Probably not the city engineers. It's not their job to catch usability issues, only safety issues, as related to applicable codes. But Apple did NOT design the building themselves. They hired a consulting engineering firm to do it for them. Those guys should have paid attention to it.
I love to pick on Apple as much as the next guy, but this is really an oversight from the civil engineering firm they hired to design it for them. The owner can have as much input as they want, and tell the architect what they'd like, but ultimately, the engineers are supposed to do a feasibility analysis that takes into account foreseeable conditions. They definitely have to design for snow loads for one, and if you have funny shapes, you should be aware that snow will accumulate differently than on a flat surface, and you should be doing some numerical modelling to try to predict this. It's time consuming, and expensive, but that's part of the reason fancy buildings cost more than cookie-cutter ones.
That's it. I'm Boycotting all Disney products. I hope people wake up and start doing this before they completely destroy the entertainment industry. I was feeling uneasy about them for a while, but this is the last straw. They need to be made to divest of a large part of their recent acquisitions. This kind of monopoly is good for no one.
How is it being elitist complaining that the measurement used is that which only a tiny fraction of temperature unit users everywhere use? If anything, I would say it's the opposite.
I will definitely not be wasting money on it. After the total mess Jar Jar Abrams did with episode 7. Until Ep. 7, I never thought I'd be so disgusted with Start Wars that I wouldn't even want to see any more of it. They should have given it to someone who gives a damned about the Start Wars universe, and not trust that bozo. If we learned anything from the prequels is that Jar Jar can't be trusted with anything.
Plus, the headline makes it look like Einstein didn't believe stars could bend light of other stars, when what he doubted was our ability to observe it.
In other news, they seem to imply that nothing can currently be done against this very specific threat... however, if you set the numerical password entry to be with randomized number location, it seems to me that the gyro is not very useful, as it will provide random data. This feature has been around for a while, and is good against the good ol' eyeball mark 1 infiltration app too (unless the observer is so far over your shoulder that they can directly observe the numbers, obviously).
Shouldn't the government have an obligation to limit the market price of such drugs? I'm sure the rapacious companies charging exuberant amounts for the drugs would yell "free market" to excuse their prices, but the truth is that a drug under anti-competitive patent protection does not exist in a free market. Since the government provides the protection against competition to the manufacturer, shouldn't the same government, whose primary obligation is towards its flesh and blood citizens, and not its corporate citizens, have the obligation to regulate the price of drugs used for the treatment of illness? To lose the price restriction, a company should be obligated to lose the protection against competition. That only seems fair, and a proper use of the patent system. Right now it seems to be broken and abused by the industry.
That's different, the mechanic gets money from you directly (the physician analogy is not relevant in many countries). The people writing these reports are NOT getting a direct benefit from th reports. It's a lazy statement of someone unaware of their function. Most likely it's a group of people from academia, public works and yes industry that make the point. While the guys from the industry may have some monetary interest, it doesn't affect the other groups.
Actually, if you bother reading those reports, you'll find out that what they advocate is not waiting until things are about to crumble to make the investment because the work is so close to being a rebuild that it's much more expensive over any given period of time to do so than quickly making a little patchwork early on. The reports actually advocate spending less money on repairs... by doing them in a timely manner. So the entire analogy is flawed.
You don't even need to be a civil engineer to understand it either. If you've ever lived in a house whose owner decided to not spend the money to fix a little leak in pipes, or in the roof only to have to dish out an order of magnitude larger amount of money to fix the damages resulting from the neglect, then you have a healthy appreciation for the soundness of the advice.
But Infrastructure spending is not sexy, as John Oliver would no doubt agree.
How is "No problem" less polite than "You are welcome"? To me, you are welcome has a connotation that I was expecting thanks from you (which is really kind of impolite), while "no problem" or "don't mention it" imply that you are really diminishing the effort that it caused you so that the thanker should not feel in too much of a debt. I think either of those two are actually more polite than "you are welcome".
This is likely nothing to worry about... if as hypothesized it is related to the magnetic flip. As the summary states this happens "on average" every 300000 years, and that's way more frequent than the return period of mass extinctions. Of course, this hypothesis could be wrong...
What the article I read described was that the glass had a high modulus of elasticity. There was absolutely no reference to strength, or ductility, both properties that would make me call the glass "strong" or "impact resistant". It's just stiff glass. Period. By the way, almost all grades of steel have about the same modulus of elasticity, even when their strength is vastly different, so the one does not imply the other.
Exactly. In my university it's the same. It's not with nefarious intent. But I can call campus security and report an accident in building so, and so in room such. It means something for campus security who can get someone there quickly both because of close location and because of their familiarity with the location. They are in a better position to contact and guide emergency personnel to the proper location. It avoids confusion and can save lives.
The next question is: why would you filter tap water after it's already been treated? I'd be more concerned about the microbial population of my home filter than about the quality of the tap water in most places that have water treatment plants.
As for the juices, unlike sodas, you do get vitamins unfortunately, even without added sugar, fruits that you don't have to chew or digest to assimilate, means that you get all those extra fruit servings, without feeling satiated and without the solids slowing down the assimilation rate. It's only a small step up from sodas to juices.
It seems to me that the logical step before establishing a permanent base anywhere else in the solar system we need to have a permanent presence on the Moon. It is the logical step to develop the knowledge and experience needed for such an endeavour. It is close enough to earth that "relief missions" can be contemplated, yet hard enough to reach that you better had a solid plan in place requiring it to be self-sustaining. Once the bugs are out of the system on the Moon is the time to take on Mars. And yes, permanent settlements are needed to make it worth doing, otherwise they are nothing but very expensive vacations for a little bunch of people. The resource commitment needed to reach it, means that from the start, the manned mission should aim to be a permanent settlement.
Now that I have added my little bit of uninformed opinion to the general Slashdot noise, I consider my day complete.
I use Gnome on a Desktop exclusively. I haven't tried 3.18, but in general, GNOME 3 made my desktop experience more enjoyable. In particular, dynamic virtual desktop allocation, mouse swipe the the corner to reveal the dash etc, are actually very productivity enhancing for me. I don't know how good the interface would be on a tablet, but to me, it is definitely a superior desktop paradigm for the desktop. Gnome shell applets and various settings can be tweaked to improve on the overall experience (like a mounted volume indicator on the task bar etc.). The only issue I have with Gnome, is that Gnome Tweaks should not be an optional additional application to install, but should be integrated in the default settings of Gnome. Personally, I wouldn't go back to the antiquated hierarchical menu, as my apps are much easier to find now (this I think is definitely more oriented towards the desktop, as typing in search terms in a touch screen sucks).
I'm sorry. The journals do not have "staff" that peer review the journals. The peers of the authors, i.e. other authors do all the peer review. The only job of the journals is managing those lists of reviewers and assign reviews. With electronic publishing reducing costs, and software to do most of that "managing" there is very little value to those journals. Sincerely, libraries should pitch into a "common" pool. On a national basis perhaps, they should create a number of peer reviewed journals for the various topics.. and instead of spending that 20000$ per journal, they could contribute to the administrative infrastructure of those new journals which could then offer their content openly. I consider that my university's library funds would be better spent that way than paying the indecent fees for minimal contribution from the journals. I certainly know that as I reviewer I don't receive a dime from any of the publications that I review articles for. I think that is OK, but I don't think the indecent cost of subscribing to journals or publishing in open access is justified given that the vast majority of the potential cost of the peer review process is already being externalized by the journals.
Unfortunately, most economists subscribe to fallacy of infinite growth. If limiting factors were understood, then a stable economy at its capacity (and healthy) would be more clearly differentiated from a stagnating economy (stable, but below capacity), and you would not have to suffer these collapses. Collapses are a sign of an unhealthy ecosystem, and the same is true of the economy. Until the economy is treated as a subcomponent of the ecosystems it depends on, unfortunately, this is not likely to stop.
Slashdot Mirror
I completely agree. It's whoever Apple hired to designed who are at fault for this.
Probably not the city engineers. It's not their job to catch usability issues, only safety issues, as related to applicable codes. But Apple did NOT design the building themselves. They hired a consulting engineering firm to do it for them. Those guys should have paid attention to it.
I love to pick on Apple as much as the next guy, but this is really an oversight from the civil engineering firm they hired to design it for them. The owner can have as much input as they want, and tell the architect what they'd like, but ultimately, the engineers are supposed to do a feasibility analysis that takes into account foreseeable conditions. They definitely have to design for snow loads for one, and if you have funny shapes, you should be aware that snow will accumulate differently than on a flat surface, and you should be doing some numerical modelling to try to predict this. It's time consuming, and expensive, but that's part of the reason fancy buildings cost more than cookie-cutter ones.
That's it. I'm Boycotting all Disney products. I hope people wake up and start doing this before they completely destroy the entertainment industry. I was feeling uneasy about them for a while, but this is the last straw. They need to be made to divest of a large part of their recent acquisitions. This kind of monopoly is good for no one.
I don't understand sarcasm.
How is it being elitist complaining that the measurement used is that which only a tiny fraction of temperature unit users everywhere use? If anything, I would say it's the opposite.
I will definitely not be wasting money on it. After the total mess Jar Jar Abrams did with episode 7. Until Ep. 7, I never thought I'd be so disgusted with Start Wars that I wouldn't even want to see any more of it. They should have given it to someone who gives a damned about the Start Wars universe, and not trust that bozo. If we learned anything from the prequels is that Jar Jar can't be trusted with anything.
Plus, the headline makes it look like Einstein didn't believe stars could bend light of other stars, when what he doubted was our ability to observe it.
What? And here I thought Steve as an atmospheric phenomenon. I never knew it was an hermaphrodite entrepreneur. It's so confusing.
I'm not that excited. Call me when they launch the Sundiver Project.
In other news, they seem to imply that nothing can currently be done against this very specific threat... however, if you set the numerical password entry to be with randomized number location, it seems to me that the gyro is not very useful, as it will provide random data. This feature has been around for a while, and is good against the good ol' eyeball mark 1 infiltration app too (unless the observer is so far over your shoulder that they can directly observe the numbers, obviously).
Shouldn't the government have an obligation to limit the market price of such drugs? I'm sure the rapacious companies charging exuberant amounts for the drugs would yell "free market" to excuse their prices, but the truth is that a drug under anti-competitive patent protection does not exist in a free market. Since the government provides the protection against competition to the manufacturer, shouldn't the same government, whose primary obligation is towards its flesh and blood citizens, and not its corporate citizens, have the obligation to regulate the price of drugs used for the treatment of illness? To lose the price restriction, a company should be obligated to lose the protection against competition. That only seems fair, and a proper use of the patent system. Right now it seems to be broken and abused by the industry.
That's different, the mechanic gets money from you directly (the physician analogy is not relevant in many countries). The people writing these reports are NOT getting a direct benefit from th reports. It's a lazy statement of someone unaware of their function. Most likely it's a group of people from academia, public works and yes industry that make the point. While the guys from the industry may have some monetary interest, it doesn't affect the other groups.
Actually, if you bother reading those reports, you'll find out that what they advocate is not waiting until things are about to crumble to make the investment because the work is so close to being a rebuild that it's much more expensive over any given period of time to do so than quickly making a little patchwork early on. The reports actually advocate spending less money on repairs... by doing them in a timely manner. So the entire analogy is flawed.
You don't even need to be a civil engineer to understand it either. If you've ever lived in a house whose owner decided to not spend the money to fix a little leak in pipes, or in the roof only to have to dish out an order of magnitude larger amount of money to fix the damages resulting from the neglect, then you have a healthy appreciation for the soundness of the advice.
But Infrastructure spending is not sexy, as John Oliver would no doubt agree.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
How is "No problem" less polite than "You are welcome"? To me, you are welcome has a connotation that I was expecting thanks from you (which is really kind of impolite), while "no problem" or "don't mention it" imply that you are really diminishing the effort that it caused you so that the thanker should not feel in too much of a debt. I think either of those two are actually more polite than "you are welcome".
This is likely nothing to worry about... if as hypothesized it is related to the magnetic flip. As the summary states this happens "on average" every 300000 years, and that's way more frequent than the return period of mass extinctions. Of course, this hypothesis could be wrong...
That'd be handy for shoe laces. Except the reverse... they're only knots when you don't look at them.
Wine Is Not an Emulator
What the article I read described was that the glass had a high modulus of elasticity. There was absolutely no reference to strength, or ductility, both properties that would make me call the glass "strong" or "impact resistant". It's just stiff glass. Period. By the way, almost all grades of steel have about the same modulus of elasticity, even when their strength is vastly different, so the one does not imply the other.
Exactly. In my university it's the same. It's not with nefarious intent. But I can call campus security and report an accident in building so, and so in room such. It means something for campus security who can get someone there quickly both because of close location and because of their familiarity with the location. They are in a better position to contact and guide emergency personnel to the proper location. It avoids confusion and can save lives.
The next question is: why would you filter tap water after it's already been treated? I'd be more concerned about the microbial population of my home filter than about the quality of the tap water in most places that have water treatment plants.
As for the juices, unlike sodas, you do get vitamins unfortunately, even without added sugar, fruits that you don't have to chew or digest to assimilate, means that you get all those extra fruit servings, without feeling satiated and without the solids slowing down the assimilation rate. It's only a small step up from sodas to juices.
My beverage of choice: unfiltered tap water.
It seems to me that the logical step before establishing a permanent base anywhere else in the solar system we need to have a permanent presence on the Moon. It is the logical step to develop the knowledge and experience needed for such an endeavour. It is close enough to earth that "relief missions" can be contemplated, yet hard enough to reach that you better had a solid plan in place requiring it to be self-sustaining. Once the bugs are out of the system on the Moon is the time to take on Mars. And yes, permanent settlements are needed to make it worth doing, otherwise they are nothing but very expensive vacations for a little bunch of people. The resource commitment needed to reach it, means that from the start, the manned mission should aim to be a permanent settlement.
Now that I have added my little bit of uninformed opinion to the general Slashdot noise, I consider my day complete.
I use Gnome on a Desktop exclusively. I haven't tried 3.18, but in general, GNOME 3 made my desktop experience more enjoyable. In particular, dynamic virtual desktop allocation, mouse swipe the the corner to reveal the dash etc, are actually very productivity enhancing for me. I don't know how good the interface would be on a tablet, but to me, it is definitely a superior desktop paradigm for the desktop. Gnome shell applets and various settings can be tweaked to improve on the overall experience (like a mounted volume indicator on the task bar etc.). The only issue I have with Gnome, is that Gnome Tweaks should not be an optional additional application to install, but should be integrated in the default settings of Gnome. Personally, I wouldn't go back to the antiquated hierarchical menu, as my apps are much easier to find now (this I think is definitely more oriented towards the desktop, as typing in search terms in a touch screen sucks).
I'm sorry. The journals do not have "staff" that peer review the journals. The peers of the authors, i.e. other authors do all the peer review. The only job of the journals is managing those lists of reviewers and assign reviews. With electronic publishing reducing costs, and software to do most of that "managing" there is very little value to those journals. Sincerely, libraries should pitch into a "common" pool. On a national basis perhaps, they should create a number of peer reviewed journals for the various topics.. and instead of spending that 20000$ per journal, they could contribute to the administrative infrastructure of those new journals which could then offer their content openly. I consider that my university's library funds would be better spent that way than paying the indecent fees for minimal contribution from the journals. I certainly know that as I reviewer I don't receive a dime from any of the publications that I review articles for. I think that is OK, but I don't think the indecent cost of subscribing to journals or publishing in open access is justified given that the vast majority of the potential cost of the peer review process is already being externalized by the journals.
Unfortunately, most economists subscribe to fallacy of infinite growth. If limiting factors were understood, then a stable economy at its capacity (and healthy) would be more clearly differentiated from a stagnating economy (stable, but below capacity), and you would not have to suffer these collapses. Collapses are a sign of an unhealthy ecosystem, and the same is true of the economy. Until the economy is treated as a subcomponent of the ecosystems it depends on, unfortunately, this is not likely to stop.
Indeed. Sounds like Apple.