I have a family now, so I need to make sure we're going to be covered should anything happen.
Then I highly suggest that your wife get a full-time job that qualifies for health care. In addition, it will provide some income while your business starts up, or in the unfortunate event that it does not take off.
Because the absolute first thing *I* thought when I heard of this atrocity is: "Orwell would be proud."
The first thing I thought was "Man, a whole lot of administrators are going to get arrested on child pornography charges."
I would love to know what school official actually thought that remotely enabling the webcam would be a good idea. With people like that educating our children, I think we're screwed.
I'm no meteorologist. I can't tell what weather we will have tomorrow, but I can reliably predict that the average temperature (where I live) will be higher six months from now. It's called summer. Strange, huh? No idea about short term, pretty good idea about long term average.
No! You can't predict the long-term average. That is the whole point of the global warming debate! Maybe you can tell me if I should wear shorts or a sweater, but not what the average temperature increase will be each year for 100 years. Nor can you tell me with certainty how any temperature fluctuations will affect the Earth's weather.
The problem arises from the fact that current average predictions are based on direct measurements collected over a human timescale (hundreds of years) with interpreted data going back a few thousands. That's not predictive science, that's history. With that data people (you, included) are saying you can confidently account for atmospheric both climate fluctuations (that occur on a geologic timescale) and possible human-induced fluctuations (that manifest themselves occur over an unknown timescale)?
It's preposterous. And what is sad is that the scientists who are willing to acknowledge that we don't really have a handle on exactly what is going on are being drowned out and browbeaten by the ones who are shouting that they do.
So... we're not supposed to bother our pretty little heads trying to understand the basics of the earth's energy budget, how much comes in vs. how much goes out. But trying to "read between the lines", however, like some kind of psychoanalytic literary critic, that is supposed to tell us something? Sure.
You can go wild thinking about the energy budget, but the problem is complex enough that you will not be able to get meaningful data without a multiprocessor computer, a good computer model of the earth's climate processes, proper understanding of the sources and sinks, and a hell of a lot of time and funding to work on the problem. There are already people doing this, which is why I suggest reading their work to weed out the headline-grabbers from the real scientists.
You're right, though. Both sides are full of shit. Both the climate "skeptics", and the people like you who pretend to be "fair and balanced" without knowing shit.
Heh. I am not pretending to be fair and balanced. I am saying that there is currently not enough data available to experimentally prove that global warming is or is not happening. Anyone who is saying otherwise is full of shit.
People like you are part of the problem. As you said, you aren't a meterologist and from your arrogant comment you clearly don't have a good understanding on how nuanced the climate fluctuations are, but you chose your side and have decided everyone else is wrong.
I used to agree with you, then I started reading the journal articles.
You don't have to have a PhD in the relevant field to know when some is doing science wrong. When a research facility hides its data and refuses to reveal the precise methods -- in this case, source code -- by which another facility can duplicate its results, that is doing it wrong.
Definitely. My point was that you are describing both the pro- and anti-global warming studies. There are bad apples on both sides muddying the water.
But you probably do need a Ph.D. to interpret the actual data and figure out what is actually going on with the climate, right?
NASA got caught faking data 2 or 3 years ago by theregister. The Brit experts then get caught admitting they fake data last year.
Everyone publishing used those 2 as the ultimate source of their data. The data currently published cannot be trusted. None of it. Chuck it all, and prove it with fresh uncontaminated numbers, if you can find them. Then I'll believe it. Maybe.
Hmmm, who to believe: (1) The greedy big-business oil companies sponsoring studies that say we are just experiencing a normal global warming cycle and that the commie liberal tree-huggers are using all false data? Or (2) the commie liberal climate scientists (who can't predict the weather a week in advance) telling me that we are DEFINITELY experiencing global warming and that if I doubt it then I am a moron and not worthy of their time.
I think I am going to go with.... both sides are full of shit and have agendas. And agendas and science don't mix.
But it is comforting that while we may not be able to wrap our head around climate science, we definitely can rely on our proven ability to politicize a scientific issue to the point that the actual answer doesn't fucking matter anymore. Way to go humanity.
P.S. If you don't have a Masters degree or equivalent in a physical science, then you are absolutely not qualified to interpret any climate data or its validity, so stop trying. If climate studies seem clear to you, it is because they have been dumbed down so that you will *think* you understand the issue. The best you can do is ready a lot of studies and attempt to read between the lines in each of them, but you will never actually understand what is going on... the climate scientists aren't even at that level.
I would love to see the funding justification for this work. Not being snotty, I just want to know how to get research dollars for things that appear to have no practical purpose.
Bad joke. If California were a separate nation, it would be the eighth largest economy in the world, right after Italy and before Spain, Canada, Brazil, Russia, India, and on and on. Australia is an entire continent, and its economy is less than half the size of California's. What Californians are pissed about is that we also have some of the highest taxes in the nation, and we have no idea where that money is all going.
You want an even worse joke? If California was a separate nation, they would be Greece... because they are completely broke! Har, har, har.
Seriously though, maybe the larger the economy, the more overconfidence that nothing will go wrong.
How do you solve the problem though? Where is the money going? Into too many social services? Into too many government jobs? What politician is going to have the stones to cut social services and jobs to save the budget? Essentially, it highlights how the US is slowly strangling itself.
Don't worry though Californians, because what is going on for you is probably an indication of what is going to happen to the US as a whole if we don't get our shit worked out pretty quick.
Have you tried the Pilot G2 pens? Hands down, best writing utensil in my book. The fountain pens are a pain from a practicality sense. The gel pens work better.
Just a shame the "digital pens" aren't gel.
The gel pen tips always get goobery after a month or so no matter how often you wipe them. And them never seem to write as well as a fountain pen.
Agreed. Fountain pens require some maintenance, but they are the best for note taking. You need to make sure you get a low maintenance, sturdy pen for that task though: steel nib, large ink reservoir, and preferably a light metal body construction for durability.
I personally use the Lamy Safari or Al Star for all my note taking. They are cheap and can be dropped or run them over with car tires and they keep on writing smoothly. And if you do lose them, they are relatively cheap.
Re:Actually, this quite possibly could be useful.
on
Spray-On Liquid Glass
·
· Score: 1
I know this was meant as a joke, but the way wind shields are repaired is essentially spraying in some clear liquid which hardens. It might be difficult to use this spray to get a clear windshield, but the key thing which causes cracks to run is the sharpness of the crack. If this could be sprayed in soon after the crack forms, it may keep the crack from running by blunting the crack tip.
There is actually no "spraying" involved in window repair. They inject an epoxy into the chip. The epoxy has a refractive index that matches the glass so you can look through it without getting dizzy. In cases of a deep crack, they will pull a partial vacuum prior to injection in an attempt to get the epoxy to fully penetrate. Simply spraying epoxy on the window would not be enough to get the epoxy into the ding or crack without leaving an air gap.
Also, there is no way a spray would blunt the crack tip. The only way to arrest a crack in a brittle material are to (1) either steer it back on itself, (2) drill a relieving hole to remove the stress concentration at the crack tip, or to (3) fill it with epoxy to keep the two edges of the crack together and prevent differential stress in the material.
as long as i can remember, the next generation has always looked worse than the previous generation. mostly because they did thing differently. generation X was said to be lazy 15 years ago because they sat around with their computers all the time instead of working in a factory
I guess. I think there has been a slow decline in generational work ethic since World War 2. People from that generation always seemed incredibly capable to me, as if they could do anything. The baby boomers were less capable, but still excelled at a few life skills and were generally well-mannered. I always figured that the veterans beat that into their kids. Most people in Generation X didn't seem to know how to change their oil, but most made it though college after suffering though adolescent angst. The current teenage generation (don't know what they are called) can't seem to do anything except type on their cell phones while driving.
I find that each generation has more useless people in it. Maybe we need a big war to weed out all the rejects again and toughen everyone else up.
I'd worry about the battery life: What good is a gun that you can't use when you need it?
Most people with kids keep their guns in electronic gun safes... so they are already worrying about batteries.
Personally, as a firearm owner, I think this is an interesting device. It's always nice to not have to worry about being shot with your own gun when you get home from work. I think the watch is a little kludgy and the price is ridiculous, but it will be interesting to see how this evolves.
It has to make you think about what kind of society are we living in today that legislators would even have to consider putting forward a law like this.
Let's review: Twenty teenagers watched the gangrape of a 16-year-old girl outside a high school without doing ANYTHING and your primary concern is a fucking good samaritan law eroding your freedom?
I am a little more worried about the how those spectators will be the future of America.
And if you could, in any way, justify not reporting a violent crime in action (even anonymously), you have some serious issues. That's the problem nowdays, we've been reduced to sheep who don't want to get our hoofs dirty, so we just watch and wait for someone else to fix the problem.
At least in my field (Mobile Robotics), Chinese papers are everywhere but none of the ones I found were some kind of breakthrough.
China is all about volume simply bc they are HUGE.
And also... I'm still waiting to see a major civil war there sometime..
Definitely right from my field too (fluid mechanics). Most of their papers are copies of others' ideas. And also, most of them are of very poor scientific quality. When reviewing, I normally accept 50%, but for Chinese papers it works about to only about 10% acceptance rate. They are definitely doing a lot of work and a small percentage of it is quality, but the rest is crap. They don't really know why they are doing it and have no long term focus.
It is pretty clear that their scientists are either really being encouraged (or being forced) to publish the most work possible. I think they just submit their papers to the most prestigous journal, and keep submitting them to lesser quality journals until it is accepted somewhere. This doesn't mean that China is "leading world scientific research," it just means that they submit a lot of papers. If you keep trying, you eventually get that perfect(ly incompetent) combination of reviewers that doesn't care enough to let your crappy paper through. Much like you will eventually get lucky at a bar if you keep asking every girl to sleep with you.
It's almost like they are trying to live up to the term "Chinese copy."
Come on. That is my regular work schedule plus a few more hours in the evening when I feel like it. It's what comes with having exempt pay status. Only in California is that considered inhumane. If they employees don't like it, they should get another job that pays more or has better hours.
I am sorry to be negative, but this Slashdot post reads like it was written by someone with absolutely no experience in astronomy.
While the gentleman certainly takes high-quality pictures, he is solidly in the amateur category and no different from the thousands of other committed amateur astronomers that have a minimum of $20K in equipment to be able to observe and image the stars. There are amateurs who take much better pictures and have far more spectacular (and expensive) equipment out there.
Furthermore, it is absolutely ridiculous and insulting to compare his images to that of the Hubble Space Telescope. His telescope has a smaller aperature (8 inches versus 95 inches), his CCD resolution is much lower and has a much higher operating temperature. Furthermore, he has to contend with the effects of atmospheric distortion. Just because the object shapes and colors look similar to a layperson, his images achieve nowhere near the resolution and detail of the Hubble.
The other thing about handwriting is that you can do it one handed at decent speed. If you have one hand holding a clipboard, notepad, tablet, etc, you need good text input with one hand. If you only ever write where you can use 2 hands, such as at your desk, a keyboard (ie PC or laptop) is probably best.
I agree. The other really awesome thing about a pen and paper is that you can drop them both hard and they still work. Also, they don't need battery power to function and are far less obtrusive than a battery powered device. I can also write shorthand incredibly fast. It isn't formal shorthand, but rather the first 2-3 letters of the word followed by a line that is approximately the length of the word. It seems strange, but I can read my shorthand several month later, so it works for me.
Also, maybe it is because I am old (33), but I find it easier to formulate my thoughts on paper and then transfer them to the computer. When I try to do it on the computer, it is much more difficult to mentally focus on the project. And that is if the internet connection is unplugged, if I am networked then forget any focus whatsoever.
And I don't mean my title to sound flippant. It's just that I stopped reading the NYT years ago and don't really miss any of their content. There are plenty of other online news sources where I can get my news. Not to mention that their articles are verbose and have a decidedly liberal bent. Even as a liberal, I don't always appreciate that.
If they don't want to offer ad-supported online news, they should stick to their printed newspaper. They do that well. Charging for online content isn't going to work for them in the long run and the debate over how to deal with it is just going to consume them and detract from them being the best news source they can be.
And another thought, maybe they aren't as epic as they think they are. CNN and BBC are able to provide free content. I know they are larger news companies that provide multiple media outputs. But it seems to be working for them...
I am proud of Google for telling China to piss off. The US government hasn't been able to do this for years because they are afraid of losing the cheap Chinese imports, even though it is decimating our economy.
In a full-blown war where it's drastic enough to start downing birds, you're going to hit anything that could possibly help your enemies and give you a better chance to survive.
In a full-blown war, the first attack will be to nuke the enemy, repeatedly. And then to nuke them one more time for good measure.
These stupid satellite games are more for skirmishes when you don't want to annihilate the enemy, but just cripple them.
Unless India finally realized that India is right next door, so the fallout will blow back into their country...
Put him in a room, and turn the wireless on and off. Guaranteed he won't be able to tell the difference.
The real way to solve it is to turn up the gain. Maybe he will spontaneously combust! Or maybe he won't know the difference. Either way, problem solved.
...that's still too expensive for Joe Shiftworker. Doesn't it just give you a warm fuzzy to see people driving past you in cars that you can't afford to buy because the Government gouged you so hard in order to give your tax money to the people who can afford to buy them?
Yeah, I got the same fuzzy feeling when the government gave massive tax breaks to those same "poor" people who were buying new houses. And when they helped people who were upside down on their mortgages to refinance because they bought more home than they could afford. And when they instituted Cash-for-Clunkers so that people with old pickups and SUVs could buy bigger pickups and SUVs.
You know who the government fucks hard? Middle class people who responsibly manage their money. They don't qualify for government assistance and they can't don't have enough money to shelter it like the rich. So cry me a river.
Slashdot Mirror
I have a family now, so I need to make sure we're going to be covered should anything happen.
Then I highly suggest that your wife get a full-time job that qualifies for health care. In addition, it will provide some income while your business starts up, or in the unfortunate event that it does not take off.
Because the absolute first thing *I* thought when I heard of this atrocity is: "Orwell would be proud."
The first thing I thought was "Man, a whole lot of administrators are going to get arrested on child pornography charges."
I would love to know what school official actually thought that remotely enabling the webcam would be a good idea. With people like that educating our children, I think we're screwed.
I'm no meteorologist. I can't tell what weather we will have tomorrow, but I can reliably predict that the average temperature (where I live) will be higher six months from now. It's called summer. Strange, huh? No idea about short term, pretty good idea about long term average.
No! You can't predict the long-term average. That is the whole point of the global warming debate! Maybe you can tell me if I should wear shorts or a sweater, but not what the average temperature increase will be each year for 100 years. Nor can you tell me with certainty how any temperature fluctuations will affect the Earth's weather.
The problem arises from the fact that current average predictions are based on direct measurements collected over a human timescale (hundreds of years) with interpreted data going back a few thousands. That's not predictive science, that's history. With that data people (you, included) are saying you can confidently account for atmospheric both climate fluctuations (that occur on a geologic timescale) and possible human-induced fluctuations (that manifest themselves occur over an unknown timescale)?
It's preposterous. And what is sad is that the scientists who are willing to acknowledge that we don't really have a handle on exactly what is going on are being drowned out and browbeaten by the ones who are shouting that they do.
So... we're not supposed to bother our pretty little heads trying to understand the basics of the earth's energy budget, how much comes in vs. how much goes out. But trying to "read between the lines", however, like some kind of psychoanalytic literary critic, that is supposed to tell us something? Sure.
You can go wild thinking about the energy budget, but the problem is complex enough that you will not be able to get meaningful data without a multiprocessor computer, a good computer model of the earth's climate processes, proper understanding of the sources and sinks, and a hell of a lot of time and funding to work on the problem. There are already people doing this, which is why I suggest reading their work to weed out the headline-grabbers from the real scientists.
You're right, though. Both sides are full of shit. Both the climate "skeptics", and the people like you who pretend to be "fair and balanced" without knowing shit.
Heh. I am not pretending to be fair and balanced. I am saying that there is currently not enough data available to experimentally prove that global warming is or is not happening. Anyone who is saying otherwise is full of shit.
People like you are part of the problem. As you said, you aren't a meterologist and from your arrogant comment you clearly don't have a good understanding on how nuanced the climate fluctuations are, but you chose your side and have decided everyone else is wrong.
I used to agree with you, then I started reading the journal articles.
You don't have to have a PhD in the relevant field to know when some is doing science wrong. When a research facility hides its data and refuses to reveal the precise methods -- in this case, source code -- by which another facility can duplicate its results, that is doing it wrong.
Definitely. My point was that you are describing both the pro- and anti-global warming studies. There are bad apples on both sides muddying the water.
But you probably do need a Ph.D. to interpret the actual data and figure out what is actually going on with the climate, right?
NASA got caught faking data 2 or 3 years ago by theregister. The Brit experts then get caught admitting they fake data last year.
Everyone publishing used those 2 as the ultimate source of their data. The data currently published cannot be trusted. None of it. Chuck it all, and prove it with fresh uncontaminated numbers, if you can find them. Then I'll believe it. Maybe.
Hmmm, who to believe: (1) The greedy big-business oil companies sponsoring studies that say we are just experiencing a normal global warming cycle and that the commie liberal tree-huggers are using all false data? Or (2) the commie liberal climate scientists (who can't predict the weather a week in advance) telling me that we are DEFINITELY experiencing global warming and that if I doubt it then I am a moron and not worthy of their time.
I think I am going to go with.... both sides are full of shit and have agendas. And agendas and science don't mix.
But it is comforting that while we may not be able to wrap our head around climate science, we definitely can rely on our proven ability to politicize a scientific issue to the point that the actual answer doesn't fucking matter anymore. Way to go humanity.
P.S. If you don't have a Masters degree or equivalent in a physical science, then you are absolutely not qualified to interpret any climate data or its validity, so stop trying. If climate studies seem clear to you, it is because they have been dumbed down so that you will *think* you understand the issue. The best you can do is ready a lot of studies and attempt to read between the lines in each of them, but you will never actually understand what is going on... the climate scientists aren't even at that level.
No, duct tape, a sawzall and pliers can fix anything. Duct tape by itself can only fix 1/3 of anything.
I would love to see the funding justification for this work. Not being snotty, I just want to know how to get research dollars for things that appear to have no practical purpose.
I would say that "A4-sized sheets of PET plastic" count as consumables. This is a marketing scam.
Bad joke. If California were a separate nation, it would be the eighth largest economy in the world, right after Italy and before Spain, Canada, Brazil, Russia, India, and on and on. Australia is an entire continent, and its economy is less than half the size of California's. What Californians are pissed about is that we also have some of the highest taxes in the nation, and we have no idea where that money is all going.
You want an even worse joke? If California was a separate nation, they would be Greece... because they are completely broke! Har, har, har.
Seriously though, maybe the larger the economy, the more overconfidence that nothing will go wrong.
How do you solve the problem though? Where is the money going? Into too many social services? Into too many government jobs? What politician is going to have the stones to cut social services and jobs to save the budget? Essentially, it highlights how the US is slowly strangling itself.
Don't worry though Californians, because what is going on for you is probably an indication of what is going to happen to the US as a whole if we don't get our shit worked out pretty quick.
Have you tried the Pilot G2 pens? Hands down, best writing utensil in my book. The fountain pens are a pain from a practicality sense. The gel pens work better.
Just a shame the "digital pens" aren't gel.
The gel pen tips always get goobery after a month or so no matter how often you wipe them. And them never seem to write as well as a fountain pen.
Then you've been using shitty fountain pens.
Agreed. Fountain pens require some maintenance, but they are the best for note taking. You need to make sure you get a low maintenance, sturdy pen for that task though: steel nib, large ink reservoir, and preferably a light metal body construction for durability.
I personally use the Lamy Safari or Al Star for all my note taking. They are cheap and can be dropped or run them over with car tires and they keep on writing smoothly. And if you do lose them, they are relatively cheap.
I know this was meant as a joke, but the way wind shields are repaired is essentially spraying in some clear liquid which hardens. It might be difficult to use this spray to get a clear windshield, but the key thing which causes cracks to run is the sharpness of the crack. If this could be sprayed in soon after the crack forms, it may keep the crack from running by blunting the crack tip.
There is actually no "spraying" involved in window repair. They inject an epoxy into the chip. The epoxy has a refractive index that matches the glass so you can look through it without getting dizzy. In cases of a deep crack, they will pull a partial vacuum prior to injection in an attempt to get the epoxy to fully penetrate. Simply spraying epoxy on the window would not be enough to get the epoxy into the ding or crack without leaving an air gap.
Also, there is no way a spray would blunt the crack tip. The only way to arrest a crack in a brittle material are to (1) either steer it back on itself, (2) drill a relieving hole to remove the stress concentration at the crack tip, or to (3) fill it with epoxy to keep the two edges of the crack together and prevent differential stress in the material.
as long as i can remember, the next generation has always looked worse than the previous generation. mostly because they did thing differently. generation X was said to be lazy 15 years ago because they sat around with their computers all the time instead of working in a factory
I guess. I think there has been a slow decline in generational work ethic since World War 2. People from that generation always seemed incredibly capable to me, as if they could do anything. The baby boomers were less capable, but still excelled at a few life skills and were generally well-mannered. I always figured that the veterans beat that into their kids. Most people in Generation X didn't seem to know how to change their oil, but most made it though college after suffering though adolescent angst. The current teenage generation (don't know what they are called) can't seem to do anything except type on their cell phones while driving.
I find that each generation has more useless people in it. Maybe we need a big war to weed out all the rejects again and toughen everyone else up.
I'd worry about the battery life: What good is a gun that you can't use when you need it?
Most people with kids keep their guns in electronic gun safes... so they are already worrying about batteries.
Personally, as a firearm owner, I think this is an interesting device. It's always nice to not have to worry about being shot with your own gun when you get home from work. I think the watch is a little kludgy and the price is ridiculous, but it will be interesting to see how this evolves.
It has to make you think about what kind of society are we living in today that legislators would even have to consider putting forward a law like this.
Let's review: Twenty teenagers watched the gangrape of a 16-year-old girl outside a high school without doing ANYTHING and your primary concern is a fucking good samaritan law eroding your freedom?
I am a little more worried about the how those spectators will be the future of America.
And if you could, in any way, justify not reporting a violent crime in action (even anonymously), you have some serious issues. That's the problem nowdays, we've been reduced to sheep who don't want to get our hoofs dirty, so we just watch and wait for someone else to fix the problem.
I, for one, welcome our all-composite overlords.
At least in my field (Mobile Robotics), Chinese papers are everywhere but none of the ones I found were some kind of breakthrough. China is all about volume simply bc they are HUGE. And also... I'm still waiting to see a major civil war there sometime..
Definitely right from my field too (fluid mechanics). Most of their papers are copies of others' ideas. And also, most of them are of very poor scientific quality. When reviewing, I normally accept 50%, but for Chinese papers it works about to only about 10% acceptance rate. They are definitely doing a lot of work and a small percentage of it is quality, but the rest is crap. They don't really know why they are doing it and have no long term focus.
It is pretty clear that their scientists are either really being encouraged (or being forced) to publish the most work possible. I think they just submit their papers to the most prestigous journal, and keep submitting them to lesser quality journals until it is accepted somewhere. This doesn't mean that China is "leading world scientific research," it just means that they submit a lot of papers. If you keep trying, you eventually get that perfect(ly incompetent) combination of reviewers that doesn't care enough to let your crappy paper through. Much like you will eventually get lucky at a bar if you keep asking every girl to sleep with you.
It's almost like they are trying to live up to the term "Chinese copy."
12-hour work days and 6-day weeks
Come on. That is my regular work schedule plus a few more hours in the evening when I feel like it. It's what comes with having exempt pay status. Only in California is that considered inhumane. If they employees don't like it, they should get another job that pays more or has better hours.
I am sorry to be negative, but this Slashdot post reads like it was written by someone with absolutely no experience in astronomy.
While the gentleman certainly takes high-quality pictures, he is solidly in the amateur category and no different from the thousands of other committed amateur astronomers that have a minimum of $20K in equipment to be able to observe and image the stars. There are amateurs who take much better pictures and have far more spectacular (and expensive) equipment out there.
Furthermore, it is absolutely ridiculous and insulting to compare his images to that of the Hubble Space Telescope. His telescope has a smaller aperature (8 inches versus 95 inches), his CCD resolution is much lower and has a much higher operating temperature. Furthermore, he has to contend with the effects of atmospheric distortion. Just because the object shapes and colors look similar to a layperson, his images achieve nowhere near the resolution and detail of the Hubble.
The other thing about handwriting is that you can do it one handed at decent speed. If you have one hand holding a clipboard, notepad, tablet, etc, you need good text input with one hand. If you only ever write where you can use 2 hands, such as at your desk, a keyboard (ie PC or laptop) is probably best.
I agree. The other really awesome thing about a pen and paper is that you can drop them both hard and they still work. Also, they don't need battery power to function and are far less obtrusive than a battery powered device. I can also write shorthand incredibly fast. It isn't formal shorthand, but rather the first 2-3 letters of the word followed by a line that is approximately the length of the word. It seems strange, but I can read my shorthand several month later, so it works for me.
Also, maybe it is because I am old (33), but I find it easier to formulate my thoughts on paper and then transfer them to the computer. When I try to do it on the computer, it is much more difficult to mentally focus on the project. And that is if the internet connection is unplugged, if I am networked then forget any focus whatsoever.
And I don't mean my title to sound flippant. It's just that I stopped reading the NYT years ago and don't really miss any of their content. There are plenty of other online news sources where I can get my news. Not to mention that their articles are verbose and have a decidedly liberal bent. Even as a liberal, I don't always appreciate that.
If they don't want to offer ad-supported online news, they should stick to their printed newspaper. They do that well. Charging for online content isn't going to work for them in the long run and the debate over how to deal with it is just going to consume them and detract from them being the best news source they can be.
And another thought, maybe they aren't as epic as they think they are. CNN and BBC are able to provide free content. I know they are larger news companies that provide multiple media outputs. But it seems to be working for them...
I am proud of Google for telling China to piss off. The US government hasn't been able to do this for years because they are afraid of losing the cheap Chinese imports, even though it is decimating our economy.
In a full-blown war where it's drastic enough to start downing birds, you're going to hit anything that could possibly help your enemies and give you a better chance to survive.
In a full-blown war, the first attack will be to nuke the enemy, repeatedly. And then to nuke them one more time for good measure.
These stupid satellite games are more for skirmishes when you don't want to annihilate the enemy, but just cripple them.
Unless India finally realized that India is right next door, so the fallout will blow back into their country...
You can't be "Allergic to wi-fi"
Put him in a room, and turn the wireless on and off. Guaranteed he won't be able to tell the difference.
The real way to solve it is to turn up the gain. Maybe he will spontaneously combust! Or maybe he won't know the difference. Either way, problem solved.
...that's still too expensive for Joe Shiftworker. Doesn't it just give you a warm fuzzy to see people driving past you in cars that you can't afford to buy because the Government gouged you so hard in order to give your tax money to the people who can afford to buy them?
Yeah, I got the same fuzzy feeling when the government gave massive tax breaks to those same "poor" people who were buying new houses. And when they helped people who were upside down on their mortgages to refinance because they bought more home than they could afford. And when they instituted Cash-for-Clunkers so that people with old pickups and SUVs could buy bigger pickups and SUVs.
You know who the government fucks hard? Middle class people who responsibly manage their money. They don't qualify for government assistance and they can't don't have enough money to shelter it like the rich. So cry me a river.