It's illegal to consider many things about a job applicant, too, but very often, the pretty lady who shows up dressed to kill will still likely get the job over the ugly duckling with the tattoo on her neck, qualifications aside. The white guy will still likely get the job over the black guy, qualifications aside. The guy will still likely get the job over the woman, qualifications aside. VW will still build emissions systems that are out of spec. It's all illegal. It happens anyway. And so will insurance companies shorting people of care (thought other means of course, it's always thought other means) when they have a clear indicator that those people are, statistically speaking, going to impact the bottom line in a way that the actuaries can point to in a concrete manner.
Single payer, cover-everyone is the only sane answer. Capitalist society, socialist society, libertarian society, communist society, same answer every time. Shit that happens randomly to people needs to have umbrella-level countermeasures or it will fuck things up. Just as we have repeatedly seen with US healthcare, and for that matter are still seeing in spades where the medicare expansion was broken by evil-minded, bought-off shills.
Keeping people alive you know are faulty is kinda senseless unless you have ways to fix the problems.
As a poster-child for the counterpoint: Stephen Hawking
Evolution and natural selection for stronger individuals is a thing. Has been a thing. But in no way does that imply that we can't make decisions for ourselves now that we have some idea what we're doing. That's without even considering the fact that we're going to be able to fix all this stuff in fairly short order, in terms of evolutionary time scales, so your worries about the "trend" are truly pointless.
It was definitely a corporate handout by congress (and also, not what Obama asked for... hence I never call it "ObamaCare"), but it also definitely made some things better. I know quite a few people who have healthcare for the first time in many years, some of them with pre-existing conditions, others who simply couldn't afford it. Care ranging from from a CPAP mask to a much-needed case of testosterone therapy. In fact, if it hadn't been for the malfuckery of the Montana republicans, who callously shot the legs out from under the ACA by bitch-screwing the medicaid expansion for years, it would have done even more.
Next year - assuming no further malfuckery on the part of the various Kochsuckers out there, one 62 y/o lady I know who is both diabetic and a breast cancer survivor, is going to have decent, continuous medical care for the first time in her life. Her breast cancer costs were covered by a vertical breast/cervical treatment program, and she's 10+ years out now, so that's good, but as she points out, if it had been liver cancer, she would have had no viable options at all. Now she will. Hopefully. If the ACA hadn't been so adroitly interfered with, she would have already.
So while I'm totally on-board with "could have been a lot better", the way it was prior to the ACA... that was a whole damn sight worse.
Real costs for the same goods and services -- with the notable, but not very consequential, exception of electronics -- continue to rise at a rate that far exceeds the concurrent value of money. From hamburgers to heating to plumbing to taxes, it's all rising steeply. The value of money is not keeping pace. Nor is the amount of income keeping pace so that the amount of money could compensate for it's reduced buying power. The end result is poorer poor and poorer middle class, while the trickle-up continues at ever-increasing rates in every sector.
The system is badly broken, and it is heading towards a critical failure that will change society one way or another -- either it will be allowed to happen and the very nature of our streets and homes will change, or we'll save it by moving to something along the lines of Basic Income. But the sure thing is that we can't keep on going like we are. We fell off the cliff some time ago, and now the ground is coming up fast.
A pocket sized collection of things going very quickly around the solar system to account for the periodic occlusions?
All it would need to be is an irregular object with a spin. Think about it. If I put you in one spot, and an irregular, spinning object more-or-less between you and what you want to look at, what happens to your view of the object?
Everything should be in hexadecimal. Divisible by 2, 4, and 8 just fine. We divide things into halves, quarters and eighths more than we do anything else. Base ten gives us divisible by 2 and that's it. Pah.
As for the other direction, hex is replete with useful multipliers. Just as your computer will show you.:)
And of course binary folds perfectly into hex, and vice-versa. Base ten? Oy. That's why floats don't do an accurate job when you try to do something as mundane as represent one tenth accurately. But 1/4? 1/8? etc.? No problem.
Ever see a DAA instruction in an early computer instruction set? "Decimal Adjust." So the early CPUs could actually (sort of) do base ten math without screwing it up...
Radians: 2pi / circle Gradians: 400/circle Fyngyrzians: 256/circle
I actually used 256/circle in some old arcade games I wrote. Very, very convenient when you're dealing with the native capabilities of Z80s and 6809s and the like. Makes for excellent lookup tables with byte indexes.
Keep in mind the closer to us the occultation is occurring, the smaller the occluding object needs to be. Could just be a small chunk of matter in interstellar space moving along a coincidental path nearer to us than the star in question. You know how big an object would have to be to completely occult our sun from the edge of our solar system? You could carry a whole collection of them in one pocket.
We know almost nothing about nature anywhere outside the solar system. We have been making assumptions as best we can with the data we have, but the fact is all of our real experience is local and we just don't know what might be going on that far away.
The sane way to use hydrogen, assuming it can be produced in large enough quantity and without enough pollution to compromise its other advantages, is to create it adjacent to, and then use to it drive, large power plants, which then pass the resulting energy along to vehicles as electricity. Electric vehicles offer something hydrogen vehicles cannot: they are energy agnostic, because you can make electricity in quite a few ways, none of which the electric vehicle even needs to know about, and from there, it's almost trivial to get the energy to most vehicles. Making hydrogen with a coal plant? That has to be most unfortunately indirect, and it just won't ever be practical. But an electric vehicle, today can run from a coal plant today, a nuke tomorrow, tidal when you go to the coast, and solar when you're in the south. Geothermal when you're cruising around Iceland. Etc. And hydrogen, if you build a hydrogen power plant.
Transport and storage for hydrogen are severely problematic, there is no established infrastructure. The infrastructure for electric cars is already mostly in place. They can be plugged in at night when most generating facilities have considerable excess capacity available, and they'll be good to go for the mast majority of use cases, which will be short to moderate range. Furthermore, if the charging station is built with local storage, it can be accumulating energy when the vehicle isn't present and deliver it to the vehicle later, which will smooth the peak grid load out even further.
Batteries are unlikely to be the long term energy storage of choice in vehicles, but for now, they're a cost-effective technology, and there's not much reason not to (continue to) go there. We can hope for ultracaps -- there are numerous signs of progress, but they're just not there yet -- but batteries will certainly do for now.
Given the Chevrolet side saddle gas tanks imbroglio, the Ford Pinto, and the Toyota floor mat malfunction, I'd say Volkswagon can count on the short term memory of the buying public.
It isn't even jsut a matter of short term memory (although yes, that certainly plays into it.) I had a Chevy in the 70's, another from the 80's, and now I have a recent model. The one from the 70's was awful, just a total piece of junk. Right down to a soda can in the door straight off the showroom floor, rattles, plastic coach accouterments that basically melted in the sun in the first year of the car's life, and an engine that should never have made it into a lawnmower, never mind into a car you needed to depend on.
Then Japan, Inc. kicked their corporate ass, and by the late 80's, the whole picture had changed -- and using "memory" to color that picture would have been a grave mistake. Fast forward to my most recent Chevy, which I bought on the strength of my late 80's model (which is still running just fine 26 years later), and the marque has gone even further in garnering my respect. If they manage to come out with a decent electric that could compete with a Tesla and had the range, I'm pretty sure I'll buy it.
The idea that a mistake or an outright attempt to do wrong is something that should incur wrath and retribution forever and a day is a uniquely SJW-tainted stupidity, one that pervades American thought (and perhaps elsewhere as well, but it's the USA I am familiar with.) The right thing: fix the problem, reform behavior, move on. That's the sane approach.
How will that work out for the "average user" on an "average day".
This isn't about average users. This is about the outliers. And just as with DRM on video, what will hit distribution is video/imagery with the DRM (and the warnings) removed. The only people who will see the warnings and not copy the works are the people who aren't pirates anyway.
The whole thing is an exercise in futility.
Also, to an issue brought up earlier about doing this "en mass", that simply isn't a problem. Programmatic capture of multiple images from a post-file source is a doddle.
You do understand that is entirely irrelevant to the question of whether $190k then was, or was not, significantly different from 1m today, right?
You also understand that "making the film", specifically the part that got less expensive, is a tiny, tiny part of the undertaking, right?
You also understand that without dedicated props departments (such as those at DesiLu), props take much more time and energy and are less efficiently made in this case as compared to TOS, right?
You also understand that the number of dollars put out for anything from a bit of particle board to the plastic for a switch and the material for the costumes has increased proportionally as well, right?
You also understand that as these people are not professionals, they are no doubt at all putting in more work on some things than the crew at DesiLu, right?
I am sure your understanding is wide and deep, O Anonymous One.
Why a central bank would elevate economics to the status of awarding a Nobel prize is because they recognize just how valuable the field is to their work.
Why a central bank would elevate economics to the status of awarding a Nobel prize is because they recognize just how valuable the field is to defrauding the general public.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure. Eventually. Might as well defer till later, right?
Good grief.
It's illegal to consider many things about a job applicant, too, but very often, the pretty lady who shows up dressed to kill will still likely get the job over the ugly duckling with the tattoo on her neck, qualifications aside. The white guy will still likely get the job over the black guy, qualifications aside. The guy will still likely get the job over the woman, qualifications aside. VW will still build emissions systems that are out of spec. It's all illegal. It happens anyway. And so will insurance companies shorting people of care (thought other means of course, it's always thought other means) when they have a clear indicator that those people are, statistically speaking, going to impact the bottom line in a way that the actuaries can point to in a concrete manner.
Single payer, cover-everyone is the only sane answer. Capitalist society, socialist society, libertarian society, communist society, same answer every time. Shit that happens randomly to people needs to have umbrella-level countermeasures or it will fuck things up. Just as we have repeatedly seen with US healthcare, and for that matter are still seeing in spades where the medicare expansion was broken by evil-minded, bought-off shills.
As a poster-child for the counterpoint: Stephen Hawking
Evolution and natural selection for stronger individuals is a thing. Has been a thing. But in no way does that imply that we can't make decisions for ourselves now that we have some idea what we're doing. That's without even considering the fact that we're going to be able to fix all this stuff in fairly short order, in terms of evolutionary time scales, so your worries about the "trend" are truly pointless.
It was definitely a corporate handout by congress (and also, not what Obama asked for... hence I never call it "ObamaCare"), but it also definitely made some things better. I know quite a few people who have healthcare for the first time in many years, some of them with pre-existing conditions, others who simply couldn't afford it. Care ranging from from a CPAP mask to a much-needed case of testosterone therapy. In fact, if it hadn't been for the malfuckery of the Montana republicans, who callously shot the legs out from under the ACA by bitch-screwing the medicaid expansion for years, it would have done even more.
Next year - assuming no further malfuckery on the part of the various Kochsuckers out there, one 62 y/o lady I know who is both diabetic and a breast cancer survivor, is going to have decent, continuous medical care for the first time in her life. Her breast cancer costs were covered by a vertical breast/cervical treatment program, and she's 10+ years out now, so that's good, but as she points out, if it had been liver cancer, she would have had no viable options at all. Now she will. Hopefully. If the ACA hadn't been so adroitly interfered with, she would have already.
So while I'm totally on-board with "could have been a lot better", the way it was prior to the ACA... that was a whole damn sight worse.
Real costs for the same goods and services -- with the notable, but not very consequential, exception of electronics -- continue to rise at a rate that far exceeds the concurrent value of money. From hamburgers to heating to plumbing to taxes, it's all rising steeply. The value of money is not keeping pace. Nor is the amount of income keeping pace so that the amount of money could compensate for it's reduced buying power. The end result is poorer poor and poorer middle class, while the trickle-up continues at ever-increasing rates in every sector.
The system is badly broken, and it is heading towards a critical failure that will change society one way or another -- either it will be allowed to happen and the very nature of our streets and homes will change, or we'll save it by moving to something along the lines of Basic Income. But the sure thing is that we can't keep on going like we are. We fell off the cliff some time ago, and now the ground is coming up fast.
Please. Just.... please.
All it would need to be is an irregular object with a spin. Think about it. If I put you in one spot, and an irregular, spinning object more-or-less between you and what you want to look at, what happens to your view of the object?
Everything should be in hexadecimal. Divisible by 2, 4, and 8 just fine. We divide things into halves, quarters and eighths more than we do anything else. Base ten gives us divisible by 2 and that's it. Pah.
As for the other direction, hex is replete with useful multipliers. Just as your computer will show you. :)
And of course binary folds perfectly into hex, and vice-versa. Base ten? Oy. That's why floats don't do an accurate job when you try to do something as mundane as represent one tenth accurately. But 1/4? 1/8? etc.? No problem.
Ever see a DAA instruction in an early computer instruction set? "Decimal Adjust." So the early CPUs could actually (sort of) do base ten math without screwing it up...
Radians: 2pi / circle
Gradians: 400/circle
Fyngyrzians: 256/circle
I actually used 256/circle in some old arcade games I wrote. Very, very convenient when you're dealing with the native capabilities of Z80s and 6809s and the like. Makes for excellent lookup tables with byte indexes.
Yeah! Pretty soon you'll have to have a set of reference carbon nanotubes around just to build a doghouse!
Personally, I measure everything using chi, bu, and li. It's easier to convert from myriad and avoirdupois quartiers that way.
It all goes to hell when I'm baking, though. :)
Keep in mind the closer to us the occultation is occurring, the smaller the occluding object needs to be. Could just be a small chunk of matter in interstellar space moving along a coincidental path nearer to us than the star in question. You know how big an object would have to be to completely occult our sun from the edge of our solar system? You could carry a whole collection of them in one pocket.
We know almost nothing about nature anywhere outside the solar system. We have been making assumptions as best we can with the data we have, but the fact is all of our real experience is local and we just don't know what might be going on that far away.
The sane way to use hydrogen, assuming it can be produced in large enough quantity and without enough pollution to compromise its other advantages, is to create it adjacent to, and then use to it drive, large power plants, which then pass the resulting energy along to vehicles as electricity. Electric vehicles offer something hydrogen vehicles cannot: they are energy agnostic, because you can make electricity in quite a few ways, none of which the electric vehicle even needs to know about, and from there, it's almost trivial to get the energy to most vehicles. Making hydrogen with a coal plant? That has to be most unfortunately indirect, and it just won't ever be practical. But an electric vehicle, today can run from a coal plant today, a nuke tomorrow, tidal when you go to the coast, and solar when you're in the south. Geothermal when you're cruising around Iceland. Etc. And hydrogen, if you build a hydrogen power plant.
Transport and storage for hydrogen are severely problematic, there is no established infrastructure. The infrastructure for electric cars is already mostly in place. They can be plugged in at night when most generating facilities have considerable excess capacity available, and they'll be good to go for the mast majority of use cases, which will be short to moderate range. Furthermore, if the charging station is built with local storage, it can be accumulating energy when the vehicle isn't present and deliver it to the vehicle later, which will smooth the peak grid load out even further.
Batteries are unlikely to be the long term energy storage of choice in vehicles, but for now, they're a cost-effective technology, and there's not much reason not to (continue to) go there. We can hope for ultracaps -- there are numerous signs of progress, but they're just not there yet -- but batteries will certainly do for now.
It isn't even jsut a matter of short term memory (although yes, that certainly plays into it.) I had a Chevy in the 70's, another from the 80's, and now I have a recent model. The one from the 70's was awful, just a total piece of junk. Right down to a soda can in the door straight off the showroom floor, rattles, plastic coach accouterments that basically melted in the sun in the first year of the car's life, and an engine that should never have made it into a lawnmower, never mind into a car you needed to depend on.
Then Japan, Inc. kicked their corporate ass, and by the late 80's, the whole picture had changed -- and using "memory" to color that picture would have been a grave mistake. Fast forward to my most recent Chevy, which I bought on the strength of my late 80's model (which is still running just fine 26 years later), and the marque has gone even further in garnering my respect. If they manage to come out with a decent electric that could compete with a Tesla and had the range, I'm pretty sure I'll buy it.
The idea that a mistake or an outright attempt to do wrong is something that should incur wrath and retribution forever and a day is a uniquely SJW-tainted stupidity, one that pervades American thought (and perhaps elsewhere as well, but it's the USA I am familiar with.) The right thing: fix the problem, reform behavior, move on. That's the sane approach.
This isn't about average users. This is about the outliers. And just as with DRM on video, what will hit distribution is video/imagery with the DRM (and the warnings) removed. The only people who will see the warnings and not copy the works are the people who aren't pirates anyway.
The whole thing is an exercise in futility.
Also, to an issue brought up earlier about doing this "en mass", that simply isn't a problem. Programmatic capture of multiple images from a post-file source is a doddle.
Doesn't apply if you have a green card anyway. Or if you just graduated college or are looking for an internship.
The Japanese have had that handled for years. Not a problem.
Fuzzy logic. It's what's for dinner. :)
LLVM :)
Sorry, five years experience required.
I don't think you're being objective about this.
African, or European?
You do understand that is entirely irrelevant to the question of whether $190k then was, or was not, significantly different from 1m today, right?
You also understand that "making the film", specifically the part that got less expensive, is a tiny, tiny part of the undertaking, right?
You also understand that without dedicated props departments (such as those at DesiLu), props take much more time and energy and are less efficiently made in this case as compared to TOS, right?
You also understand that the number of dollars put out for anything from a bit of particle board to the plastic for a switch and the material for the costumes has increased proportionally as well, right?
You also understand that as these people are not professionals, they are no doubt at all putting in more work on some things than the crew at DesiLu, right?
I am sure your understanding is wide and deep, O Anonymous One.
Psychology 102:
Smart people also do Dumb things.
Dumb people also do Good things.
Good people also do Bad things.
Bad people also do Smart things.
Psychology 103:
Smart people also do Good things.
Dumb people also do Bad things.
Good people also do Smart things.
Bad people also do Dumb things.
Psychology 104:
Smart people also do Bad things.
Dumb people also do Smart things.
Good people also do Dumb things.
Bad people also do Good things.
Second year:
Psychology 201:
How to use statistics to imply anything
Psychology 202:
The zen of tiny sample sizes
Psychology 203:
Regression therapy, or, How to make someone think they remember something that never happened
Psychology 204:
The more letters you have, the more authoritative you can pretend you are. So come back for a baccalaureate!
Congratulations! You are now the proud owner of an Associate's Degree in Psychology!
Yeah, but you have to say that very, very softly.
Why a central bank would elevate economics to the status of awarding a Nobel prize is because they recognize just how valuable the field is to defrauding the general public.
FTFY