I probably wouldn't agree with Boehner 100% on a lot of issues, but is was pretty clear he didn't believe lots of the nonsense that came out of the far right wing of his party. I think it became too much for him to deal with.
This may have a short term benefit, but by and large happy workers aren't productive, productive workers are happy. At the end of the day, we all like to feel like we succeeded somehow. SOME distraction and downtime that is work sponsored is beneficial, but there is a definite limit, more effective is finding ways to make the needed tasks satisfying to perform has a better long term result.
IT was never needed beyond the initial set up. Computer programs run just fine for years on end, computer hardware lasts much longer than most companies replacement cycles. You only need IT when you want new features or functionality. Problem is users want more of it then ever, as computing becomes cheaper, more and more will be demanded to do more things.
It seems pretty simple, if a gene was useful in the past at some time, it is possible it might be useful in the future. Therefore it is handy to write down old unneeded sequences just in case. How many you write down would be related to the desire to facilitate mutations or prevent them as the case may be. FYI this was actually hinted at by creationist who pointed out the probability of gene sequences spontaneously forming being astronomically low. Clearly biology was cribbing from previously useful sequences.
Right now, I don't think the law addresses that issue. In this specific case, according to the guy who shot the drone, he was waiting with shotgun ready in case the drone did pass over his property. I doubt he waited long before firing. It isn't clear if the "peeping tom" angle is legit or a smokescreen, drones aren't exactly stealthy and due to battery limitations can't really loiter that long.
Factually I think the height the drone is flying at makes a big difference also. If you take a picture of someone from a few feet away clearly pointing at them, kind of like google glasses do, yeah, that is annoying. If however they take a photo of the beach, and you happen to be in the photo over a hundred feet from the camera and you object, well, you should probably avoid ever going out in public if that is too much intrusion for you. So yeah, closely hovering over a specific group of people is one thing, but taking broad pictures of the beach and the people on it is clearly legal and ethical. If the drone is so far away you can't tell for sure if it has a camera, on public property no less, you should learn to deal with it.
It is a currently unresolved legal issue I understand, but if the drone was over 80 feet up, it *may* not have been trespassing. Owning a drone myself, I am well aware of the temptation for misuse (you need to get on good terms with your neighbors, pro tip: boys love drone and often act as great ambassadors to the parents), still they are expensive and frankly likely the drone couldn't have been hovering for a really long time due to battery life.
That said, I do look forward to better defined rules and regulations so everyone knows what to do and expect.
Which exact frequency would they use? AM, FM or PM (polarization modulation)? Would they simply polarize star light in a certain direction with a giant field or something so they didn't have to generate to much energy? Are our detectors sensitive enough? Are any detectors or transmitters sensitive enough, the universe doesn't owe us interstellar communication. Why radio waves and not cosmic rays or neutrinos? We don't really know the answer to these questions I think, we just know we don't have the needed technology. We might find something, but it is so hard to be sure when you don't really know what you are looking for.
The prime flaw in the Fermi Paradox is, we don't posses technology to communicate between stars (all but the nearest) or travel between them. Therefore, we have no reason to suspect we know what to look for. For all we know, alien communication is everywhere, all we know for sure is flying saucer haven't landed, followed by demands to see our leaders, which is dumb because they would really ask to see Elvis!
Read the actual article and paper, men weren't shown more ads for positions paying $200k+, they were shown more ads for coaching services to help them get jobs paying $200k+. It is more accurate to say that men are more willing to pay money to get help getting jobs paying $200K+, read men are relatively more desperate to get high paying jobs. This matches pretty well with what (if we are even remotely honest) we already know, men are more likely to be judged based on their job. Even Mythbusters was able to easily conclude that, for example, men who make more money are considered cuter by women on average. (same men, but with different job profiles).
This increased desire for high paying jobs and willingness to sacrifice for them (in this case, literally paying money for coaching), may well result in men getting more high paying jobs, BUT again these are ads for services, not job offers.
Right, it isn't monolithic, so you do you know for a fact that it is an example of market failure? I assert companies have used metric or imperial as their needs dictated and that there is no reason, per se, to believe that they made the wrong choice. It is not like no metric parts are used or make in the U.S. What I am also pointing out is that the whole question is becoming irrelevant, computers don't care and can easily deal with many measurement systems. When you 3D scan the item you will 3D print and make a computer file, the computer will be able to display the data you wish in any format you like.
Ah, but who bests knows the cost specifics, the people actually working in the industry or you, because they don't see the "big picture"? But your still missing it, my 3D printer can use inches, meters, cubits and furlongs and the best size for a screw may not come out evenly in any unit of measure. I have nothing against the metric system, but the future will likely make sunk transition costs today a pure loss.
Because they have to buy a new machine to make 2 liter jugs when they have perfectly working ones that make gallon jugs. Does the milk taste different somehow?
"Going Metric" really has nothing to do with measuring in Centimeters and Celsius and never did. It really has to do with retooling industry and parts to new standard sizes. The problem is it is very costly to do so. Think about the metric and common wrenches you have, is used to be you had one set of tools and best of all because there were not really that many commonly used sizes, and the differences were visually apparent, you could just reach for the right wrench by looking at it. Right now you might be thinking "ah but of only the U.S. would just use the parts the rest of the world uses, things would be fine.". First, remember that goes both ways as metric nuts are in no way better than common ones. Second, well, frankly most industries have fairly specialized tools, in other words you care more about those immediately around you, the sizes of available nuts have nothing to with board lengths.
But, we are entering a new custom manufacturing world. We may soon be manufacturing boards AND nuts to the specific needs of the product rather than standard sizes. When that happens, well, you can measure in inches, meters or cubits and the computer will be able to convert and manufacture just fine.
Still don't forget most cell lines factually don't last that long, the successful ones made it at the cost of overwhelming numbers not making it. So for example when a batch of cells go bad (say cancer), it helps to have a whole other batch of cells, say in another person, to fall back on. This is great research none the less.
I am not supporting secrecy, but I am not surprised by it. All trade agreements piss someone off and kill someone's sacred cash cow. If there were no special interests to protect, you wouldn't need a trade agreement as there would be no, or low, import taxes. These agreements very specifically say stuff like, we are going to stop taxing microchip imports and you will stop taxing rice imports. Needless to say, your microchip producers and their rice farmers get pissed off. These agreements have been hashed out in long and difficult sessions by dedicated staff and their likely net effects on the economy of both nations have been calculated. So of course after going through this processes, the negotiators don't want to deal with local special interests campaigning to insist that their particular trade barrier remain. Basically you have lots of special interests who correctly see a big danger to themselves, while potential winners only see potential gains, the trade agreement can get quickly picked apart piece by piece.
Actually I think my reply was spot on. I will leave the issue of what is a "fair" wage alone for now to simply say, because U.S. workers were so much richer than the rest of the worlds workers, there was never any doubt but that free trade would depress their wages. That is what has been happening for decades, working class U.S. citizens have been losing ground in wages because they more directly compete with others around the world. The Farm owner may be well off, but it is really is true he or she can't afford to pay too much more than they do now. However at the same time you see increasing wealth in other countries and of course the wealthy are doing even better. This was the expected result of free trade and is what we are seeing. Now I am torn about this issue. I would like people in other countries to have a shot at a good job too and it does seem fairest to give everyone an equal chance. Maybe it will be best for the world in the long term and it kind of seems world wide wealth inequity is being equalized somewhat. None the less, a pretty clear and easy to follow line can be drawn between the working class getting a smaller percentage of the U.S. economy and being able to easily hire someone in another country to do the same thing for less. As for CEO pay, check out some stories about stock holders trying to change CEO pay, many businesses are not the democracies you think they are, indeed they sound more like royal courts or high school cliques when you find out how they really run. OTOH, maybe this will finally be the wake up call for stock owners to look a little more closely at corporate governance rules, after all money in the CEOs pocket comes out of profits just like workers wages, AND there might be a business in another country paying their CEO less and thus be more competitive.
Yes, you will, they do in Japan and think it is a bargain, of course Japan does protect farm imports. You won't pay that today because the store knows it can get them cheaper from Mexico. Even if very few strawberries are imported, U.S. producers MUST compete on price or they know they will quickly go out of business. The know the price of strawberry imports and know full well that even if this year they could keep the price up, their market would quickly erode and imports would skyrocket. I am not against free trade, but I don't blind myself to it's consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
Do open source coders meet in person much? I am not hip to that scene, but I thought it was mostly done online.
I probably wouldn't agree with Boehner 100% on a lot of issues, but is was pretty clear he didn't believe lots of the nonsense that came out of the far right wing of his party. I think it became too much for him to deal with.
Ouch, my brain exploded. Ignore my post and read this one.
Why all the excitement? It isn't any more interesting than you typical asteroid flyby.
This may have a short term benefit, but by and large happy workers aren't productive, productive workers are happy. At the end of the day, we all like to feel like we succeeded somehow. SOME distraction and downtime that is work sponsored is beneficial, but there is a definite limit, more effective is finding ways to make the needed tasks satisfying to perform has a better long term result.
IT was never needed beyond the initial set up. Computer programs run just fine for years on end, computer hardware lasts much longer than most companies replacement cycles. You only need IT when you want new features or functionality. Problem is users want more of it then ever, as computing becomes cheaper, more and more will be demanded to do more things.
It seems pretty simple, if a gene was useful in the past at some time, it is possible it might be useful in the future. Therefore it is handy to write down old unneeded sequences just in case. How many you write down would be related to the desire to facilitate mutations or prevent them as the case may be. FYI this was actually hinted at by creationist who pointed out the probability of gene sequences spontaneously forming being astronomically low. Clearly biology was cribbing from previously useful sequences.
The final answer. Asimov, 1920 - 1992
Meh, compared to China being one time zone, this isn't news.
I was unaware destruction of property was legal, where do you live exactly?
Right now, I don't think the law addresses that issue. In this specific case, according to the guy who shot the drone, he was waiting with shotgun ready in case the drone did pass over his property. I doubt he waited long before firing. It isn't clear if the "peeping tom" angle is legit or a smokescreen, drones aren't exactly stealthy and due to battery limitations can't really loiter that long.
Factually I think the height the drone is flying at makes a big difference also. If you take a picture of someone from a few feet away clearly pointing at them, kind of like google glasses do, yeah, that is annoying. If however they take a photo of the beach, and you happen to be in the photo over a hundred feet from the camera and you object, well, you should probably avoid ever going out in public if that is too much intrusion for you. So yeah, closely hovering over a specific group of people is one thing, but taking broad pictures of the beach and the people on it is clearly legal and ethical. If the drone is so far away you can't tell for sure if it has a camera, on public property no less, you should learn to deal with it.
It is a currently unresolved legal issue I understand, but if the drone was over 80 feet up, it *may* not have been trespassing. Owning a drone myself, I am well aware of the temptation for misuse (you need to get on good terms with your neighbors, pro tip: boys love drone and often act as great ambassadors to the parents), still they are expensive and frankly likely the drone couldn't have been hovering for a really long time due to battery life. That said, I do look forward to better defined rules and regulations so everyone knows what to do and expect.
Which exact frequency would they use? AM, FM or PM (polarization modulation)? Would they simply polarize star light in a certain direction with a giant field or something so they didn't have to generate to much energy? Are our detectors sensitive enough? Are any detectors or transmitters sensitive enough, the universe doesn't owe us interstellar communication. Why radio waves and not cosmic rays or neutrinos? We don't really know the answer to these questions I think, we just know we don't have the needed technology. We might find something, but it is so hard to be sure when you don't really know what you are looking for.
The prime flaw in the Fermi Paradox is, we don't posses technology to communicate between stars (all but the nearest) or travel between them. Therefore, we have no reason to suspect we know what to look for. For all we know, alien communication is everywhere, all we know for sure is flying saucer haven't landed, followed by demands to see our leaders, which is dumb because they would really ask to see Elvis!
Read the actual article and paper, men weren't shown more ads for positions paying $200k+, they were shown more ads for coaching services to help them get jobs paying $200k+. It is more accurate to say that men are more willing to pay money to get help getting jobs paying $200K+, read men are relatively more desperate to get high paying jobs. This matches pretty well with what (if we are even remotely honest) we already know, men are more likely to be judged based on their job. Even Mythbusters was able to easily conclude that, for example, men who make more money are considered cuter by women on average. (same men, but with different job profiles). This increased desire for high paying jobs and willingness to sacrifice for them (in this case, literally paying money for coaching), may well result in men getting more high paying jobs, BUT again these are ads for services, not job offers.
Right, it isn't monolithic, so you do you know for a fact that it is an example of market failure? I assert companies have used metric or imperial as their needs dictated and that there is no reason, per se, to believe that they made the wrong choice. It is not like no metric parts are used or make in the U.S. What I am also pointing out is that the whole question is becoming irrelevant, computers don't care and can easily deal with many measurement systems. When you 3D scan the item you will 3D print and make a computer file, the computer will be able to display the data you wish in any format you like.
Ah, but who bests knows the cost specifics, the people actually working in the industry or you, because they don't see the "big picture"? But your still missing it, my 3D printer can use inches, meters, cubits and furlongs and the best size for a screw may not come out evenly in any unit of measure. I have nothing against the metric system, but the future will likely make sunk transition costs today a pure loss.
Because they have to buy a new machine to make 2 liter jugs when they have perfectly working ones that make gallon jugs. Does the milk taste different somehow?
"Going Metric" really has nothing to do with measuring in Centimeters and Celsius and never did. It really has to do with retooling industry and parts to new standard sizes. The problem is it is very costly to do so. Think about the metric and common wrenches you have, is used to be you had one set of tools and best of all because there were not really that many commonly used sizes, and the differences were visually apparent, you could just reach for the right wrench by looking at it. Right now you might be thinking "ah but of only the U.S. would just use the parts the rest of the world uses, things would be fine.". First, remember that goes both ways as metric nuts are in no way better than common ones. Second, well, frankly most industries have fairly specialized tools, in other words you care more about those immediately around you, the sizes of available nuts have nothing to with board lengths. But, we are entering a new custom manufacturing world. We may soon be manufacturing boards AND nuts to the specific needs of the product rather than standard sizes. When that happens, well, you can measure in inches, meters or cubits and the computer will be able to convert and manufacture just fine.
Still don't forget most cell lines factually don't last that long, the successful ones made it at the cost of overwhelming numbers not making it. So for example when a batch of cells go bad (say cancer), it helps to have a whole other batch of cells, say in another person, to fall back on. This is great research none the less.
If more galaxies are red than blue (and I blue stars don't last all that long) how close are we to heat death?
I am not supporting secrecy, but I am not surprised by it. All trade agreements piss someone off and kill someone's sacred cash cow. If there were no special interests to protect, you wouldn't need a trade agreement as there would be no, or low, import taxes. These agreements very specifically say stuff like, we are going to stop taxing microchip imports and you will stop taxing rice imports. Needless to say, your microchip producers and their rice farmers get pissed off. These agreements have been hashed out in long and difficult sessions by dedicated staff and their likely net effects on the economy of both nations have been calculated. So of course after going through this processes, the negotiators don't want to deal with local special interests campaigning to insist that their particular trade barrier remain. Basically you have lots of special interests who correctly see a big danger to themselves, while potential winners only see potential gains, the trade agreement can get quickly picked apart piece by piece.
Actually I think my reply was spot on. I will leave the issue of what is a "fair" wage alone for now to simply say, because U.S. workers were so much richer than the rest of the worlds workers, there was never any doubt but that free trade would depress their wages. That is what has been happening for decades, working class U.S. citizens have been losing ground in wages because they more directly compete with others around the world. The Farm owner may be well off, but it is really is true he or she can't afford to pay too much more than they do now. However at the same time you see increasing wealth in other countries and of course the wealthy are doing even better. This was the expected result of free trade and is what we are seeing. Now I am torn about this issue. I would like people in other countries to have a shot at a good job too and it does seem fairest to give everyone an equal chance. Maybe it will be best for the world in the long term and it kind of seems world wide wealth inequity is being equalized somewhat. None the less, a pretty clear and easy to follow line can be drawn between the working class getting a smaller percentage of the U.S. economy and being able to easily hire someone in another country to do the same thing for less. As for CEO pay, check out some stories about stock holders trying to change CEO pay, many businesses are not the democracies you think they are, indeed they sound more like royal courts or high school cliques when you find out how they really run. OTOH, maybe this will finally be the wake up call for stock owners to look a little more closely at corporate governance rules, after all money in the CEOs pocket comes out of profits just like workers wages, AND there might be a business in another country paying their CEO less and thus be more competitive.
Yes, you will, they do in Japan and think it is a bargain, of course Japan does protect farm imports. You won't pay that today because the store knows it can get them cheaper from Mexico. Even if very few strawberries are imported, U.S. producers MUST compete on price or they know they will quickly go out of business. The know the price of strawberry imports and know full well that even if this year they could keep the price up, their market would quickly erode and imports would skyrocket. I am not against free trade, but I don't blind myself to it's consequences.