One small correction here: we're not enslaved by debt in the sense that you're talking about, we're enslaved by credit. It's entirely possible to have good credit while not being in debt, slavery notwithstanding.
Well, in this case, since 2017, only "80 of the company's now 250 employees" have opted in. That's not to say that it couldn't be exactly as you describe; though, it looks like at least they did an okay job with it.
I'm not sure about other providers, but with T-Mobile's ONE plan, after the "limit", your connection is only deprioritized rather than throttled. (On their legacy/grandfathered plans, throttling is still in place.)
The greatest cost is the continuing loss of faith & trust in our government.
cybersquid never said whose continuing loss of faith. Certainly mine and, I'd assume, his/hers as well. It appears to be an assumption that he/she was speaking for the whole United States, collectively. On topic, for my part, I'm at a loss as to how to change a system that's self-reinforcing.
If you take this office, you'll get free money. Now, your task for this session is to create laws that prevent you from getting free money.
How is that supposed to work? That's just lobbying, of all the issues we face.
This thread is dead at this point, but I thought I'd respond to you in case you got any value from this.
My viewing history is very similar to yours, with my current viewing being mostly on YouTube. The content I used to watch as a kid on PBS, Discovery and TLC is now on YouTube. Over the years, I've built up a pretty extensive list of subscriptions that provide me with as much or more than I want to watch every day.
I use an Amazon FireTV (unlike some people, I have to have a physical remote control when I'm on the couch; I don't want to have to pick up my phone and screw with that to play, pause and choose the next thing to watch) and the Firefox browser at https://youtube.com/tv (somehow I didn't even know this existed until recently, but IMO it's a quite-functional, purpose-built interface) to scroll through the newest videos from my subscriptions. I make sure I subscribe to stuff I'm interested in. Every so often, I'll go back to the Recommended list and check out videos there. What I have found is that if I feed the system, it really does consistently: (a) provide me new content that is consistent with what I'm interested in and have been watching; (b) provide me with different content that actually has led me in new directions that are horizontally relevant to my interests; and, (c) follow short-term whims in watching that shift and turn much more quickly than long term patterns.
Anyhow, I'm not sure if any of this is useful to you; if anyone else reads this and finds it useful, then: hello, there! You're welcome.
If nobody sees him until after they're dead, then basically anyone who claims to know that he exists (let alone know anything about what he is like, or what he wants) is just making shit up.
Yeah, but some people say they have a book that was written by people who knew stuff about guys who talked to a guy who said he was the son of the... thing?... that controls it all. The people in the book say they saw the guy do some crazy stuff that proved he wasn't normal.
Another interesting comment I read in this thread was that something as mundane as a minor case of Scoliosis can disqualify someone from serving in an armed force. Where is the standard? Should we open the doors to something as biologically and medically impactful as gender transition (greater) when we're already closing them to something like a minor case of Scoliosis (lesser)? Should we be arguing for allowing transgendered people just because it's a big social issue or should we consider it in the context of all other reasons that a person can be blocked from entering military service?
Disclaimer: I am a gay male (biologically and by self-identification).
Why is it different this time?
The most significant reason I think this is different is because maintaining one's transition to a different gender has biological repercussions and medical maintenance requirements. That's been stated several times in this thread. Check farther up for some interesting data from servicepeople.
"Galling" might be a bit strong; this is definitely an incremental improvement over some previous techniques. You're also making a soft implication ascribing nefarious intent to this research that I'm not sure is reasonable.
I absolutely agree with this; but, my guess is that it's another outcome of many people's hate for "the black bars". Depending on how old you are, you might remember how every movie used to be cropped and pan-and-scanned on VHS. It was a rarity for a movie to be presented in letterbox. So many people used to tell me how they "hated the black bars" when I was younger. I'd try to argue that cropping the film and applying panning in post was, to some degree, destroying the vision after which the movie was made. That argument didn't work very often.
So, yeah: the zoom + blurred background is probably just to put something there so the black bars aren't.
The biggest threat I see is the inability for people to parse mass media of info. Stats says violence is down but we feel like it is worse. Because we see all the worlds problems in a one hour segment every day.
I've said flavors of this many times, and I really do believe this is one of the greatest challenges we face, today. Most people just aren't naturally equipped with the meta-sense to parse this stuff and come out the other side. I have no idea what the solution is.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't vote for kings.
LMGTFY https://itsfoss.com/apt-vs-apt...
I wish I could pay Comcast $30/mo.
"Moana Kea" is pretty funny.
One small correction here: we're not enslaved by debt in the sense that you're talking about, we're enslaved by credit. It's entirely possible to have good credit while not being in debt, slavery notwithstanding.
"red team"|"penetration test"|"white hat"
What article?
Most studies/trials/prototypes/etc. start with a smaller sample than "everyone". Then we use what we learned there to expand or extinguish.
Well, in this case, since 2017, only "80 of the company's now 250 employees" have opted in. That's not to say that it couldn't be exactly as you describe; though, it looks like at least they did an okay job with it.
I might've gone with "hash me too movement", but then "hash" is also a verb... Tricky.
"octothorpe me too movement"? At least that can't be a verb.
I'm not sure about other providers, but with T-Mobile's ONE plan, after the "limit", your connection is only deprioritized rather than throttled. (On their legacy/grandfathered plans, throttling is still in place.)
Some potentially relevant links:
https://www.t-mobile.com/respo...
https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobi...
https://www.t-mobile.com/news/...
That's just, like, your opinion, man.
cybersquid never said whose continuing loss of faith. Certainly mine and, I'd assume, his/hers as well. It appears to be an assumption that he/she was speaking for the whole United States, collectively. On topic, for my part, I'm at a loss as to how to change a system that's self-reinforcing.
If you take this office, you'll get free money. Now, your task for this session is to create laws that prevent you from getting free money.
How is that supposed to work? That's just lobbying, of all the issues we face.
Not very simple, in this case, I think.
This thread is dead at this point, but I thought I'd respond to you in case you got any value from this.
My viewing history is very similar to yours, with my current viewing being mostly on YouTube. The content I used to watch as a kid on PBS, Discovery and TLC is now on YouTube. Over the years, I've built up a pretty extensive list of subscriptions that provide me with as much or more than I want to watch every day.
I use an Amazon FireTV (unlike some people, I have to have a physical remote control when I'm on the couch; I don't want to have to pick up my phone and screw with that to play, pause and choose the next thing to watch) and the Firefox browser at https://youtube.com/tv (somehow I didn't even know this existed until recently, but IMO it's a quite-functional, purpose-built interface) to scroll through the newest videos from my subscriptions. I make sure I subscribe to stuff I'm interested in. Every so often, I'll go back to the Recommended list and check out videos there. What I have found is that if I feed the system, it really does consistently: (a) provide me new content that is consistent with what I'm interested in and have been watching; (b) provide me with different content that actually has led me in new directions that are horizontally relevant to my interests; and, (c) follow short-term whims in watching that shift and turn much more quickly than long term patterns.
Anyhow, I'm not sure if any of this is useful to you; if anyone else reads this and finds it useful, then: hello, there! You're welcome.
Yeah, but some people say they have a book that was written by people who knew stuff about guys who talked to a guy who said he was the son of the ... thing? ... that controls it all. The people in the book say they saw the guy do some crazy stuff that proved he wasn't normal.
Except that they've apparently solicited discussion about these very topics. That's what led to the Damore memo.
It doesn't teach anything.
Another interesting comment I read in this thread was that something as mundane as a minor case of Scoliosis can disqualify someone from serving in an armed force. Where is the standard? Should we open the doors to something as biologically and medically impactful as gender transition (greater) when we're already closing them to something like a minor case of Scoliosis (lesser)? Should we be arguing for allowing transgendered people just because it's a big social issue or should we consider it in the context of all other reasons that a person can be blocked from entering military service?
It's a complicated topic.
The most significant reason I think this is different is because maintaining one's transition to a different gender has biological repercussions and medical maintenance requirements. That's been stated several times in this thread. Check farther up for some interesting data from servicepeople.
"Galling" might be a bit strong; this is definitely an incremental improvement over some previous techniques. You're also making a soft implication ascribing nefarious intent to this research that I'm not sure is reasonable.
You're brave.
Well there's your problem.
I think it's probably reasonable to interpret "C/C++" as "C or C++" in good faith to the poster.
I absolutely agree with this; but, my guess is that it's another outcome of many people's hate for "the black bars". Depending on how old you are, you might remember how every movie used to be cropped and pan-and-scanned on VHS. It was a rarity for a movie to be presented in letterbox. So many people used to tell me how they "hated the black bars" when I was younger. I'd try to argue that cropping the film and applying panning in post was, to some degree, destroying the vision after which the movie was made. That argument didn't work very often.
So, yeah: the zoom + blurred background is probably just to put something there so the black bars aren't.
I've said flavors of this many times, and I really do believe this is one of the greatest challenges we face, today. Most people just aren't naturally equipped with the meta-sense to parse this stuff and come out the other side. I have no idea what the solution is.