...they ARE going to throw people in jail for "acting funny"...
If you believe that, you're hopelessly irrational. Go read the article... it doesn't offer any evidence that there is any truth to such absurd notions. People on this site REALLY need to learn to think critically, and to apply those skills to things they read.
From the article linked by the less accurate and more sensationalized Newsweek article:
A behavior specialist may decide to move in to help the suspicious passenger recover belongings that have passed through the baggage X-ray. Or he may ask where the traveler's going. If more alarms go off, officers will "refer" the person to law enforcement officials for further questioning.
...
...The strategy is based on a time-tested and successful Israeli model, but in the United States, the scrutiny is much less invasive, Ekman said. American officers receive 56 hours of training -- far less than their Israeli counterparts_ because U.S. officials want to be less intrusive.
It doesn't say anything about "arresting" people. That's retarded, and you're jumping to bullshit conclusions because you think it makes you sound cool among the faux-intellectuals that populate the slashdot comments.
Mod me down! Put all of your insecurities into it! I know the truth hurts... oppress me! Shut down my dissent! Police these forums with all of the fascistic tendencies you project onto people with whom you disagree!
You're acting like they're going to throw people in jail for "acting funny". That's an unfounded and uneducated assumption to make, just as the tags "oppression" and "policestate"--both of which are prominently featured as I write this--are juvenile and unfounded. Giving an extra look at people who act suspiciously, which is all that will happen, is a no-brainer. This type of profiling is based on science. Why do you hate science?
I would love to see a psychological profile done on the slashdot community as a whole. The positions you get behind and the recurring irrelevant tags that you use are indicative of a remarkable level of group-think, and a sort of cliqueiness that I personally interpret as a lot of self-esteem issues and a need to fit in, even if it means blindly and uncritically accepting absurdly fantastic ideas... almost like conspiracy theorists, but not quite as batshit crazy and uneducated--but close.
And he gave a pretty damned good answer. I think a lot of people will be confused about why some people (lots on Slashdot, apparently) can't get their heads around the idea that creationism and evolution aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Huckabee doesn't seem to be anti-evolution, just pro-creation.
You should go read RealClimate sometime. It is characteristic of the entire political climate science community, not the climate science community as a whole. It's the Manns, the Hansens, the Gavin Schmidts, etc.
Of course the US record is just a small fraction of the global record, and, thus, this error didn't affect global temperatures by much. What is troubling is that an error like this could be overlooked--because the underlying data is not subjected to any public scrutiny--in the freakin' United States. The question, then, is what major flaws might be hidden in the GLOBAL data if the most sophisticated and well-maintained network in the world has this sort of bad data? If the US data was off by 0.3C, what might we find in Africa? Or rural SE Asia? Or Siberia? The former Soviet bloc states?
The fact is that we put a remarkable amount of faith in the data from surface stations--which are adjusted for time of measurement, then adjusted again for physical location, then adjusted again for urbanization (based on other stations which have, themselves, been adjusted), and those adjustments are NOT well documented and there is no empirical evidence to support the "correctness" of the adjustments. It is reasonable to assume that if we have major errors, the rest of the world as a whole has WORSE errors since their networks are not nearly as well-maintained as ours and they are starting with more suspect data in the first place.
Because it isn't like this sort of thing EVER happens with giant, inefficient, incompetent government bureaucracies (like the VA). The difference is that in this case--with a free market--the people who suck go out of business, while the VA just says "whoops" and continues to suck. Okay, you may resume your blind faith-based, anti-capitalist religious babbling now. Chomsky told you to think something, so it must be true!
Disclaimer: I certainly don't want to turn the CIA as an entity into a bunch of nice guys...
They probably are a bunch of nice guys. Just because a bunch of cynical half-wits on slashdot tell you that you are supposed to think a certain way doesn't mean it's right.
I think he is saying that he would rather that his OS doesn't play HD content at all if it won't let him watch movies he steals.
Once again, people... stop stealing shit and your lives will become much easier.
Sure, the weatherman is predicting different things. But the weatherman is making his predictions based on computer models that are MUCH simpler, involve data that can be very easily measured (atmospheric pressure, wind speeds, etc), and involving mechanisms which are well-understood.
Climatologists, on the other hand, are making predictions based on models of poorly-understood and unimaginably complicated systems, with all sorts of known and unknown feedbacks over centuries, using data that can't be measured but, rather, must be "guessed" using complicated statistical methods. Did you know that the "margin of error" for the estimated global surface temperature is several times larger than the "observed warming"?
So it isn't entirely unreasonable to distrust the climatologists complicated models when the weathermans much simpler models don't always perform well. In my experience, however, weathermen get it right most of the time... for what its worth.
They used more words, and described what Google is doing less effectively. From Google's official blog:
When you reach the limit of free storage (i.e., 1GB for Picasa Web Albums, 2.8GB for Gmail), consider this your overflow solution. Plans start at $20/year for 6GB (yes, $5 cheaper than before), with larger plans ranging up to 250GB.
When you go to the official storage management page, the first thing it says is, "Each Google service offers you some free storage.", and then gives you a nice visual representation of how much you have used.
...if these morons cause Netflix to have to shutdown this service before they even get the good content on it. Good fucking grief... just learn to quit stealing shit. It isn't that complicated.
Re:Don't you mean "according to the publisher"?
on
OpenGL SuperBible
·
· Score: 1
I don't think there's anything bloated about that statement. The "world's best" is the only thing that sounds like marketing, but we're also talking about the 4th edition of a well-established and popular book that can make that sort of claim.
Only a person who works for M$ would consider telling the truth to be "damage".
Now we all know that you are young, inexperienced, and haven't worked in the real work. "No camera" rules are quite common at large companies... we have one where I work, in fact. Corporate espionage and IP protection are taken very seriously in the real world, where things actually matter--and especially where security concerns are integral to the company's business.
The guy who was fired for breaking a very simple-to-follow no cameras rule has absolutely no relevance to the story we are discussing. He wasn't fired for voicing some opinion upon which Microsoft had not even commented, he was fired for breaking a rule.
I think this article pretty much sums up all of the juvenility and the lack of sophistication and intelligence of the slashdot community. To think it is somehow useful to crash the browser of someone visiting your website is to be a complete moron and a jackass... the whole "I Hate M$" thing was cute for a while, but its time to grow the fuck up for a lot of you people.
Slashdot Mirror
If you believe that, you're hopelessly irrational. Go read the article... it doesn't offer any evidence that there is any truth to such absurd notions. People on this site REALLY need to learn to think critically, and to apply those skills to things they read.
From the article linked by the less accurate and more sensationalized Newsweek article:It doesn't say anything about "arresting" people. That's retarded, and you're jumping to bullshit conclusions because you think it makes you sound cool among the faux-intellectuals that populate the slashdot comments.
Mod me down! Put all of your insecurities into it! I know the truth hurts... oppress me! Shut down my dissent! Police these forums with all of the fascistic tendencies you project onto people with whom you disagree!
LOL. Feel better?
You're acting like they're going to throw people in jail for "acting funny". That's an unfounded and uneducated assumption to make, just as the tags "oppression" and "policestate"--both of which are prominently featured as I write this--are juvenile and unfounded. Giving an extra look at people who act suspiciously, which is all that will happen, is a no-brainer. This type of profiling is based on science. Why do you hate science?
I would love to see a psychological profile done on the slashdot community as a whole. The positions you get behind and the recurring irrelevant tags that you use are indicative of a remarkable level of group-think, and a sort of cliqueiness that I personally interpret as a lot of self-esteem issues and a need to fit in, even if it means blindly and uncritically accepting absurdly fantastic ideas... almost like conspiracy theorists, but not quite as batshit crazy and uneducated--but close.
And he gave a pretty damned good answer. I think a lot of people will be confused about why some people (lots on Slashdot, apparently) can't get their heads around the idea that creationism and evolution aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Huckabee doesn't seem to be anti-evolution, just pro-creation.
You should go read RealClimate sometime. It is characteristic of the entire political climate science community, not the climate science community as a whole. It's the Manns, the Hansens, the Gavin Schmidts, etc.
Of course the US record is just a small fraction of the global record, and, thus, this error didn't affect global temperatures by much. What is troubling is that an error like this could be overlooked--because the underlying data is not subjected to any public scrutiny--in the freakin' United States. The question, then, is what major flaws might be hidden in the GLOBAL data if the most sophisticated and well-maintained network in the world has this sort of bad data? If the US data was off by 0.3C, what might we find in Africa? Or rural SE Asia? Or Siberia? The former Soviet bloc states?
The fact is that we put a remarkable amount of faith in the data from surface stations--which are adjusted for time of measurement, then adjusted again for physical location, then adjusted again for urbanization (based on other stations which have, themselves, been adjusted), and those adjustments are NOT well documented and there is no empirical evidence to support the "correctness" of the adjustments. It is reasonable to assume that if we have major errors, the rest of the world as a whole has WORSE errors since their networks are not nearly as well-maintained as ours and they are starting with more suspect data in the first place.
...who said with 95% certainty that 1998 was the hottest year EVAH in the US. It's called hubris. They have too much of it.
Good luck finding a list of stations that were used to do urbanization adjustments to a particular stations record. It's not there. It's a secret.
...something like 27 different times.
You're assuming that the person who wrote the article understands the distinction between a "firewall", an open port, or any number of other things.
Because it isn't like this sort of thing EVER happens with giant, inefficient, incompetent government bureaucracies (like the VA). The difference is that in this case--with a free market--the people who suck go out of business, while the VA just says "whoops" and continues to suck.
Okay, you may resume your blind faith-based, anti-capitalist religious babbling now. Chomsky told you to think something, so it must be true!
Disclaimer: I certainly don't want to turn the CIA as an entity into a bunch of nice guys...
They probably are a bunch of nice guys. Just because a bunch of cynical half-wits on slashdot tell you that you are supposed to think a certain way doesn't mean it's right.
I think he is saying that he would rather that his OS doesn't play HD content at all if it won't let him watch movies he steals. Once again, people... stop stealing shit and your lives will become much easier.
freepository.com used to have free accounts for CVS. I don't know if its still free.
Sure, the weatherman is predicting different things. But the weatherman is making his predictions based on computer models that are MUCH simpler, involve data that can be very easily measured (atmospheric pressure, wind speeds, etc), and involving mechanisms which are well-understood.
Climatologists, on the other hand, are making predictions based on models of poorly-understood and unimaginably complicated systems, with all sorts of known and unknown feedbacks over centuries, using data that can't be measured but, rather, must be "guessed" using complicated statistical methods. Did you know that the "margin of error" for the estimated global surface temperature is several times larger than the "observed warming"?
So it isn't entirely unreasonable to distrust the climatologists complicated models when the weathermans much simpler models don't always perform well. In my experience, however, weathermen get it right most of the time... for what its worth.
...if these morons cause Netflix to have to shutdown this service before they even get the good content on it. Good fucking grief... just learn to quit stealing shit. It isn't that complicated.
You'll be more informed than the submitter.
I don't think there's anything bloated about that statement. The "world's best" is the only thing that sounds like marketing, but we're also talking about the 4th edition of a well-established and popular book that can make that sort of claim.
Only a person who works for M$ would consider telling the truth to be "damage". Now we all know that you are young, inexperienced, and haven't worked in the real work. "No camera" rules are quite common at large companies... we have one where I work, in fact. Corporate espionage and IP protection are taken very seriously in the real world, where things actually matter--and especially where security concerns are integral to the company's business. The guy who was fired for breaking a very simple-to-follow no cameras rule has absolutely no relevance to the story we are discussing. He wasn't fired for voicing some opinion upon which Microsoft had not even commented, he was fired for breaking a rule.
That's absurd. Any employee who says something that doesn't necessarily reflect the "official" view of the company should be fired?
Pretty self-explanatory. What is it with slashdot?
It's easier than introspection, huh? Dipshits.
I think this article pretty much sums up all of the juvenility and the lack of sophistication and intelligence of the slashdot community. To think it is somehow useful to crash the browser of someone visiting your website is to be a complete moron and a jackass... the whole "I Hate M$" thing was cute for a while, but its time to grow the fuck up for a lot of you people.
I understand that, of late, the game is rigged on /.
That's like saying that the Special Olympics is rigged.