Affirmative action only matters at admissions, not further. Whether a minority student is accepted to a medical school or law school or whatever to fill a quota, they will come out the other end of that program unless they pass the highly rigorous standards. A medical student cannot be certified in the US without passing all 3 steps of the USMLE, and a residency. So you can trust your doctor or your lawyer, whatever their race. They earned their spot, and quotas didn't matter a damn when they had to sit their exams.
Sure, they'll pass, but let's say they got into Harvard but they were certainly not Harvard material, much less driven than their peers, much lower GPA than the average Harvard student, but they happen to be a minority with the money to cover tuition and hey, we've got this seat to fill. So they get into Harvard, do the minimum to get their degree, and hey, this other student who also happens to be of a minority race has always gotten straight A's, is extremely driven, and graduated from Harvard at the top of their class. Well, tell me, since both have Harvard degrees, how do I tell them apart? Both minorities, one accepted on their merits, one accepted to fill a seat, both passing the courses and getting a degree, one at the top (because they were there on their merits and were actually driven) and one just barely (because they actually shouldn't have been there). But they both have the same degree.
Having those quotas in place is great, because it undoes generations' worth of racism that today manifests itself in socio-economic status. Affirmative action is actively trying to undo all the harm that racism and segregation have done in the past. If you are born African-American or Hispanic, you are likely to be born poorer. The police will treat you differently. Doors will be closed to you that are not to Caucasians. We need programs like Affirmative Action in place to undo all the harm that has been caused and continues to be caused.
We need something, I'm not saying we don't. Damage has been done and yes, it needs to be repaired. Affirmative action is not the answer, though. Seriously, think about it; why force a racist white guy to hire a minority employee he's just going to treat poorly, when there are plenty of non-racist businesses out there who would love to hire them and treat them well? They get that job and, oh, hey, the job market's tough, right? They put up with the abuse and never discover the companies that would treat them right and pay them what they're worth. Because of this, Affirmative action perpetuates racism, causing more damage, rather than repairing it.
And out on the job market? You think race doesn't matter, and that it's all academic. Well there are countless studies that have shown that the same resume will get treated differently if submitted under a different name - a "white-sounding" name will get a lot more calls back than a "black-sounding". Extremely so - sometimes the black names (again, same resumes) will get no calls back for 15 calls back for white names.
I never said race doesn't matter. Clearly, while I took the time to think about this and write those thoughts here, for you to read (thank you for acknowledging that, by the way), you didn't take the time to read and process all I have written. Go back and read my 7th paragraph again; I'd quote it here, but I'm trying to keep clear in my reply, here, who said what, and quoting myself would break that.
Racism is unfortunately well alive. Today it is mostly subconscious but it is still really harmful. From the fact that you gave this matter enough thought to come up with your rant above, and yet not discover the basic logical fallacy in it, though you seem otherwise intelligent, makes me think you have quite a bit of subconscious racism left too. It's okay if you do, many people do, especially if they are of the privileged class and never have to question their assumptions, or hav
Uhm... check your math, please. It's wrong, and that's a good thing. As a heterosexual male, I would be quite disappointed to live somewhere where 77% of the population was male; but then, since you're stating that 77% of the population is both male and white, that would place the male portion of the population somewhere north of 77%, would it not? To some, that would be a utopia; and more power to those people; but that's A) not for me and B) not even remotely accurate.
No, it's not how it already works. The GSM/LTE radio currently takes raw audio from the phone and compresses it with dedicated hardware, then blasts it out to the tower. It may be using IPv6, it may not be, but in either case, the compression, processing, and connection negotiation for voice data is done in hardware currently.. In fact, much more efficient, dedicated hardware.
What's being discussed here is a software solution. Audio processing and compression done in software, on the general purpose CPU. Connection negotiated in software, on the general purpose CPU. Packets assembled in software, on the general purpose CPU. That's a whole lot more activity on the CPU and likely not any less on the radio chip; how is that in any way similar to how it already works?
Assembled packets passed to the radio in software, on the general purpose CPU. I don't know about your phone, but all the phones I've owned in the past 5 years or so tend to heat up when I use the data connection or do anything CPU-intensive, but not so much during a voice call. My current phone, a recent flagship model also lasts about twice as long on a call as it does using the data connection (tested on my current phone with a call to my landline fresh off a full charge, then a multi gigabyte download fresh off a full charge, screen off and phone in the same location and position for both tests). Now, consider that in my tests, the phone call was about equal parts inbound and outbound data, constantly transmitting, while the download was primarily inbound data, with occasional bursts of ACK packets being transmitted; I'm not factoring in traffic caused as a result of maintaining the connection to the network, as both tests would have seen similar traffic, making it irrelevant.
To put that into perspective, the phone call, which was about equal parts transmit and receive, used about half the power of the download, which was mostly receive, primarily as a result of those packets being processed on the CPU, rather than by the dedicated hardware on the radio chip. Factor in the doing audio processing and compression on the CPU and your talk time is now much less than half of what you're getting now. Likely 1/3-1/4 by the time you account for a transmit rate roughly equal to the receive rate.
Apparently, this is what we have to look forward to. I'm so glad my smartphone is used as "a computer that also haas the ability to make calls, should I ever need to", rather than "a phone that can do some computer-y stuff when I want"; it means I'll be, by and large, unaffected by this change, should I ever own a VoLTE-enabled handset.
My day-to-day usage tells a different tale. You want to stand by and time me opening, editing, and saving files? First, using the mouse whenever reasonably possible, then again using keyboard shortcuts whenever reasonably possible. Let's see, for a real-life workflow, comparing the same application and platform, which is actually faster for a user who's experienced with the application they're using.
Re:Never used this keystroke
on
Goodbye, Ctrl-S
·
· Score: 1
That's wonderful until you make changes, THEN decide you want to save the new version as a different document. Then, you have to duplicate, then roll back one of the copies to the previous state. Hopefully it didn't autosave more than a handful of times since you started editing, or you'll have a tough time finding the version you wanted to keep!
+5, Insightful and no flames or accusations? Slashdot, you have truly blown me away! I try not to be a cynic, but it's not often I can put as much effort and thought into a post here and actually be rewarded for it. Thank you, Slashdot, for restoring a little bit of my faith in humanity.
Okay, so if you're a racist white guy you might want to work for a company run by a bunch of racist white guys; I'd say ya got me there, but I actually already addressed that point.
And affirmative action should be ignored anywhere the client or customer must instill blind faith in the abilities of your team; not because minorities aren't capable, but because if you're going to hire a member of a minority group, it should be because they're qualified, not because you have a seat to fill and the law says you have to. Hiring anyone, minority or otherwise, for any other reason only serves to ensure that your customers can't trust your people.
Re:Never used this keystroke
on
Goodbye, Ctrl-S
·
· Score: 1
I expected that heat, it's actually one of the things that keeps me coming back here. More than a handful of times I've been shown that my viewpoint or understanding of a topic is actually wrong and have emerged a better person for it.
But yes, given that "Save As" and "Duplicate" essentially do the same thing and that, by the time the action of either option has been completed, both copies of the file will be identical, it really and truly is impossible to save your new changes as a new file, leaving the original untouched; you *must* roll back the changes in one file or the other, which is an added step that clearly, based on some of the replies I've received, some people are perfectly willing to accept.
Hey! Any chance you can give your input on this post? I posted in terms of "black" and "white" because that's what most racists understand, but the post really applies unilaterally.
Full disclosure: I'm asking because you appear to be qualified to give your honest viewpoint on my comment. Your qualifications? Ironically, being a minority.
Moreso, if a company is run by someone racist enough to hire only whites, why would you want to work for them, anyway? I mean, even if you're white, unless you're racist, why would you want to work for them? And if you're not, you really shouldn't want your labor to line their pockets.
Uhm... you don't see the difference between sharing data you collect with the understanding that it won't be shared and sharing data that people provide you specifically with the intent that you will share it? Wow.
And if I'm reading you right, you're not saying you shouldn't trust a black doctor, just that you shouldn't trust an *unqualified* black doctor. Which, because you can't tell one from the other until after the fact, as a result of affirmative action, translates to "don't trust a black doctor".
People are going to call me a racist for this and I don't care. If someone can't piece this together for themselves and thinks my comments have anything to do with race (rather than the ludicrous, and patently racist, expectation that members of one race be judged on a different scale than members of another race), I can't be bothered to care what they think.
Affirmative action is bullshit!
Yes, you read that right. Affirmative action is bullshit. It only superficially helps black people who think they can't succeed without it; in reality, it only serves to help guilty racist old white guys sleep better at night. It's holding the black community back more than anything else, at this point, specifically for the reason stated at the top of this post.
A black guy and a white guy enter your office, both have the same degree form the same school. You know the white guy got into that school on his own merits, but, because of affirmative action, you don't know whether the black guy deserved to get in, or if he was accepted to fill a quota. That's not to say the black guy couldn't have possibly gotten into that school on his own merits, just that you don't, and can't, know that he did, because you have no way of knowing whether that school needed to fill a seat with a black guy in order to comply with the law. Likewise, when you hire the black guy, your customers have no way of knowing if you hired him because of his qualifications, or to comply with the law. Were you hiring the most qualified candidate, or just filling a quota? Your customers have no way of knowing.
All affirmative action hiring laws do is force people to hire people they don't want to and, therefore, shouldn't hire, regardless of reason.
Put yourself in the shoes of a black man for a moment (black guys, this should be easy for you)... Without affirmative action, would you have a harder time finding a job, as a result of rampant racism? I can't answer definitively, but I'll admit the answer is likely a very loud "yes". But think about it; do you want to work for a racist company? Do you want to work for a company that only hired you because they had to? There are enough companies out there run by people who are not racist that you should be able to find a job without having to settle for working at one that is. By forcing companies to hire you based on race, affirmative action prevents that; you don't know whether the company you're working for is run by racist assholes who hired you to fill a "black seat", or if they truly did hire you based on your qualifications; regardless of your qualifications. As a result of affirmative action, you could be willingly lining the pockets of a group of racist white guys and not even know it.
There are plenty of qualified and capable minority workers in the workforce. The trouble is, for anything that requires a higher level of trust than a cashier or cart retriever, affirmative action makes it impossible to tell, as a customer, whether the minority worker you're dealing with is actually qualified for the position until it's too late (if they're not). That's not to say every white guy who gets hired is qualified. Cronyism is definitely rampant, as well; but the fact is it's easier to fire a white guy who doesn't perform than it is to fire a minority worker for any reason, again due to affirmative action laws.
I don't know what the solution to this problem is, but I do know that it is not affirmative action. Maybe affirmative action is the best we can do and, if that's the case, that's a really sad situation for everyone involved. I know I don't want to be treated by a less-than-qualified doctor, and so I'm forced to avoid anyone who may have been hired to fill a seat; and there's nothing racist about that.
You must live in an area with shitty public transportation, then, if so few people are using it. In the SF Bay area, buses and trains are commonly standing-room-only during the day.
Just speculating here, but I wouldn't be surprised if, since it's being done in software, a less effective (this more efficient) algorithm is used for VoLTE. LTE data channels already use more power than LTE or GSM voice channels, by virtue of the data being processed by a general purpose chip (e.g. the phone's ARM CPU) versus the GSM or LTE radio handling the encoding of the voice data, so we're already looking at a substantial impact on battery life. Using an algorithm that yields best-case compression on a general purpose CPU will just add to the power requirements.
I think the article (and by transition, the summary) inverted the terminology, in which case, a 10% reduction in losses is a 10% of 10%, or a 1% improvement in efficiency.
Re:Never used this keystroke
on
Goodbye, Ctrl-S
·
· Score: 1
Mouse beats keyboard until you have to switch between the two or you find your mouse cursor on the opposite end of three 4k displays from the thing you want to click. Also, it seems their argument for the mouse being faster centers around positioning the text-entry cursor within a body of text; nobody is going to argue with you on that point, yes, it's faster to click 20 rows and lower and 80 columns to the right than it is to make 100 keystrokes. It is certainly faster to press Ctrl-S (or Command-S) than to move off of the keyboard, over to the mouse, move over to the menu, click, move to "Save", and click again. There is a balance, and for some things, yes, a keyboard shortcut is faster (Bell even admits this in their findings). They're also only comparing the Plan 9 text editor, Acme, to emacs; a fair comparison would be keyboard shortcuts vs menus within the same application on the same platform. For anything more than 1 level deep, a keyboard shortcut is, in fact, faster; and the keyboard is definitely faster if you happen to lose track of your mouse cursor, which is pretty easy to do on a modern "hide the cursor when I start typing" platform, like Windows, OSX, and quite a number of X environments, especially if you have multiple displays. I can't count the number of times I thought I left my cursor on the primary display, then spent 30+sec scanning all 3 of my displays trying to find it; it doesn't help that both Windows and OSX seem to have a habit of "losing" the cursor, themselves... completely hiding it when it enters the currently-focused window, and refusing to show its location until that window has lost focus (it's a rare occurence and certainly a bug in both platforms, but it does happen)!
It depends. They could VLAN the voice traffic and not count it toward your data plan. The question is, will they? We're talking about Verizon; this isn't outside the realm or possibility in any way, but only time will tell.
This is open "enough" that it'll just come down to implementation details, more or less. Still, I'm not hopeful that the device manufacturers won't manage to fuck it up.
This. Sadly, AT&T and Verizon will definitely do this. I don't doubt that T-Mobile will, as well, but since they offer unlimited (albeit, there's a cap on LTE speeds and you get throttled back to 2G speeds when you hit it -- unless you pay $30/mo for unlimited, which I do) it won't be quite as much of a cash grab for them. Sprint is an entirely different situation, being unlimited, but not really having enough data capacity to support it...
Re:Never used this keystroke
on
Goodbye, Ctrl-S
·
· Score: 2
My wife had the same issue with using this laptop in a reclining position (I inherited it when she inherited a 13" 2012 model from her father when he decided he'd rather have a 15"), but I haven't had the same experience. That might be because I realigned the hinges. They sometimes get installed at a slight angle (the screws to allow for some tiny misalignment), which causes them to bind at some angles and appear loose at others. If you feel them binding as the lid is almost closed, you have this issue. Rather than straighten them, I misaligned them in the other direction, so they bind when open; the laptop stays closed just fine, even during transport, because it has a magnetic closure. It's a simple procedure, though you to have to take the laptop apart a little farther than you may be comfortable with.
Re:Never used this keystroke
on
Goodbye, Ctrl-S
·
· Score: 1
I more than "half-acknowledge" how incorrect that rant is, I flat-out admit, in the first sentence, that the only Apple app I use is TextEdit, and that I use it in a minimalist capacity and, thus, have never encountered an issue with this. I then link to Apple's own documentation, which states that the options are, in fact, there, and verify that they exist in the app I use.
As for *why* I would knowingly go off on such a blatantly incorrectly-based rant? I was speaking hypothetically, in terms of the complaints I keep hearing, rather than in terms of the reality of the situation; I wasn't complaining, myself, but rather I was putting myself (and the reader) in the shoes of one of the complainers, looking at this from their, potentially ignorant, perspective, and feeling the same angst and frustration they display. The fact remains, since these complaints keep coming up, Apple did fuck up by changing what their users are familiar with.
Seriously, someone who's computer illiterate, but has learned what the Save and Save As functions do would feel like those functions were removed, even if just one of them was renamed. If you don't believe me, well, that's just fine; come up with a better explanation for why people are complaining that they're gone, then.
Re:Never used this keystroke
on
Goodbye, Ctrl-S
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Late 2011 17" MBP here... Apple screwed the pooch removing the Save function from their apps; though their current online documentation implies that it's back (and, indeed, it is in TextEdit, the only Apple app I use).
Another thing Apple screwed up was dropping the 17" MBP line. 17" Retina MBP? Yes, please. Even if it's the same resolution as the 15", making the pixels just a hair bigger won't hurt; I like a slightly larger machine that can fit comfortably on my lap, without requiring that I keep my legs smashed together lest it fall between them, and has ample component spacing to allow for decent cooling, thank you very much. I'd love an upgrade, but they don't offer anything I find compelling anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, now that is funny.
Wow, you can tell I didn't proofread this one... sorry for the typos. I'm sure you can figure out what I meant to type.
Affirmative action only matters at admissions, not further. Whether a minority student is accepted to a medical school or law school or whatever to fill a quota, they will come out the other end of that program unless they pass the highly rigorous standards. A medical student cannot be certified in the US without passing all 3 steps of the USMLE, and a residency. So you can trust your doctor or your lawyer, whatever their race. They earned their spot, and quotas didn't matter a damn when they had to sit their exams.
Sure, they'll pass, but let's say they got into Harvard but they were certainly not Harvard material, much less driven than their peers, much lower GPA than the average Harvard student, but they happen to be a minority with the money to cover tuition and hey, we've got this seat to fill. So they get into Harvard, do the minimum to get their degree, and hey, this other student who also happens to be of a minority race has always gotten straight A's, is extremely driven, and graduated from Harvard at the top of their class. Well, tell me, since both have Harvard degrees, how do I tell them apart? Both minorities, one accepted on their merits, one accepted to fill a seat, both passing the courses and getting a degree, one at the top (because they were there on their merits and were actually driven) and one just barely (because they actually shouldn't have been there). But they both have the same degree.
Having those quotas in place is great, because it undoes generations' worth of racism that today manifests itself in socio-economic status. Affirmative action is actively trying to undo all the harm that racism and segregation have done in the past. If you are born African-American or Hispanic, you are likely to be born poorer. The police will treat you differently. Doors will be closed to you that are not to Caucasians. We need programs like Affirmative Action in place to undo all the harm that has been caused and continues to be caused.
We need something, I'm not saying we don't. Damage has been done and yes, it needs to be repaired. Affirmative action is not the answer, though. Seriously, think about it; why force a racist white guy to hire a minority employee he's just going to treat poorly, when there are plenty of non-racist businesses out there who would love to hire them and treat them well? They get that job and, oh, hey, the job market's tough, right? They put up with the abuse and never discover the companies that would treat them right and pay them what they're worth. Because of this, Affirmative action perpetuates racism, causing more damage, rather than repairing it.
And out on the job market? You think race doesn't matter, and that it's all academic. Well there are countless studies that have shown that the same resume will get treated differently if submitted under a different name - a "white-sounding" name will get a lot more calls back than a "black-sounding". Extremely so - sometimes the black names (again, same resumes) will get no calls back for 15 calls back for white names.
I never said race doesn't matter. Clearly, while I took the time to think about this and write those thoughts here, for you to read (thank you for acknowledging that, by the way), you didn't take the time to read and process all I have written. Go back and read my 7th paragraph again; I'd quote it here, but I'm trying to keep clear in my reply, here, who said what, and quoting myself would break that.
Racism is unfortunately well alive. Today it is mostly subconscious but it is still really harmful. From the fact that you gave this matter enough thought to come up with your rant above, and yet not discover the basic logical fallacy in it, though you seem otherwise intelligent, makes me think you have quite a bit of subconscious racism left too. It's okay if you do, many people do, especially if they are of the privileged class and never have to question their assumptions, or hav
Uhm... check your math, please. It's wrong, and that's a good thing. As a heterosexual male, I would be quite disappointed to live somewhere where 77% of the population was male; but then, since you're stating that 77% of the population is both male and white, that would place the male portion of the population somewhere north of 77%, would it not? To some, that would be a utopia; and more power to those people; but that's A) not for me and B) not even remotely accurate.
Just sayin'.
No, it's not how it already works. The GSM/LTE radio currently takes raw audio from the phone and compresses it with dedicated hardware, then blasts it out to the tower. It may be using IPv6, it may not be, but in either case, the compression, processing, and connection negotiation for voice data is done in hardware currently.. In fact, much more efficient, dedicated hardware.
What's being discussed here is a software solution. Audio processing and compression done in software, on the general purpose CPU. Connection negotiated in software, on the general purpose CPU. Packets assembled in software, on the general purpose CPU. That's a whole lot more activity on the CPU and likely not any less on the radio chip; how is that in any way similar to how it already works?
Assembled packets passed to the radio in software, on the general purpose CPU. I don't know about your phone, but all the phones I've owned in the past 5 years or so tend to heat up when I use the data connection or do anything CPU-intensive, but not so much during a voice call. My current phone, a recent flagship model also lasts about twice as long on a call as it does using the data connection (tested on my current phone with a call to my landline fresh off a full charge, then a multi gigabyte download fresh off a full charge, screen off and phone in the same location and position for both tests). Now, consider that in my tests, the phone call was about equal parts inbound and outbound data, constantly transmitting, while the download was primarily inbound data, with occasional bursts of ACK packets being transmitted; I'm not factoring in traffic caused as a result of maintaining the connection to the network, as both tests would have seen similar traffic, making it irrelevant.
To put that into perspective, the phone call, which was about equal parts transmit and receive, used about half the power of the download, which was mostly receive, primarily as a result of those packets being processed on the CPU, rather than by the dedicated hardware on the radio chip. Factor in the doing audio processing and compression on the CPU and your talk time is now much less than half of what you're getting now. Likely 1/3-1/4 by the time you account for a transmit rate roughly equal to the receive rate.
Apparently, this is what we have to look forward to. I'm so glad my smartphone is used as "a computer that also haas the ability to make calls, should I ever need to", rather than "a phone that can do some computer-y stuff when I want"; it means I'll be, by and large, unaffected by this change, should I ever own a VoLTE-enabled handset.
My day-to-day usage tells a different tale. You want to stand by and time me opening, editing, and saving files? First, using the mouse whenever reasonably possible, then again using keyboard shortcuts whenever reasonably possible. Let's see, for a real-life workflow, comparing the same application and platform, which is actually faster for a user who's experienced with the application they're using.
That's wonderful until you make changes, THEN decide you want to save the new version as a different document. Then, you have to duplicate, then roll back one of the copies to the previous state. Hopefully it didn't autosave more than a handful of times since you started editing, or you'll have a tough time finding the version you wanted to keep!
+5, Insightful and no flames or accusations? Slashdot, you have truly blown me away! I try not to be a cynic, but it's not often I can put as much effort and thought into a post here and actually be rewarded for it. Thank you, Slashdot, for restoring a little bit of my faith in humanity.
Okay, so if you're a racist white guy you might want to work for a company run by a bunch of racist white guys; I'd say ya got me there, but I actually already addressed that point.
And affirmative action should be ignored anywhere the client or customer must instill blind faith in the abilities of your team; not because minorities aren't capable, but because if you're going to hire a member of a minority group, it should be because they're qualified, not because you have a seat to fill and the law says you have to. Hiring anyone, minority or otherwise, for any other reason only serves to ensure that your customers can't trust your people.
I expected that heat, it's actually one of the things that keeps me coming back here. More than a handful of times I've been shown that my viewpoint or understanding of a topic is actually wrong and have emerged a better person for it.
But yes, given that "Save As" and "Duplicate" essentially do the same thing and that, by the time the action of either option has been completed, both copies of the file will be identical, it really and truly is impossible to save your new changes as a new file, leaving the original untouched; you *must* roll back the changes in one file or the other, which is an added step that clearly, based on some of the replies I've received, some people are perfectly willing to accept.
Hey! Any chance you can give your input on this post? I posted in terms of "black" and "white" because that's what most racists understand, but the post really applies unilaterally.
Full disclosure: I'm asking because you appear to be qualified to give your honest viewpoint on my comment. Your qualifications? Ironically, being a minority.
Moreso, if a company is run by someone racist enough to hire only whites, why would you want to work for them, anyway? I mean, even if you're white, unless you're racist, why would you want to work for them? And if you're not, you really shouldn't want your labor to line their pockets.
Uhm... you don't see the difference between sharing data you collect with the understanding that it won't be shared and sharing data that people provide you specifically with the intent that you will share it? Wow.
And if I'm reading you right, you're not saying you shouldn't trust a black doctor, just that you shouldn't trust an *unqualified* black doctor. Which, because you can't tell one from the other until after the fact, as a result of affirmative action, translates to "don't trust a black doctor".
People are going to call me a racist for this and I don't care. If someone can't piece this together for themselves and thinks my comments have anything to do with race (rather than the ludicrous, and patently racist, expectation that members of one race be judged on a different scale than members of another race), I can't be bothered to care what they think.
Affirmative action is bullshit!
Yes, you read that right. Affirmative action is bullshit. It only superficially helps black people who think they can't succeed without it; in reality, it only serves to help guilty racist old white guys sleep better at night. It's holding the black community back more than anything else, at this point, specifically for the reason stated at the top of this post.
A black guy and a white guy enter your office, both have the same degree form the same school. You know the white guy got into that school on his own merits, but, because of affirmative action, you don't know whether the black guy deserved to get in, or if he was accepted to fill a quota. That's not to say the black guy couldn't have possibly gotten into that school on his own merits, just that you don't, and can't, know that he did, because you have no way of knowing whether that school needed to fill a seat with a black guy in order to comply with the law. Likewise, when you hire the black guy, your customers have no way of knowing if you hired him because of his qualifications, or to comply with the law. Were you hiring the most qualified candidate, or just filling a quota? Your customers have no way of knowing.
All affirmative action hiring laws do is force people to hire people they don't want to and, therefore, shouldn't hire, regardless of reason.
Put yourself in the shoes of a black man for a moment (black guys, this should be easy for you)... Without affirmative action, would you have a harder time finding a job, as a result of rampant racism? I can't answer definitively, but I'll admit the answer is likely a very loud "yes". But think about it; do you want to work for a racist company? Do you want to work for a company that only hired you because they had to? There are enough companies out there run by people who are not racist that you should be able to find a job without having to settle for working at one that is. By forcing companies to hire you based on race, affirmative action prevents that; you don't know whether the company you're working for is run by racist assholes who hired you to fill a "black seat", or if they truly did hire you based on your qualifications; regardless of your qualifications. As a result of affirmative action, you could be willingly lining the pockets of a group of racist white guys and not even know it.
There are plenty of qualified and capable minority workers in the workforce. The trouble is, for anything that requires a higher level of trust than a cashier or cart retriever, affirmative action makes it impossible to tell, as a customer, whether the minority worker you're dealing with is actually qualified for the position until it's too late (if they're not). That's not to say every white guy who gets hired is qualified. Cronyism is definitely rampant, as well; but the fact is it's easier to fire a white guy who doesn't perform than it is to fire a minority worker for any reason, again due to affirmative action laws.
I don't know what the solution to this problem is, but I do know that it is not affirmative action. Maybe affirmative action is the best we can do and, if that's the case, that's a really sad situation for everyone involved. I know I don't want to be treated by a less-than-qualified doctor, and so I'm forced to avoid anyone who may have been hired to fill a seat; and there's nothing racist about that.
You must live in an area with shitty public transportation, then, if so few people are using it. In the SF Bay area, buses and trains are commonly standing-room-only during the day.
Just speculating here, but I wouldn't be surprised if, since it's being done in software, a less effective (this more efficient) algorithm is used for VoLTE. LTE data channels already use more power than LTE or GSM voice channels, by virtue of the data being processed by a general purpose chip (e.g. the phone's ARM CPU) versus the GSM or LTE radio handling the encoding of the voice data, so we're already looking at a substantial impact on battery life. Using an algorithm that yields best-case compression on a general purpose CPU will just add to the power requirements.
I think the article (and by transition, the summary) inverted the terminology, in which case, a 10% reduction in losses is a 10% of 10%, or a 1% improvement in efficiency.
Mouse beats keyboard until you have to switch between the two or you find your mouse cursor on the opposite end of three 4k displays from the thing you want to click. Also, it seems their argument for the mouse being faster centers around positioning the text-entry cursor within a body of text; nobody is going to argue with you on that point, yes, it's faster to click 20 rows and lower and 80 columns to the right than it is to make 100 keystrokes. It is certainly faster to press Ctrl-S (or Command-S) than to move off of the keyboard, over to the mouse, move over to the menu, click, move to "Save", and click again. There is a balance, and for some things, yes, a keyboard shortcut is faster (Bell even admits this in their findings). They're also only comparing the Plan 9 text editor, Acme, to emacs; a fair comparison would be keyboard shortcuts vs menus within the same application on the same platform. For anything more than 1 level deep, a keyboard shortcut is, in fact, faster; and the keyboard is definitely faster if you happen to lose track of your mouse cursor, which is pretty easy to do on a modern "hide the cursor when I start typing" platform, like Windows, OSX, and quite a number of X environments, especially if you have multiple displays. I can't count the number of times I thought I left my cursor on the primary display, then spent 30+sec scanning all 3 of my displays trying to find it; it doesn't help that both Windows and OSX seem to have a habit of "losing" the cursor, themselves... completely hiding it when it enters the currently-focused window, and refusing to show its location until that window has lost focus (it's a rare occurence and certainly a bug in both platforms, but it does happen)!
It depends. They could VLAN the voice traffic and not count it toward your data plan. The question is, will they? We're talking about Verizon; this isn't outside the realm or possibility in any way, but only time will tell.
This is open "enough" that it'll just come down to implementation details, more or less. Still, I'm not hopeful that the device manufacturers won't manage to fuck it up.
Also, will it fail when two companies implement VoLTE slightly differently? Think early 802.11n implementations...
This. Sadly, AT&T and Verizon will definitely do this. I don't doubt that T-Mobile will, as well, but since they offer unlimited (albeit, there's a cap on LTE speeds and you get throttled back to 2G speeds when you hit it -- unless you pay $30/mo for unlimited, which I do) it won't be quite as much of a cash grab for them. Sprint is an entirely different situation, being unlimited, but not really having enough data capacity to support it...
My wife had the same issue with using this laptop in a reclining position (I inherited it when she inherited a 13" 2012 model from her father when he decided he'd rather have a 15"), but I haven't had the same experience. That might be because I realigned the hinges. They sometimes get installed at a slight angle (the screws to allow for some tiny misalignment), which causes them to bind at some angles and appear loose at others. If you feel them binding as the lid is almost closed, you have this issue. Rather than straighten them, I misaligned them in the other direction, so they bind when open; the laptop stays closed just fine, even during transport, because it has a magnetic closure. It's a simple procedure, though you to have to take the laptop apart a little farther than you may be comfortable with.
I more than "half-acknowledge" how incorrect that rant is, I flat-out admit, in the first sentence, that the only Apple app I use is TextEdit, and that I use it in a minimalist capacity and, thus, have never encountered an issue with this. I then link to Apple's own documentation, which states that the options are, in fact, there, and verify that they exist in the app I use.
As for *why* I would knowingly go off on such a blatantly incorrectly-based rant? I was speaking hypothetically, in terms of the complaints I keep hearing, rather than in terms of the reality of the situation; I wasn't complaining, myself, but rather I was putting myself (and the reader) in the shoes of one of the complainers, looking at this from their, potentially ignorant, perspective, and feeling the same angst and frustration they display. The fact remains, since these complaints keep coming up, Apple did fuck up by changing what their users are familiar with.
Seriously, someone who's computer illiterate, but has learned what the Save and Save As functions do would feel like those functions were removed, even if just one of them was renamed. If you don't believe me, well, that's just fine; come up with a better explanation for why people are complaining that they're gone, then.
Late 2011 17" MBP here... Apple screwed the pooch removing the Save function from their apps; though their current online documentation implies that it's back (and, indeed, it is in TextEdit, the only Apple app I use).
Another thing Apple screwed up was dropping the 17" MBP line. 17" Retina MBP? Yes, please. Even if it's the same resolution as the 15", making the pixels just a hair bigger won't hurt; I like a slightly larger machine that can fit comfortably on my lap, without requiring that I keep my legs smashed together lest it fall between them, and has ample component spacing to allow for decent cooling, thank you very much. I'd love an upgrade, but they don't offer anything I find compelling anymore.