This doesn't matter. They'd like to be able to repair their own tractors, but do they want to own guns and prevent abortions more? If they were indifferent to those positions or already agreed with Warren's position on them, then this would help her. It might make them more friendly, but it's not going to flip many votes.
Also, why is she calling for a law? She's in Congress, she can actually propose legislation. Talk is cheap.
Like telling people inclined to engage in a little mischief is going to stop them. If anything this will just egg them on even more, but maybe that means that they'll work harder to come up with higher quality pranks. I think a great prank would be to prank the person who started this memo by pretending to be Microsoft customers annoyed over non-existent pranks. Basically make this person run around and yell at people all day for things they didn't actually do.
It's not really the whole generation, and not everyone acting that way is from this newer generation either. The problem is that the harpies that piss in everyone else's root beer float have moved to social media where they can harangue and harass anyone in numbers that were previously not possible when in meat space. Most of this younger generation revile these people, but fear their rebuke. People just need to learn to ignore them like we eventually realized that the moralizing old church ladies were toothless gits which a much bigger bark than bite.
There was also Project Ara which aimed to bring the concept to cell phones. Google killed it off a while back though. That gives me a good enough understanding that I don't think the approach is anything that consumers really care about doing. It works okay in children's toy market or in the hobbyist community, but most consumers don't possess the time, knowledge, or desire to cobble together their devices from parts.
At least it's a convenient place for people who do want stuff like this to shop. Sure there are plenty of other companies like CPC, Mouser, or Digi-Key that will probably sell you the same stuff, the selection here is a lot more limited and easier to get exactly what you want or need.
Could be that they're working on a new product that's designed to replace this that they don't want to announce yet. At some point they need to tell current customers that the product lines they have no aren't going to see future iterations or extra development so that they can make business decisions of their own. I think that Intel is also working on restructuring their company after some of the setbacks they've had in the last few years, and as a result they may be stepping away from markets where they think there's opportunity for growth, but not a lot of value at the current moment as you point out.
You might like them more for being honest and straightforward, but investors probably wouldn't. No one wants to see a big stock dip because the company didn't wrap up the bad news in enough euphemism.
No, this looks bad for both of them. Just because I'm disgusted by the type of person who would buy and view child pornography doesn't mean that I cannot also be disgusted at the people who supplied it as well.
This is completely true, but it calls to mind the old saying about the grass being greener on the other side. This makes me think that there's a more ideal solution somewhere out there, but until then we'll just repeat the cycle between consolidation and segmentation of service.
If imaginary numbers didn't really exist, planes would fall out of the sky. The solutions to equations used to determine lift for an aerofoil will contain imaginary numbers. If you disregard them and treat them as though they don't matter, you will crash. The name is poorly chosen in relationship to the reality of complex numbers and it unfortunately anchors people to a belief that they are numbers which don't exist. An unfortunate artifact of history more than anything malicious, but there are plenty of other examples of things that cease to make sense or won't operate if imaginary numbers didn't exist.
I find it funny that they want to make e-cigarettes illegal when they do fuck all about the homeless problem and the much more hardcore, already illegal drugs that they're using.
The RTX cards from NVidia can cost twice as much or more than that. $450 (and really they're closer to $300 (and it also comes with 3 free games on top of that) in reality) is a bargain by comparison. It's still stupid, but I blame all of the yahoos mining crypto-currencies and driving up the prices.
Cops in any state and NY teachers come to mind. The former have plenty of examples of outright massive fuck-ups or corruption that don't get addressed because of the strength of the police unions. NYC teachers are so infamous for this that there are numerous stories about it, and it even has a Wikipedia article.
I'm not one of those people who believe all unions are evil or that they shouldn't exist. I personally wouldn't be likely to want to join one, but if other people want to start one, that's their business and not mine. However, it's not a misinformed myth that unions will keep people around who really should be fired. Nor are the infallible in their decision making and they're as capable of any vice as the company board.
I know that there's a tendency to look at it from a perspective of an old boys' club giving a fat paycheck to one of their chums, but from another perspective, the huge chunk of money is less costly than the damage an idiotic CEO could do if left in place. If you've got a multi-billion dollar company, $20 million to get out of a contract early could be worth every penny.
But a lot of times it's also giving a fat paycheck to one of your chums, so that he'll do the same for you.
If it's actually valuable and helps improve team productivity, then it can be justified as a business expense. If the bean counters can't be made to see the value in making sure developers are productive, I think that's enough of a canary to suggest that it's not a bad time to start looking for work somewhere else.
If your time is worth hundreds of dollars per hour, then this purchase becomes justifiable if it can save you a sufficient number of hours. I don't think that there are that many people who will see significant improvements from maxing this thing out. About half of the cost is maxing out the RAM and using the largest internal SSD possible. You can save considerably by avoiding the Apple tax and installing your own RAM upgrade and you've probably already got an external RAID setup for storage if you're in the market for this kind of machine. The $2,400 for the extra 10 cores is probably the only thing that most people would want/need to touch and I expect that over a few years of use, it's likely to justify its cost.
I'm sure the specs were finished long ago, but you just know that Jony Ive is busy trying to figure out how to get the damned thing into a tesseract or some other obscure shape. Either that or we're getting a god damned sphere.
Throw out all of the tiny island nations that are in front of us because Pacific Islanders are genetically not built for the kind of diet outside of what they were historically limited to and the U.S. tops the list, or is a close second to Mexico.
The U.S. is a wealthy and prosperous nation, but we've spent too much of that on white powder that's bad for us, whether that's sugar or cocaine, and it's lead to a lot of detrimental effects.
I'll assume you're being somewhat flippant with that example. Just because someone is American doesn't mean that they're of European descent, but all you're really saying is that our students of Asian descent are better than China's students of Asian descent. The U.S. has some world-class Olympic sprinters as well, but they're not going to be of Asian descent. As a country we're reasonably good at most things because we've got people from everywhere and people from everywhere want to come to the U.S. for a variety of reasons.
In looking at some of the questions, it doesn't appear as though there should be any cultural barrier, unless they don't have stacks in Russia or recursion in China or some such nonsense. Maybe you could argue that the test is designed with the assumption that the ACM or IEEE curriculum guides are followed, but those aren't just some standard for or set by the U.S., though they may be more likely to follow it.
I won't assume that the U.S. has better students, or we'd be kicking ass in other fields as well, unless all of the really smart kids are going into CS, whereas this isn't the case in other countries. There's probably a very good explanation for the results, but I don't believe that it's a result of the test design. The U.S. is generally recognized as having some of the world's best universities. It's entirely possible that this is especially true of computer science. Maybe the standards are higher and the weaker students are culled before their fourth year. It could be a lot of things, but I doubt culture or language barrier is one of them.
I wouldn't put much stock into your common on hacking either. The reasons for that have more to do with economics and law enforcement than anything else. The authorities in Russia won't give a fuck if someone there is scamming wealthy Americans or Europeans. The same isn't true for people within those countries (and they're much easier to arrest if operating within their own country) and there's less financial incentive to try hacking people in a country a lot less well off than your own.
It's good to be number one in something. At least something other than obesity, drug use, or all of the other things that the U.S. usually tops the charts for.
A quick glance didn't turn up any information about a particular company or entity commissioning this study, but the group that did it does have a clients page that list some of the companies that they work with, which might give you an idea of who might have commissioned it. Alternatively, they might have done it themselves just so that they can market themselves and their services to those companies as a way of showing off what kind of information they can provide. It still could well be Amazon as you point out, if for no other reason than to have something to point to when the politicians hound them.
Infinitely many, but then again I'm designing a robot system that's specifically designed to kill humans.
Otherwise, I use two. I'd use one, but Amazon also has the patent for single-click Sop Trying to Kill Us buttons in addition to single-click purchasing.
I've still got an Air 2 that works fine for the light web-browsing and Netflix watching that it gets used for, and I think a lot of people are in the same situation as I am here. At least Apple has moved past putting 32 GB (or even 16 GB) on the base models. 64 GB feels like a sufficient amount for loading it up with stuff when going on a trip and not having to worry about the lack of space.
That's not the point of the video. Any testimony given to the police can not be used to your benefit in a trial, it can only harm you. If you haven't watched the video, I would suggest doing so as it points out examples of where even a truly innocent person can be hanged with their own testimony. If the police want to talk to you, have a lawyer present.
This law clearly is not about enforcing texting and driving; there is something else going on here.
Unless you want to get down right conspiratorial, it seems to be about just that, or just making it easier for police to bust people for it after the fact anyways. From the linked article, a few years ago someone lost a child due to another person texting while driving and was upset enough about it to get involved politically. This isn't too much different than a lot of other laws put into place after someone died in a tragic manner.
It's really just another case of "there oughta be a law" in action. As the law is currently written, they can only attempt to do this after a crash has occurred and they have probable cause of suspecting that a person was on their phone. It's not going to stop anyone from doing it, just make it easier for police to tack on additional charges when a crash does occur.
Slashdot Mirror
This doesn't matter. They'd like to be able to repair their own tractors, but do they want to own guns and prevent abortions more? If they were indifferent to those positions or already agreed with Warren's position on them, then this would help her. It might make them more friendly, but it's not going to flip many votes.
Also, why is she calling for a law? She's in Congress, she can actually propose legislation. Talk is cheap.
Like telling people inclined to engage in a little mischief is going to stop them. If anything this will just egg them on even more, but maybe that means that they'll work harder to come up with higher quality pranks. I think a great prank would be to prank the person who started this memo by pretending to be Microsoft customers annoyed over non-existent pranks. Basically make this person run around and yell at people all day for things they didn't actually do.
It's not really the whole generation, and not everyone acting that way is from this newer generation either. The problem is that the harpies that piss in everyone else's root beer float have moved to social media where they can harangue and harass anyone in numbers that were previously not possible when in meat space. Most of this younger generation revile these people, but fear their rebuke. People just need to learn to ignore them like we eventually realized that the moralizing old church ladies were toothless gits which a much bigger bark than bite.
There was also Project Ara which aimed to bring the concept to cell phones. Google killed it off a while back though. That gives me a good enough understanding that I don't think the approach is anything that consumers really care about doing. It works okay in children's toy market or in the hobbyist community, but most consumers don't possess the time, knowledge, or desire to cobble together their devices from parts.
At least it's a convenient place for people who do want stuff like this to shop. Sure there are plenty of other companies like CPC, Mouser, or Digi-Key that will probably sell you the same stuff, the selection here is a lot more limited and easier to get exactly what you want or need.
Could be that they're working on a new product that's designed to replace this that they don't want to announce yet. At some point they need to tell current customers that the product lines they have no aren't going to see future iterations or extra development so that they can make business decisions of their own. I think that Intel is also working on restructuring their company after some of the setbacks they've had in the last few years, and as a result they may be stepping away from markets where they think there's opportunity for growth, but not a lot of value at the current moment as you point out.
You might like them more for being honest and straightforward, but investors probably wouldn't. No one wants to see a big stock dip because the company didn't wrap up the bad news in enough euphemism.
No, this looks bad for both of them. Just because I'm disgusted by the type of person who would buy and view child pornography doesn't mean that I cannot also be disgusted at the people who supplied it as well.
This is completely true, but it calls to mind the old saying about the grass being greener on the other side. This makes me think that there's a more ideal solution somewhere out there, but until then we'll just repeat the cycle between consolidation and segmentation of service.
If imaginary numbers didn't really exist, planes would fall out of the sky. The solutions to equations used to determine lift for an aerofoil will contain imaginary numbers. If you disregard them and treat them as though they don't matter, you will crash. The name is poorly chosen in relationship to the reality of complex numbers and it unfortunately anchors people to a belief that they are numbers which don't exist. An unfortunate artifact of history more than anything malicious, but there are plenty of other examples of things that cease to make sense or won't operate if imaginary numbers didn't exist.
Judging from other bike sharing programs in big U.S. cities, most will end up in LA's concrete river. No need for any tracking.
I find it funny that they want to make e-cigarettes illegal when they do fuck all about the homeless problem and the much more hardcore, already illegal drugs that they're using.
The RTX cards from NVidia can cost twice as much or more than that. $450 (and really they're closer to $300 (and it also comes with 3 free games on top of that) in reality) is a bargain by comparison. It's still stupid, but I blame all of the yahoos mining crypto-currencies and driving up the prices.
Cops in any state and NY teachers come to mind. The former have plenty of examples of outright massive fuck-ups or corruption that don't get addressed because of the strength of the police unions. NYC teachers are so infamous for this that there are numerous stories about it, and it even has a Wikipedia article.
I'm not one of those people who believe all unions are evil or that they shouldn't exist. I personally wouldn't be likely to want to join one, but if other people want to start one, that's their business and not mine. However, it's not a misinformed myth that unions will keep people around who really should be fired. Nor are the infallible in their decision making and they're as capable of any vice as the company board.
I know that there's a tendency to look at it from a perspective of an old boys' club giving a fat paycheck to one of their chums, but from another perspective, the huge chunk of money is less costly than the damage an idiotic CEO could do if left in place. If you've got a multi-billion dollar company, $20 million to get out of a contract early could be worth every penny.
But a lot of times it's also giving a fat paycheck to one of your chums, so that he'll do the same for you.
If it's actually valuable and helps improve team productivity, then it can be justified as a business expense. If the bean counters can't be made to see the value in making sure developers are productive, I think that's enough of a canary to suggest that it's not a bad time to start looking for work somewhere else.
If your time is worth hundreds of dollars per hour, then this purchase becomes justifiable if it can save you a sufficient number of hours. I don't think that there are that many people who will see significant improvements from maxing this thing out. About half of the cost is maxing out the RAM and using the largest internal SSD possible. You can save considerably by avoiding the Apple tax and installing your own RAM upgrade and you've probably already got an external RAID setup for storage if you're in the market for this kind of machine. The $2,400 for the extra 10 cores is probably the only thing that most people would want/need to touch and I expect that over a few years of use, it's likely to justify its cost.
I'm sure the specs were finished long ago, but you just know that Jony Ive is busy trying to figure out how to get the damned thing into a tesseract or some other obscure shape. Either that or we're getting a god damned sphere.
Throw out all of the tiny island nations that are in front of us because Pacific Islanders are genetically not built for the kind of diet outside of what they were historically limited to and the U.S. tops the list, or is a close second to Mexico.
The U.S. is a wealthy and prosperous nation, but we've spent too much of that on white powder that's bad for us, whether that's sugar or cocaine, and it's lead to a lot of detrimental effects.
I'll assume you're being somewhat flippant with that example. Just because someone is American doesn't mean that they're of European descent, but all you're really saying is that our students of Asian descent are better than China's students of Asian descent. The U.S. has some world-class Olympic sprinters as well, but they're not going to be of Asian descent. As a country we're reasonably good at most things because we've got people from everywhere and people from everywhere want to come to the U.S. for a variety of reasons.
The summary does say the exam was translated. There's a set of example questions for the exam available online from the group that creates the test: https://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/MFT/pdf/mft_samp_questions_compsci.pdf
In looking at some of the questions, it doesn't appear as though there should be any cultural barrier, unless they don't have stacks in Russia or recursion in China or some such nonsense. Maybe you could argue that the test is designed with the assumption that the ACM or IEEE curriculum guides are followed, but those aren't just some standard for or set by the U.S., though they may be more likely to follow it.
I won't assume that the U.S. has better students, or we'd be kicking ass in other fields as well, unless all of the really smart kids are going into CS, whereas this isn't the case in other countries. There's probably a very good explanation for the results, but I don't believe that it's a result of the test design. The U.S. is generally recognized as having some of the world's best universities. It's entirely possible that this is especially true of computer science. Maybe the standards are higher and the weaker students are culled before their fourth year. It could be a lot of things, but I doubt culture or language barrier is one of them.
I wouldn't put much stock into your common on hacking either. The reasons for that have more to do with economics and law enforcement than anything else. The authorities in Russia won't give a fuck if someone there is scamming wealthy Americans or Europeans. The same isn't true for people within those countries (and they're much easier to arrest if operating within their own country) and there's less financial incentive to try hacking people in a country a lot less well off than your own.
It's good to be number one in something. At least something other than obesity, drug use, or all of the other things that the U.S. usually tops the charts for.
A quick glance didn't turn up any information about a particular company or entity commissioning this study, but the group that did it does have a clients page that list some of the companies that they work with, which might give you an idea of who might have commissioned it. Alternatively, they might have done it themselves just so that they can market themselves and their services to those companies as a way of showing off what kind of information they can provide. It still could well be Amazon as you point out, if for no other reason than to have something to point to when the politicians hound them.
Infinitely many, but then again I'm designing a robot system that's specifically designed to kill humans.
Otherwise, I use two. I'd use one, but Amazon also has the patent for single-click Sop Trying to Kill Us buttons in addition to single-click purchasing.
I've still got an Air 2 that works fine for the light web-browsing and Netflix watching that it gets used for, and I think a lot of people are in the same situation as I am here. At least Apple has moved past putting 32 GB (or even 16 GB) on the base models. 64 GB feels like a sufficient amount for loading it up with stuff when going on a trip and not having to worry about the lack of space.
That's not the point of the video. Any testimony given to the police can not be used to your benefit in a trial, it can only harm you. If you haven't watched the video, I would suggest doing so as it points out examples of where even a truly innocent person can be hanged with their own testimony. If the police want to talk to you, have a lawyer present.
This law clearly is not about enforcing texting and driving; there is something else going on here.
Unless you want to get down right conspiratorial, it seems to be about just that, or just making it easier for police to bust people for it after the fact anyways. From the linked article, a few years ago someone lost a child due to another person texting while driving and was upset enough about it to get involved politically. This isn't too much different than a lot of other laws put into place after someone died in a tragic manner.
It's really just another case of "there oughta be a law" in action. As the law is currently written, they can only attempt to do this after a crash has occurred and they have probable cause of suspecting that a person was on their phone. It's not going to stop anyone from doing it, just make it easier for police to tack on additional charges when a crash does occur.