The vast majority of companies said they are having trouble finding enough money and enough qualified applicants to keep their data center staff at healthy levels.
the latitudes where coffee is grown may conceivably shift north and south a bit. Big deal.
Except there's that little bit of not having the correct soil or location to plant the coffee trees. It's not just about the temperature, it's about the area itself.
Then there's the matter of time. Even if you plant the seeds to grow new plants, it takes years for the trees to full develop and produce decent beans.
while I wait for slow eaters in the family to finish eating.
I would be characterized as a slow eater and if that annoys you, tough. Eating a meal is one of the few times one has during the day to relax and take your time. Granted, McD's can't quite be called a good meal, but regardless, eating a meal slowly is a surefire way not to eat too much and not get fat.
People talk about living life to the fullest, how about enjoying it for once.
Does this mean that every cell will have one of these installed in it, or is it used when officers think someone might be carrying contraband? i.e. they are taken to a special location.
If a person is carrying contraband, can they reach down and grab the package without the officers seeing them do so before the device activates?
Without the use of a telescope you could show your kids the surface of the sun by creating your own pinhole box.
Get as large a rectangular box as you can manage which has its ends as large as possible. Affix a large piece of white paper on the inside of one end, close the box then tape all the seams so light can't enter. Take a pin and punch a hole in the end opposite of the one you put the paper on.
Finally, cut a hole in the side of the box near the end where the paper is. When you look into this hole, you should be looking at an angle down towards the white sheet of paper. Start with a smaller hole and keep making larger until you have the size you need.
Finally, point the end with the pinhole towards the sun then look in the hole in the side of the box. When you align the box correctly, you should see an image of the sun projected onto the white sheet of paper which is perfectly safe for your kids to look at. If you're really lucky, you might see a sunspot or two.
Keep this box so when there is a solar eclipse viewable in your area, your kids can have a great view without having to stare at the sun with funky glasses on.
It's like driving ten extra miles to a store where you can get a 5 dollar discount. "Yeah but I save 5 dollers!" -"Yeah and you pay 6 dollar worth of fuel, you complete retard!"
Let's break out this charge and see how it really works (yes, I'm being a pedantic twit, but it's worth the effort in this case):
The average price per gallon of gas in the U.S. is $2.65. My car, a 1998 Honda, gets, on average, 33 mph doing my normal driving. If I have to drive to an extra ten miles to save $5 on something, that means it costs me, roughly,.89 cents to drive one way. Doubling that, round trip, means I'm spending $1.78 to save $5.
Or, put another way, I'm still saving over $3 on that particular item when fuel costs are calculated in.
Obviously, if you're driving an SUV or truck, then it is not worth your effort to save that $5 since your fuel mileage is substantially worse than mine and any savings in cost is negated by the cost of fuel used to drive that distance.
Will people even begin to doubt the most rigorous sciences like Mathematics and Physics?
Some people already doubt science in general, to limit it to just math and physics belies the current trend of refusing to accept what science, in all its forms, tells us.
Men on the moon? Nope, can't be done because of . WTC towers collapsed because of structural damage compounded by extreme temperatures? Nope, it was a government plot because . Vaccines help prevent acquisition of serious diseases? Nope, doesn't work because . Evolution? It's impossible because .
There will always be those who will find any excuse to deny the scientific evidence. That doesn't mean one shouldn't question the evidence or how it's gathered. Rather, instead of saying, "See! They used the word 'hide' so they must be falsifying the data!", one should look at the entire context of quotes and information to see what is meant.
Science, in all its forms, is one of those areas where there will always be discussion about something, but once someone, or some group, comes up with an explanation, their data and processes can be checked by others to see if those people get the same results. If not, go back and see what the differences were. If still failure, back to square one.
I am reminded of the one CSI episode* where after doing all the evidence gathering, interviewing suspects and finally finding the body, the only conclusion was that the girl, upon trying to retrieve her waste can from a garbage bin, had been partially crushed between the bin and the wall when a vehicle came by and accidentally clipped the bin.
The parents were sure their daughter was murdered and planned on hiring their own investigator to find out who killed her. Grissom remarks, "Mrs. Rycoff there is no one guilty of this."
"Because you say so?"
"Because the evidence says so."
*The episode is called Chaos Theory and is one of my all-time favorite CSI shows. Right up there with Fur and Loathing (the plushy and furry convention episode).
the guys walking around their cars every morning to check five times if their windows were up and doors were locked,
Funny you should say that. Last year I was awoken late at night (midnight? 1 AM?) by the sound of car door handles being activated. I looked out the window thinking someone was checking for unlocked doors and saw one of the folks who lives on the back side of the building doing exactly what you described.
I watched him as he walked around the car checking every door (all four of them), coming to the front and looking at something on the hood, then go back to the driver door and check that it was locked before repeating the entire process again. I don't think he did it five times but it was at least twice if not three times.
Reminded me of Monk. If one were cruel or sadistic, once the guy had walked around the car once, you'd drag him away so he couldn't check again and tie him to a chair. Imagine the energy one could get from the all twitching as he tried to get back to his car to check the doors!
I'm really late in replying to your comments, however I happened to read a BBC article which quantifies what you have found out. Link to the article.
The study found that on the whole, marriages which last longer and have a greater chance of success (i.e. not divorcing) occur when the woman is at least five years younger than the man AND the woman is smarter than the man.
Lee Child, author of the Jack Reacher novels, actually likes the simplicity because he can concentrate on the words themselves.
Someone at work suggested I might like his books. I found one at a used book stand and started reading. The words to describe his writing style are stilted and simplistic. I felt like I was running into a wall at the end of every sentence. (get the hint?)
I think I got through the first paragraph before skipping around the next few pages then finally giving up. There might be an interesting story somewhere in those pages, but I couldn't stay around long enough to find it.
If someone makes a good piece of software, it'd be great if someone else came along to document it, and everybody wins.
Here's an idea: how about the person who did the actual work do the documentation? That way, since they know all the ins and outs, someone else doesn't have to pester them to find out how to do something and document it.
Yeah, yeah. That would be too easy and make sense. Let someone else take care of the problem because I'm too lazy.
There is no reason in this day and age that the person/people creating these apps can't provide documentation at the same time. As others have already pointed out, until there is good documentation and yes, even a simple walk-through if it's warranted, it will NEVER be the year of Linux on the desktop.
When people get fed up with crippled "home" versions and paying more for "ultimate" versions, Linux will surely take off.
To use a line from The Patriot:
You dream, General.
People, average people, don't care that there are different versions of Windows. People, average people, want something that allows them to get on to the internet, send email, maybe play some online games and a few other things.
People, average people, just want something that works. They don't want to have to go to a command line and remember some obscure phrase to accomplish something. Until Linux becomes more like a Mac or Windows environment, Linux will not take off for the average person.
Your comment reminds me of the scene from Oceans 11 where they going to produce an EMP, or something similar, and the guy is standing away from the van containing the device. As he raises his hand to push the shiny red button, he moves his free hand to cover his nether region.
The look on his face as he scrunches when he presses the button is hilarious.
Stop it. Just stop it. Not only are you a coward by posting anonymously, but the nine mile debris field has been debunked REPEATEDLY, including by police officers on the scene.
The nine mile debris field consisted of bits of paper which may or may not have been from the flight when it impacted in the field.
Further, that nine mile figure is bogus. People used MapQuest to find the distance between the crash site and the supposed debris field. Sure, nine miles if you drive by road, but roughly 2.5 miles in a straight line.
The debris field WAS NOT composed of engine parts, seats, body parts or anything else heavier than a piece of paper.
Your friend is also an idiot as there are nearly a dozen eyewitnesses to the plane coming down, some of which watched the plane, intact, nose dive into the ground. Had the plane been shot down, it would have displayed some semblance of damage including smoke and/or fire trailing from it. Not one eyewitness described seeing anything of the sort.
Reminds me of when Fox News tried to sue The Simpsons, of Fox Enterntainment, who put a fake news crawl across the bottom of the screen because it could confuse the viewers into thinking the items were real news items.
Same thing with Bill O'Reilly who tried to sue Al Franken when Franken used Bill's image on the cover of his book, claiming people might think Bill endorsed the book. Fox also participated because Franken used the words, 'Fair and Balanced' on the cover and, like Bill, claimed people would think Fox had a hand in the book.
Guess it just goes to show the mentality of some groups of people.
What about asteroids? Are they all composed of rock and such or do some of them have uranium deposits? Have any of our probes detected uranium somewhere in the belt?
I realize the inherent and monumental tasks involved in getting to an asteroid laden with uranium, moving it towards Earth then mining it, but I'm asking if uranium has been found anywhere else we could potentially get at.
As an aside, what about undersea mining? Any uranium deposits found in the ocean depths?
Slashdot Mirror
The vast majority of companies said they are having trouble finding enough money and enough qualified applicants to keep their data center staff at healthy levels.
It's because they filter out qualified people who use an AOL email account!
My gosh standing in line to get money is so 1980
Yes, how horrible it is that for a brief moment in time, people had to revert to an older way which just works (albeit slightly more slowly).
Well Calleigh, just because it's appetite sucks,
Mmmmmm, Calleigh.
Mmmmm, appetite for sucking.
My apologies to Miss Procter. I'm sure she's heard worse. But then, how do we know she doesn't have such an appetite?
the latitudes where coffee is grown may conceivably shift north and south a bit. Big deal.
Except there's that little bit of not having the correct soil or location to plant the coffee trees. It's not just about the temperature, it's about the area itself.
There's a reason grapes aren't grown in the desert. For more information.
Then there's the matter of time. Even if you plant the seeds to grow new plants, it takes years for the trees to full develop and produce decent beans.
while I wait for slow eaters in the family to finish eating.
I would be characterized as a slow eater and if that annoys you, tough. Eating a meal is one of the few times one has during the day to relax and take your time. Granted, McD's can't quite be called a good meal, but regardless, eating a meal slowly is a surefire way not to eat too much and not get fat.
People talk about living life to the fullest, how about enjoying it for once.
Next question.
It's not film. It's digital. Think a big, honkin' flash drive
Your sig is somehow appropriate.
Does this mean that every cell will have one of these installed in it, or is it used when officers think someone might be carrying contraband? i.e. they are taken to a special location.
If a person is carrying contraband, can they reach down and grab the package without the officers seeing them do so before the device activates?
Without the use of a telescope you could show your kids the surface of the sun by creating your own pinhole box.
Get as large a rectangular box as you can manage which has its ends as large as possible. Affix a large piece of white paper on the inside of one end, close the box then tape all the seams so light can't enter. Take a pin and punch a hole in the end opposite of the one you put the paper on.
Finally, cut a hole in the side of the box near the end where the paper is. When you look into this hole, you should be looking at an angle down towards the white sheet of paper. Start with a smaller hole and keep making larger until you have the size you need.
Finally, point the end with the pinhole towards the sun then look in the hole in the side of the box. When you align the box correctly, you should see an image of the sun projected onto the white sheet of paper which is perfectly safe for your kids to look at. If you're really lucky, you might see a sunspot or two.
Keep this box so when there is a solar eclipse viewable in your area, your kids can have a great view without having to stare at the sun with funky glasses on.
It's like driving ten extra miles to a store where you can get a 5 dollar discount. "Yeah but I save 5 dollers!" -"Yeah and you pay 6 dollar worth of fuel, you complete retard!"
.89 cents to drive one way. Doubling that, round trip, means I'm spending $1.78 to save $5.
Let's break out this charge and see how it really works (yes, I'm being a pedantic twit, but it's worth the effort in this case):
The average price per gallon of gas in the U.S. is $2.65. My car, a 1998 Honda, gets, on average, 33 mph doing my normal driving. If I have to drive to an extra ten miles to save $5 on something, that means it costs me, roughly,
Or, put another way, I'm still saving over $3 on that particular item when fuel costs are calculated in.
Obviously, if you're driving an SUV or truck, then it is not worth your effort to save that $5 since your fuel mileage is substantially worse than mine and any savings in cost is negated by the cost of fuel used to drive that distance.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=5
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
Will people even begin to doubt the most rigorous sciences like Mathematics and Physics?
Some people already doubt science in general, to limit it to just math and physics belies the current trend of refusing to accept what science, in all its forms, tells us.
Men on the moon? Nope, can't be done because of . WTC towers collapsed because of structural damage compounded by extreme temperatures? Nope, it was a government plot because . Vaccines help prevent acquisition of serious diseases? Nope, doesn't work because . Evolution? It's impossible because .
There will always be those who will find any excuse to deny the scientific evidence. That doesn't mean one shouldn't question the evidence or how it's gathered. Rather, instead of saying, "See! They used the word 'hide' so they must be falsifying the data!", one should look at the entire context of quotes and information to see what is meant.
Science, in all its forms, is one of those areas where there will always be discussion about something, but once someone, or some group, comes up with an explanation, their data and processes can be checked by others to see if those people get the same results. If not, go back and see what the differences were. If still failure, back to square one.
I am reminded of the one CSI episode* where after doing all the evidence gathering, interviewing suspects and finally finding the body, the only conclusion was that the girl, upon trying to retrieve her waste can from a garbage bin, had been partially crushed between the bin and the wall when a vehicle came by and accidentally clipped the bin.
The parents were sure their daughter was murdered and planned on hiring their own investigator to find out who killed her. Grissom remarks, "Mrs. Rycoff there is no one guilty of this."
"Because you say so?"
"Because the evidence says so."
*The episode is called Chaos Theory and is one of my all-time favorite CSI shows. Right up there with Fur and Loathing (the plushy and furry convention episode).
the guys walking around their cars every morning to check five times if their windows were up and doors were locked,
Funny you should say that. Last year I was awoken late at night (midnight? 1 AM?) by the sound of car door handles being activated. I looked out the window thinking someone was checking for unlocked doors and saw one of the folks who lives on the back side of the building doing exactly what you described.
I watched him as he walked around the car checking every door (all four of them), coming to the front and looking at something on the hood, then go back to the driver door and check that it was locked before repeating the entire process again. I don't think he did it five times but it was at least twice if not three times.
Reminded me of Monk. If one were cruel or sadistic, once the guy had walked around the car once, you'd drag him away so he couldn't check again and tie him to a chair. Imagine the energy one could get from the all twitching as he tried to get back to his car to check the doors!
Especially considering 10% of US internet users are still on dial up.
Why yes, yes I am (for various technical and economic reasons)
I'm really late in replying to your comments, however I happened to read a BBC article which quantifies what you have found out. Link to the article.
The study found that on the whole, marriages which last longer and have a greater chance of success (i.e. not divorcing) occur when the woman is at least five years younger than the man AND the woman is smarter than the man.
Take the study as you will.
Or could I live on top of a radio tower and do just fine?
Ya know, it's amazing you should be asking this question. Here's a story from near me that will answer your question.
Lee Child, author of the Jack Reacher novels, actually likes the simplicity because he can concentrate on the words themselves.
Someone at work suggested I might like his books. I found one at a used book stand and started reading. The words to describe his writing style are stilted and simplistic. I felt like I was running into a wall at the end of every sentence. (get the hint?)
I think I got through the first paragraph before skipping around the next few pages then finally giving up. There might be an interesting story somewhere in those pages, but I couldn't stay around long enough to find it.
If someone makes a good piece of software, it'd be great if someone else came along to document it, and everybody wins.
Here's an idea: how about the person who did the actual work do the documentation? That way, since they know all the ins and outs, someone else doesn't have to pester them to find out how to do something and document it.
Yeah, yeah. That would be too easy and make sense. Let someone else take care of the problem because I'm too lazy.
There is no reason in this day and age that the person/people creating these apps can't provide documentation at the same time. As others have already pointed out, until there is good documentation and yes, even a simple walk-through if it's warranted, it will NEVER be the year of Linux on the desktop.
When people get fed up with crippled "home" versions and paying more for "ultimate" versions, Linux will surely take off.
To use a line from The Patriot:
You dream, General.
People, average people, don't care that there are different versions of Windows. People, average people, want something that allows them to get on to the internet, send email, maybe play some online games and a few other things.
People, average people, just want something that works. They don't want to have to go to a command line and remember some obscure phrase to accomplish something. Until Linux becomes more like a Mac or Windows environment, Linux will not take off for the average person.
Your comment reminds me of the scene from Oceans 11 where they going to produce an EMP, or something similar, and the guy is standing away from the van containing the device. As he raises his hand to push the shiny red button, he moves his free hand to cover his nether region.
The look on his face as he scrunches when he presses the button is hilarious.
Stop it. Just stop it. Not only are you a coward by posting anonymously, but the nine mile debris field has been debunked REPEATEDLY, including by police officers on the scene.
The nine mile debris field consisted of bits of paper which may or may not have been from the flight when it impacted in the field.
Further, that nine mile figure is bogus. People used MapQuest to find the distance between the crash site and the supposed debris field. Sure, nine miles if you drive by road, but roughly 2.5 miles in a straight line.
The debris field WAS NOT composed of engine parts, seats, body parts or anything else heavier than a piece of paper.
Your friend is also an idiot as there are nearly a dozen eyewitnesses to the plane coming down, some of which watched the plane, intact, nose dive into the ground. Had the plane been shot down, it would have displayed some semblance of damage including smoke and/or fire trailing from it. Not one eyewitness described seeing anything of the sort.
End of story, full stop.
and you should know that people love retarded animals.
As evidenced by the popularity of "reality" shows.
According to this article, the glitch is no longer.
Apparently they fixed the glitch so the problem worked itself out naturally.
Reminds me of when Fox News tried to sue The Simpsons, of Fox Enterntainment, who put a fake news crawl across the bottom of the screen because it could confuse the viewers into thinking the items were real news items.
Same thing with Bill O'Reilly who tried to sue Al Franken when Franken used Bill's image on the cover of his book, claiming people might think Bill endorsed the book. Fox also participated because Franken used the words, 'Fair and Balanced' on the cover and, like Bill, claimed people would think Fox had a hand in the book.
Guess it just goes to show the mentality of some groups of people.
Feel free to point and laugh but I'm curious.
What about asteroids? Are they all composed of rock and such or do some of them have uranium deposits? Have any of our probes detected uranium somewhere in the belt?
I realize the inherent and monumental tasks involved in getting to an asteroid laden with uranium, moving it towards Earth then mining it, but I'm asking if uranium has been found anywhere else we could potentially get at.
As an aside, what about undersea mining? Any uranium deposits found in the ocean depths?