're writing drivers, OSes or something else that might need to know EXACTLY how many cycles an op is going to take, your cache behavior, e.g. is never going to be part of what you're building your code around.
And RAM sizes are large enough that a "large" input is easily contained entirely within even smallish RAM.
As long as they used a consistent testbed between languages, it's an excellent heuristic for language effects on performance in the real world.
Yes. It won't matter though.
Here's a couple hundred pieces of evidence.
But that's not what you said.
What you said that was particularly dumb is the fact that no one is currently doing X is somehow evidence X never happened.
So... basically, all you have is stereotypes? That informs the entirety of your worldview? Sad. Real sad.
I'm glad people like you exist.
No matter how unthinking and stupid I am sometimes, I will never, ever, ever say something as dumb as this argument is right now.
It's odd. We just checked, but there's some kind of large metallic object and a flagpole blocking the best few candidate positions.
Yeah, this falls into the category of "Things where text is more useful/interesting than video". Not to mention people who just don't want noise/video.
Yeah, maybe Liberia, but I've never heard of Guinea having that problem.
Everything blizzard has done that's been online only has just completely disinterested me. I miss their games that were designed to be games, rather than continuous profit centers.
Starcraft 2, was probably okay, but online only DRM, changed out for online only multiplayer was still enough to sour me on the idea.
People who say "throw money at [X]" usually tend to rankle me. The phrase can have uses, and I don't want to completely dismiss it, but a lot of times, like, in particular, this time, you just use it without consideration to what it means.
Containing and treating a disease is a logistically complicated task. Procuring appropriate medical equipment, temporary sterile environments, available medical manpower, and transporting those are all operations that actually require money and organization.
Now I'm all for bringing in western expertise where it's useful, the CDC is pretty heavily western, and so are a lot of ebola experts. American military assets are good at fast response, and operating in difficult areas. That's good. They need that too. But there's a lot that can and should be done locally that those governments maybe can't afford to do.
Yeah, the CDC says it's possible, and I trust their judgement more than my own.
But, in spite of that, I have a question: How can something with a 90% fatality rate really become endemic? It'd imply a near complete depopulation of the affected areas.
Epidemic makes sense. People hide out, move around, spread the disease, huge, rapid expansion into new populations occurs. I don't know how they'd model a endemic ebola.