Those people dont buy electric cars to begin with man.
These are expensive status-symbols for spoiled rich kids. The same people who voluntarily pay more for 'green' electricity. If they have to purchase twice as much juice because their fancy wireless charger is less efficient, I really dont think that will bother them. It might even be a plus.
"Tranny" is not just a label that implies transsexual, it specifically implies a transsexual *prostitute* which is why most transsexuals would be offended to be so labeled. Just as most women do not like to be called whores. Of course there are exceptions to every rule, but your post does seem rather hard to believe. Either you know several transexual friends who are all either prostitutes or do not mind being called such, or you just made this all up. Occam's razor is gently calling...
"No, because if it really turns out that what set of genitals you have play a major role in such a huge financial decision as what career you choose, even in the absence of outside coercion, then that instantly invalidates any economic theory that assumes people generally make rational (from purely economic perspective) choices - which would be all of them."
Not at all. Try to follow along.
The genitals you have, along with many other factors, shape you and what you desire.
'Rational choices' only acquires meaning here after desires are established. People chase their desires and in doing so tend to be more rational about it than they realize.
But if you really believe what you are posting then you should give equal time to recruiting more male nurses, and child development specialists, and also we need more female sanitation workers and firemen btw. Lots more.
The only reliable and straightforward defense may well be an older car.
Alternatively, since this thing appears to target the CAN bus, you might get results from shielding it. That should be relatively straightforward and I would expect something as simple as wrapping it carefully in foil might give you significant shielding, which would reduce the effective range, and it sounds like they dont have much range to begin with. BUT, there really isnt any way to know whether/how effective your shielding is without fabricating a transmitter of your own and testing it out.
Interesting that the left-hand drive vehicles are legal in Canada, did not know that. There is one I would be dying to import if I lived there. (Mazda B-series turbodiesel, small pickup, heavy suspension, dual rear wheels and a flatbed. Wonderfully practical vehicle and we really should be able to get them here with the steering wheel on the right side but nooooo.)
I couldnt say it fails to be English. However after perusing every link I am left without any information about what this 'organic visualization' thing actually is, and how it's supposed to work.
Leaving me only to comment more generally that it is not the search engines job to read the users mind, and shouldnt be, if only because it is impossible to do that with any amount of computing power. It's one of those disastrously attractive ideas that may take us another decade to finally start getting over.
"How many people will actually apply this firmware update? 90% of people plug their router in, hook their equipment up to it and leave it that way until it breaks, then they replace it."
This has broader applicability as well. No matter how much software people may wish otherwise, people treat their hardware like a black box and it makes no sense to them for it to be changing after the fact.
So you have massive vulnerabilities in just about anything ever shipped, because of the way software is developed. (There are other ways to develop, but essentially no one wants to hear about them, because they are slower.) Security depends on updates being applied quickly, yet this is always going to be problematic. Relying on the customer to apply an update (particularly one that has warnings about bricking your box on it) on time is ludicrous in most cases, yet any sort of automatic update system that does not rely on the user to make judgements is just another huge surface for vulnerabilities as well.
Put it all together and security is usually a bad joke.
"Evolution relies on the fact that better chromosomes would be lost from the genepool at a slower rate because they would lead to greater fitness and worse chromosomes would be lost at a faster rate because they would lead to a lesser fitness."
Because selection does not operate on Y-DNA (or MtDNA.) These genes are passed on directly with no mixing, so the only source of entropy in the signal is mutation. Most, if not all, of these chromosomes actually perform no role and are never activated, so they are doubly insulated from selection.
While in some cases you can spot such visual clues, in others you cannot. For instance, most people would assume that Australian aborigines are closely related to some African people. In fact their closest relatives are native Americans and east Asians.
Fair complexion was heavily selected for in certain climates before the advent of cheap and reliable supplies of vitamin D.
Sure, that's exactly why Y-DNA is useful. It's not a problem that a lot of Y gets lost along the way, as long as this happens uniformly you still wind up with a good sample. The prehistoric group that bore these genes was obviously larger than 1-3 men, but it may well have been a few dozen closely related men, so the ones that left no YDNA are still effectively represented by a cousin who did.
(The same thing happens with MDNA as well - a woman who has only sons disappears from that readout and wont be part of either the male or female sample here - but more than likely a close relative of hers will.)
I have not seen anyone writing 'alittle' or heard it spoken either. I rather suspect this actually has more to do with a/an being effectively a prefix in most spoken English, and perhaps also on analogy with 'another' which is comprehensible as 'an other.'
If it's an immigration thing they already believe they have the right person and they just now need to write a job spec that no one else will meet in order to get the visa.
If instead of that specific dodge, it's general policy, then you are looking at a common hiring strategy geared around hiring someone that in theory already has all the specific knowledge needed. That almost never really works, and usually those jobs seem to cycle quite frequently. Somewhere there is a manager who is (at least for a time) successful in painting his own incompetence as an issue with procuring the necessary talent.
Yes, there are a few Habibs in India that charge more than I do, and are worth it. They have advanced degrees in mathematics and are actually capable of doing work over my head.
The ones that are competing for my job? I could trounce 99/100 of them in less than 5 minutes on any subject. They get work because it is cheaper to let them work on the job for an hour and THEN escalate to me when they still cant figure it out. And expect me to clean up not only the original problem but all the damage the overseas tech did as well, in less than 20 minutes.
Since I can do that and they cannot, my job remains relatively secure.
That said, obviously requiring remote work limits the options quite a bit. I know I could easily make 3x my current salary if I would move to some urban hellhole, but most of the raise would go to higher cost of living, and quality would go down, so why would I be tempted?
Look at all the ridiculous replies you got though. It's true, it's very hard to go broke by UNDERestimating the intelligence of the consumer. And economy of scale works in their favor.
I dont know but having read TFA it seems there is more involved than you imply. The original models did not have this problem. The rev1 software would suspend when the car was off and power usage overnight was truly negligible.
It had other problems though. And the fix was a revision to turn off the power management. Several revs later they are still only partially succesful in re-implementing power management without causing more serious problems elsewhere. Sounds to me like the made the attractive but dangerous decision to just run everything through software controls and eliminate manuals across the board, without really exploring the ramifications properly, and are stuck with the results.
Actually there are quite a few of them left, AOL and practically every remaining ISP runs one.
Usually only the less technically literate ever see them, of course. But they exist, and make a profit by selling ads and putting as little as possible into maintaining them.
And while Outlook is very near worst of breed for email - yahoo webmail is not just webmail, it's probably the worst webmail available.
I dont blame their employees for not wanting to use it, I have used a yahoo email since just after they first went online, but I dont even bother log into it anymore after the last batch of forced regressions involved in their redesign.
On the one hand, if they dont use it, it obviously will never be fixed. They clearly dont listen to customer feedback in any way shape or means. But then again, why would they listen to their employee feedback either?
More than likely a lot of those employees actually DID respond to the request to eat that dogfood, gave it a try, found out it tastes as bad as it looks and is unlikly to ever be fixed no matter what the employee feedback - and therefore rationally went back to Outlook.
Actually the photograph is only supposed to be copyrightable if it contains a novel and creative element - i.e. if it's a good straight photo with no funny stuff (like you want for a print) then it is not copyrightable.
"Had we not fought in Vietnam, where would the momentum of communism have carried it?"
Exactly where it did carry it - to the grave. Communism wasnt stopped with guns or bombs, economics is what killed it and what was always going to kill it. A beast like that dies more quickly in peace time (when people expect to eat) than in wartime (when they can easily be taught to blame their empty stomachs on the enemy.)
"Would a newly communist Vietnam, without the economic and military ruin of a long war have felt emboldened both by success and by ideology to invade Thailand? Malaysia?"
Vietnam was a nationalist struggle against the French, they 'turned communist' to get communist bloc weaponry once they were certain no one else would help them. They havent been aggressive outside their borders in modern history, the country was a shambles, and the entire idea sounds like something you would have to know nothing at all about the situation to take seriously.
Unless you are one of those people that likes to play with the meaning of 'impossible.' No, it's not impossible. Not impossible that the French will nuke us in the morning either, but I think it's a fairly safe bet. And remember you dont get to weigh some imaginary costless intervention against the remote possibility of something bad happening. Real invasions, at their best, are still very very bad. Lots of death and destruction and misery and lots of monetary expense. Not something you want to run around doing on a whim just because it's 'possible' that something bad might one day happen if you dont.
"Would Saddam Hussein have used oil profits from both Kuwait and Iraq to build a larger military to subdue Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon and with enough money even Iran? "
Look at his track record. How many invasions did he launch? Two. How many did he get a US 'green light' on before he moved? Two.
He was a greaseball and a thug and not a nice person at all, but he could be and had been deterred very effectively, just like all the others.
"you nip problems when they are small and far away, or when they are large and on your border
those are your choices in life"
No, actually, they are not.
People talking just like that have been running our foreign policy for the last century and have bee proven wrong time after time after time, always with disastrous consequences for the country as a whole. Yet they keep getting promoted.
In fact, the world works better when the people actually involved in a problem are allowed to solve it, rather than having some global white-knight rushing around nosing into everyone elses business.
"isolationism is a failed, loser's attitude"
"Isolationism" is used to imply a false dichotomy, where you are either in favor of blessing little brown people all around the world with embargos and bombs or else you want us to put up an iron curtain and wall ourselves off from the rest of the world. That's nonsense.
The obvious, common sense, third option is peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.
You dont seem to understand what I am saying at all.
I can look at it from multiple points of view, and it seems to me everyone else is basically pursuing their own interests from their point of view, as I expect. Then we come to the USA, which so often seems to do the opposite. Constantly inserting themselves into situation after situation where there is no national interest, always doing favours for all these foreign 'friends' no matter what it costs us to do so.
As a US citizen and taxpayer, I would prefer that my supposed representatives behave more rationally.
"Yes and no. Vietnam cuddled up to the U.S., not the other way around. They felt threatened by China. Can you imagine that?"
I understand exactly what the Vietnamese were doing - pursuing their national interest. But what have US leaders been up to? What possible national interest do we have in fighting China on behalf of Vietnam? Or anyone else?
Err, dont look now, but this is *exactly* the internal logic in China that is leading them to assert themselves like this. Only they see the US as the aggressive power that's been appeased for too long already, and that case actually seems a bit stronger than the reverse. It's not like China allied with Mexico and started supplying them with weapons and encouraging them to stir up old border disputes - but that's exactly what the US is doing in e.g. the Philippines, Vietnam, Japan, etc.
Yes, and let's not forget to fine mechanics schools that fail to recruit "enough" females and cosmetology schools that fail to recruit 'enough' males as well.
For that matter why not just make it law that whenever people gather, for any reason, at any place, at any time, there must be exact parity between the genders.
Slashdot Mirror
Those people dont buy electric cars to begin with man.
These are expensive status-symbols for spoiled rich kids. The same people who voluntarily pay more for 'green' electricity. If they have to purchase twice as much juice because their fancy wireless charger is less efficient, I really dont think that will bother them. It might even be a plus.
"Tranny" is not just a label that implies transsexual, it specifically implies a transsexual *prostitute* which is why most transsexuals would be offended to be so labeled. Just as most women do not like to be called whores. Of course there are exceptions to every rule, but your post does seem rather hard to believe. Either you know several transexual friends who are all either prostitutes or do not mind being called such, or you just made this all up. Occam's razor is gently calling...
"No, because if it really turns out that what set of genitals you have play a major role in such a huge financial decision as what career you choose, even in the absence of outside coercion, then that instantly invalidates any economic theory that assumes people generally make rational (from purely economic perspective) choices - which would be all of them."
Not at all. Try to follow along.
The genitals you have, along with many other factors, shape you and what you desire.
'Rational choices' only acquires meaning here after desires are established. People chase their desires and in doing so tend to be more rational about it than they realize.
But if you really believe what you are posting then you should give equal time to recruiting more male nurses, and child development specialists, and also we need more female sanitation workers and firemen btw. Lots more.
The only reliable and straightforward defense may well be an older car.
Alternatively, since this thing appears to target the CAN bus, you might get results from shielding it. That should be relatively straightforward and I would expect something as simple as wrapping it carefully in foil might give you significant shielding, which would reduce the effective range, and it sounds like they dont have much range to begin with. BUT, there really isnt any way to know whether/how effective your shielding is without fabricating a transmitter of your own and testing it out.
Interesting that the left-hand drive vehicles are legal in Canada, did not know that. There is one I would be dying to import if I lived there. (Mazda B-series turbodiesel, small pickup, heavy suspension, dual rear wheels and a flatbed. Wonderfully practical vehicle and we really should be able to get them here with the steering wheel on the right side but nooooo.)
I couldnt say it fails to be English. However after perusing every link I am left without any information about what this 'organic visualization' thing actually is, and how it's supposed to work.
Leaving me only to comment more generally that it is not the search engines job to read the users mind, and shouldnt be, if only because it is impossible to do that with any amount of computing power. It's one of those disastrously attractive ideas that may take us another decade to finally start getting over.
"How many people will actually apply this firmware update? 90% of people plug their router in, hook their equipment up to it and leave it that way until it breaks, then they replace it."
This has broader applicability as well. No matter how much software people may wish otherwise, people treat their hardware like a black box and it makes no sense to them for it to be changing after the fact.
So you have massive vulnerabilities in just about anything ever shipped, because of the way software is developed. (There are other ways to develop, but essentially no one wants to hear about them, because they are slower.) Security depends on updates being applied quickly, yet this is always going to be problematic. Relying on the customer to apply an update (particularly one that has warnings about bricking your box on it) on time is ludicrous in most cases, yet any sort of automatic update system that does not rely on the user to make judgements is just another huge surface for vulnerabilities as well.
Put it all together and security is usually a bad joke.
"Evolution relies on the fact that better chromosomes would be lost from the genepool at a slower rate because they would lead to greater fitness and worse chromosomes would be lost at a faster rate because they would lead to a lesser fitness."
Because selection does not operate on Y-DNA (or MtDNA.) These genes are passed on directly with no mixing, so the only source of entropy in the signal is mutation. Most, if not all, of these chromosomes actually perform no role and are never activated, so they are doubly insulated from selection.
While in some cases you can spot such visual clues, in others you cannot. For instance, most people would assume that Australian aborigines are closely related to some African people. In fact their closest relatives are native Americans and east Asians.
Fair complexion was heavily selected for in certain climates before the advent of cheap and reliable supplies of vitamin D.
Sure, that's exactly why Y-DNA is useful. It's not a problem that a lot of Y gets lost along the way, as long as this happens uniformly you still wind up with a good sample. The prehistoric group that bore these genes was obviously larger than 1-3 men, but it may well have been a few dozen closely related men, so the ones that left no YDNA are still effectively represented by a cousin who did.
(The same thing happens with MDNA as well - a woman who has only sons disappears from that readout and wont be part of either the male or female sample here - but more than likely a close relative of hers will.)
I have not seen anyone writing 'alittle' or heard it spoken either. I rather suspect this actually has more to do with a/an being effectively a prefix in most spoken English, and perhaps also on analogy with 'another' which is comprehensible as 'an other.'
There are a lot of protections built into contract law here.
Unfortunately they all seem to be ignored lately. No way is a EULA a valid contract on its face, yet courts have enforced them nonetheless.
Yeah, those are basically your options.
If it's an immigration thing they already believe they have the right person and they just now need to write a job spec that no one else will meet in order to get the visa.
If instead of that specific dodge, it's general policy, then you are looking at a common hiring strategy geared around hiring someone that in theory already has all the specific knowledge needed. That almost never really works, and usually those jobs seem to cycle quite frequently. Somewhere there is a manager who is (at least for a time) successful in painting his own incompetence as an issue with procuring the necessary talent.
I think you are wrong.
Yes, there are a few Habibs in India that charge more than I do, and are worth it. They have advanced degrees in mathematics and are actually capable of doing work over my head.
The ones that are competing for my job? I could trounce 99/100 of them in less than 5 minutes on any subject. They get work because it is cheaper to let them work on the job for an hour and THEN escalate to me when they still cant figure it out. And expect me to clean up not only the original problem but all the damage the overseas tech did as well, in less than 20 minutes.
Since I can do that and they cannot, my job remains relatively secure.
That said, obviously requiring remote work limits the options quite a bit. I know I could easily make 3x my current salary if I would move to some urban hellhole, but most of the raise would go to higher cost of living, and quality would go down, so why would I be tempted?
Yes indeed, you get it.
Look at all the ridiculous replies you got though. It's true, it's very hard to go broke by UNDERestimating the intelligence of the consumer. And economy of scale works in their favor.
I dont know but having read TFA it seems there is more involved than you imply. The original models did not have this problem. The rev1 software would suspend when the car was off and power usage overnight was truly negligible.
It had other problems though. And the fix was a revision to turn off the power management. Several revs later they are still only partially succesful in re-implementing power management without causing more serious problems elsewhere. Sounds to me like the made the attractive but dangerous decision to just run everything through software controls and eliminate manuals across the board, without really exploring the ramifications properly, and are stuck with the results.
Actually there are quite a few of them left, AOL and practically every remaining ISP runs one.
Usually only the less technically literate ever see them, of course. But they exist, and make a profit by selling ads and putting as little as possible into maintaining them.
Very true.
And while Outlook is very near worst of breed for email - yahoo webmail is not just webmail, it's probably the worst webmail available.
I dont blame their employees for not wanting to use it, I have used a yahoo email since just after they first went online, but I dont even bother log into it anymore after the last batch of forced regressions involved in their redesign.
On the one hand, if they dont use it, it obviously will never be fixed. They clearly dont listen to customer feedback in any way shape or means. But then again, why would they listen to their employee feedback either?
More than likely a lot of those employees actually DID respond to the request to eat that dogfood, gave it a try, found out it tastes as bad as it looks and is unlikly to ever be fixed no matter what the employee feedback - and therefore rationally went back to Outlook.
Actually the photograph is only supposed to be copyrightable if it contains a novel and creative element - i.e. if it's a good straight photo with no funny stuff (like you want for a print) then it is not copyrightable.
"Had we not fought in Vietnam, where would the momentum of communism have carried it?"
Exactly where it did carry it - to the grave. Communism wasnt stopped with guns or bombs, economics is what killed it and what was always going to kill it. A beast like that dies more quickly in peace time (when people expect to eat) than in wartime (when they can easily be taught to blame their empty stomachs on the enemy.)
"Would a newly communist Vietnam, without the economic and military ruin of a long war have felt emboldened both by success and by ideology to invade Thailand? Malaysia?"
Vietnam was a nationalist struggle against the French, they 'turned communist' to get communist bloc weaponry once they were certain no one else would help them. They havent been aggressive outside their borders in modern history, the country was a shambles, and the entire idea sounds like something you would have to know nothing at all about the situation to take seriously.
Unless you are one of those people that likes to play with the meaning of 'impossible.' No, it's not impossible. Not impossible that the French will nuke us in the morning either, but I think it's a fairly safe bet. And remember you dont get to weigh some imaginary costless intervention against the remote possibility of something bad happening. Real invasions, at their best, are still very very bad. Lots of death and destruction and misery and lots of monetary expense. Not something you want to run around doing on a whim just because it's 'possible' that something bad might one day happen if you dont.
"Would Saddam Hussein have used oil profits from both Kuwait and Iraq to build a larger military to subdue Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon and with enough money even Iran? "
Look at his track record. How many invasions did he launch? Two. How many did he get a US 'green light' on before he moved? Two.
He was a greaseball and a thug and not a nice person at all, but he could be and had been deterred very effectively, just like all the others.
"you nip problems when they are small and far away, or when they are large and on your border
those are your choices in life"
No, actually, they are not.
People talking just like that have been running our foreign policy for the last century and have bee proven wrong time after time after time, always with disastrous consequences for the country as a whole. Yet they keep getting promoted.
In fact, the world works better when the people actually involved in a problem are allowed to solve it, rather than having some global white-knight rushing around nosing into everyone elses business.
"isolationism is a failed, loser's attitude"
"Isolationism" is used to imply a false dichotomy, where you are either in favor of blessing little brown people all around the world with embargos and bombs or else you want us to put up an iron curtain and wall ourselves off from the rest of the world. That's nonsense.
The obvious, common sense, third option is peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.
You dont seem to understand what I am saying at all.
I can look at it from multiple points of view, and it seems to me everyone else is basically pursuing their own interests from their point of view, as I expect. Then we come to the USA, which so often seems to do the opposite. Constantly inserting themselves into situation after situation where there is no national interest, always doing favours for all these foreign 'friends' no matter what it costs us to do so.
As a US citizen and taxpayer, I would prefer that my supposed representatives behave more rationally.
"Yes and no. Vietnam cuddled up to the U.S., not the other way around. They felt threatened by China. Can you imagine that?"
I understand exactly what the Vietnamese were doing - pursuing their national interest. But what have US leaders been up to? What possible national interest do we have in fighting China on behalf of Vietnam? Or anyone else?
Err, dont look now, but this is *exactly* the internal logic in China that is leading them to assert themselves like this. Only they see the US as the aggressive power that's been appeased for too long already, and that case actually seems a bit stronger than the reverse. It's not like China allied with Mexico and started supplying them with weapons and encouraging them to stir up old border disputes - but that's exactly what the US is doing in e.g. the Philippines, Vietnam, Japan, etc.
Yes, and let's not forget to fine mechanics schools that fail to recruit "enough" females and cosmetology schools that fail to recruit 'enough' males as well.
For that matter why not just make it law that whenever people gather, for any reason, at any place, at any time, there must be exact parity between the genders.