Which is only an important distinction as long as one can remove oneself from the presence of pot. If it's legalized it's going to be a much less distinct line between physical and psychological addiction.
The suggestion you're making that it being psychologically addictive is somehow better than it being physically addictive is just plain ignorant. Tell that to individuals suffering from OCD, I'm sure they'll be glad to hear that their addictions to behaviors is somehow less serious because it's not a physical addiction.
I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. Yes, the guys at PARC didn't create the first GUI, but they did expand upon it more than everybody else up until that point. They had made substantial progress to creating a paperless office.
I like that you're towing the Apple "we didn't rip off Xerox" line, but it's bullshit, Xerox ultimately unsuccessfully sued them for doing it. That's not exactly indicative of a deal to share ideas.
When it comes to Xerox, they would have released the stuff eventually, it's rather ignorant to suggest that they were developing all that stuff just to develop it. Xerox was going to release it eventually, they just mistakenly agreed to show their stuff to Jobs and the rest is history.
Hobbes was writing over three centuries before the invention of chemical weapons or the atomic bomb. Suggesting that folks now could go back to things in that way is naive to say the least.
I'm a fan of Hobbes writings, but trying to apply it in that way to the modern world requires a certain dedication to ignorance.
A half a billion is like nothing compared with the benefits that we're going to get from the other companies that are being invested in. 0.5 billion is a bit more than a dollar a person for every man woman and child in the US, it's not a huge amount of money compared with other expenditures. Sure it was an unfortunate happening, but it's hardly as bad as the rather egregious losses under GOP stewardship.
As for welfare, you like every other libertard out there is opposed to them now, but how many of you folks are opposed to them when they're eligible? I don't often hear about people turning down medicare or portions of the Social Security dollars when they get it.
When it comes to income redistribution, the GOP has done more of that in the last decade than any and all parties combined up until that point. It's astonishing to me that people can still suggest with a straight face that Democrats redistribute wealth, implying that the GOP doesn't. At least the Democrats comprehend where wealth comes from in the first place.
What's drained the work ethic in the US is the lack of reward for labor. Most labor is done for the benefit of the rich investor class whereas the people actually doing the work get screwed. No pension plans, no loyalty from the company and no guarantee that they'll be able to pay for the necessities of life without those social programs from the government.
If you want to blame anybody, blame the corporations that offshore work when the workers can't afford to make the concessions the company has demanded.
As far America taking care of the worst off, I challenge you to come to a large city and ask the homeless people you meet if they're being well taken care of.
The issue isn't technology, the issue is that the government has been investing less and less in education in recent years. A large part of why college costs keep going up is the continued cuts by state and federal government. I'm sure the prices are going up even when taking that into account, but I doubt it would be anywhere near as steep an increase.
As for technology, it can help make teachers more efficient and provide better service, but it's hardly a panacea, anybody that was capable of learning that much on their own is probably not going to waste money on a degree in the first place.
If they're not careful they can get sued for violating the various affirmative action laws. What they have to be really careful about is what happens if they aren't hiring the expected number of minorities and women. There are no quotas per se in the US, but if there is a conspicuous lack of diversity it tends to attract law suits from individuals that aren't being hired or promoted. And if it turns out that the job posting has requirements that are fraudulent and that tends towards discouraging minority applicants, there could be a law suit.
As for quality of education, it really depends, the UK in general and England in particular is a much smaller entity than the US, there are good schools here and bad schools here, but the good schools are still the envy of the world.
Nice trolling, so in your vision, only the wealthy should go to college because clearly the ability to be born to wealthy parents is a significant contribution to society.
Social Security and socialized medicine are entitlements, it's something that people ought to be entitled for just for being born American citizens. It's a right that people in other parts of the developed world take for granted.
The point isn't that the GOP is trying to take those things away, it's _why_ they're trying to take them away. They're trying to take them away so that they can give to the wealthy, and cut taxes for corporations who in some cases don't pay any federal taxes. But, most importantly it's because if the average worker didn't have to work for a large company to have health insurance they'd be significantly more likely to do crazy things like start a business or work at something that they enjoy.
lol, the answer would be farther north. The amount of extra energy you get from the solar cells isn't likely to ever provide enough extra energy to provide the extra cooling. Heating in the winter isn't going to be a problem as the datacenter is going to produce more than enough to keep it within the design parameters.
Of course, if somebody does ever manage 100% efficient cells and a cooling system that's 100% efficient then it might theoretically break even.
Yes, but ultimately, they did implement it and it's still going strong 40+ years later. That says something, and it's not like Apple which manages to maintain a small section of the market with limited competition. C isn't as widely used as it used to be, but it's managed to do quite well considering the huge number of languages that have popped up in the mean time, many of which were gunning for it.
Not really, home computing is definitely significant, but it was Woz and the guys at PARC that ought to get the lion's share of the credit there. Woz for allowing for the Apple ][ to be produced at a price that people could afford and PARC for creating all the stuff that Apple ultimately ripped off for the Mac. Take away either of those and you probably wouldn't have Apple computers still on sale by Apple.
Computing power was increasing, even without Apple, machines would have been powerful enough to run Unix before too long. Sure, Apple sped the process up, but it's really hard to suggest that it wouldn't have happened. Unix OTOH, was completely revolutionary and between it and C, you have a very hard time finding products that don't at some point come into contact with either of those things during production. Apple products, not so much.
It doesn't mean that Steve Jobs didn't contribute, but it does lead to questions as to why he's deserving of a day, when somebody who gave so much more hasn't.
Which is precisely why Ritchie is in need of a day of recognition. The work he did was influential in a way that Steve Jobs can only dream of. Hell, even the products that Apple sells these days make heavy use of innovations from C and Unix.
Re:That's why the world works.
on
Dennis Ritchie Day
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
California had a day to recognize Steve Jobs, Dennis Ritchie had a much larger impact on the world at large than Steve did. Steve just was really good at PR.
Except that even in China Chinese goods have a reputation for being crap. Most of them would much rather buy American when they can afford it, rather than having to worry about safety and quality issues.
I"ve noticed that myself, my rig should run The Witcher 2 without too much trouble according to the site, but in practice the system plays laggy and ultimately it's not playable. Kind of like Quake when I first bought it.
Pretty much, the Mexican government would have to grant permission for the US to send forces down there. Not politically popular, despite the violence. The US has been providing surveillance. As long as the NRA is fighting to defend the rights of people to buy firearms with little or no documentation it's going to be hard to prevent or slow the flow of weapons to Mexico which would have a significant impact on the cartels.
Same goes for all the drug users that insist that it's a personal decision, despite them funding the cartels.
There is always that possibility, but you have an officer on site and there's accountability there. And don't forget that innocent civilians aren't typically expecting death from above. What happens if there's a glitch in the system? These presumably aren't going to be fully automated, but you still have the risk of mistakes happening, and people being vulnerable that wouldn't otherwise be vulnerable. You also don't have any information about the scene that isn't specifically accounted for by one of the sensors. Police are far from perfect, but having personnel deployed is a significant advantage if you need to worry about killing innocent civilians.
This strikes me as a significant move towards a fascist dictatorship.
As for grenade launcher type weapons, the summary pretty clearly implied that it was actual grenades. Tear gas is typically less than lethal. Of course I suppose that there is a remote risk of death, like with rubber bullets, but they are intended to be less than lethal, unlike grenades.
The Clinton administration failed to account for the sort of drunken spending orgy that only Republicans can manage. And I can't blame him for not seeing it coming, the GOP has been quite adament about no new taxes and one would naturally assume that they'd recognize that it would entail no new spending as well.
President Bush, during his term in office, managed to blow trillions of dollars on pointless expenditures and funds for his cronies. There's no way that Obama is going to be able to predict what spending is going to happen to whomever it is that's President after he's out of office.
You do realize that the officials under the Clinton administration that were studying these things were conservative economists, right?
Given that a balanced portfolio will include bonds for protection during times where the stock market isn't doing well, where are those investment dollars supposed to go? You need investment in order to grow the economy, unless you take the alternate route of nationalizing all the industries and fund it directly via tax dollars. If you don't have adequate protection from the temporary risks associated with stocks, you're probably not going to put as much money into investments as you would have.
Those economists are idiots. The only reason that's at all a risk is because the Federal Reserve has allowed the wealth to accumulate in the hands of a small group of people. Basically, robbing the poor to pay the rich by keeping treasury yields low. And they keep the yields low by issuing additional bonds.
The problem is that it has the effect of discouraging the poor from saving any money and gaining the advantage of savings while artificially increasing the numbers in the bank accounts of the rich.
So, in a sense it could cause a deflationary spiral, but only if there's criminal negligence on the part of the Fed as it would require a prolonged period of significant debt retirement rather than a smoother more predictable payment plan.
You have a state that doesn't seem to mind executing people that might be innocent and where there's little concern for courts convicting innocent people in general.
Yeah, those are the people that I'd want to be operating armed drones over my house. Thankfully, I live way away from, Texas, but this ought to scare the crap out of anybody who lives there. Precisely what happens when this thing hits somebody that isn't the intended target? Or how about collateral damage? I don't think that police forces typically arm themselves with grenade launchers in the US>
I'm pretty sure that's not true. PDF has been an open standard for a few years now, and I'm not sure how any document would know what reader was trying to read it anyways.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is only an important distinction as long as one can remove oneself from the presence of pot. If it's legalized it's going to be a much less distinct line between physical and psychological addiction.
The suggestion you're making that it being psychologically addictive is somehow better than it being physically addictive is just plain ignorant. Tell that to individuals suffering from OCD, I'm sure they'll be glad to hear that their addictions to behaviors is somehow less serious because it's not a physical addiction.
I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. Yes, the guys at PARC didn't create the first GUI, but they did expand upon it more than everybody else up until that point. They had made substantial progress to creating a paperless office.
I like that you're towing the Apple "we didn't rip off Xerox" line, but it's bullshit, Xerox ultimately unsuccessfully sued them for doing it. That's not exactly indicative of a deal to share ideas.
When it comes to Xerox, they would have released the stuff eventually, it's rather ignorant to suggest that they were developing all that stuff just to develop it. Xerox was going to release it eventually, they just mistakenly agreed to show their stuff to Jobs and the rest is history.
Hobbes was writing over three centuries before the invention of chemical weapons or the atomic bomb. Suggesting that folks now could go back to things in that way is naive to say the least.
I'm a fan of Hobbes writings, but trying to apply it in that way to the modern world requires a certain dedication to ignorance.
A half a billion is like nothing compared with the benefits that we're going to get from the other companies that are being invested in. 0.5 billion is a bit more than a dollar a person for every man woman and child in the US, it's not a huge amount of money compared with other expenditures. Sure it was an unfortunate happening, but it's hardly as bad as the rather egregious losses under GOP stewardship.
As for welfare, you like every other libertard out there is opposed to them now, but how many of you folks are opposed to them when they're eligible? I don't often hear about people turning down medicare or portions of the Social Security dollars when they get it.
When it comes to income redistribution, the GOP has done more of that in the last decade than any and all parties combined up until that point. It's astonishing to me that people can still suggest with a straight face that Democrats redistribute wealth, implying that the GOP doesn't. At least the Democrats comprehend where wealth comes from in the first place.
What's drained the work ethic in the US is the lack of reward for labor. Most labor is done for the benefit of the rich investor class whereas the people actually doing the work get screwed. No pension plans, no loyalty from the company and no guarantee that they'll be able to pay for the necessities of life without those social programs from the government.
If you want to blame anybody, blame the corporations that offshore work when the workers can't afford to make the concessions the company has demanded.
As far America taking care of the worst off, I challenge you to come to a large city and ask the homeless people you meet if they're being well taken care of.
The issue isn't technology, the issue is that the government has been investing less and less in education in recent years. A large part of why college costs keep going up is the continued cuts by state and federal government. I'm sure the prices are going up even when taking that into account, but I doubt it would be anywhere near as steep an increase.
As for technology, it can help make teachers more efficient and provide better service, but it's hardly a panacea, anybody that was capable of learning that much on their own is probably not going to waste money on a degree in the first place.
If they're not careful they can get sued for violating the various affirmative action laws. What they have to be really careful about is what happens if they aren't hiring the expected number of minorities and women. There are no quotas per se in the US, but if there is a conspicuous lack of diversity it tends to attract law suits from individuals that aren't being hired or promoted. And if it turns out that the job posting has requirements that are fraudulent and that tends towards discouraging minority applicants, there could be a law suit.
As for quality of education, it really depends, the UK in general and England in particular is a much smaller entity than the US, there are good schools here and bad schools here, but the good schools are still the envy of the world.
Nice trolling, so in your vision, only the wealthy should go to college because clearly the ability to be born to wealthy parents is a significant contribution to society.
Social Security and socialized medicine are entitlements, it's something that people ought to be entitled for just for being born American citizens. It's a right that people in other parts of the developed world take for granted.
The point isn't that the GOP is trying to take those things away, it's _why_ they're trying to take them away. They're trying to take them away so that they can give to the wealthy, and cut taxes for corporations who in some cases don't pay any federal taxes. But, most importantly it's because if the average worker didn't have to work for a large company to have health insurance they'd be significantly more likely to do crazy things like start a business or work at something that they enjoy.
lol, the answer would be farther north. The amount of extra energy you get from the solar cells isn't likely to ever provide enough extra energy to provide the extra cooling. Heating in the winter isn't going to be a problem as the datacenter is going to produce more than enough to keep it within the design parameters.
Of course, if somebody does ever manage 100% efficient cells and a cooling system that's 100% efficient then it might theoretically break even.
Because Apple encourages people to "Think Different" and tries to convey the sense that it's not like every other corporate entity out there.
If they hadn't been so high and mighty about it, I doubt it would be seen as particularly significant.
Yes, but ultimately, they did implement it and it's still going strong 40+ years later. That says something, and it's not like Apple which manages to maintain a small section of the market with limited competition. C isn't as widely used as it used to be, but it's managed to do quite well considering the huge number of languages that have popped up in the mean time, many of which were gunning for it.
Not really, home computing is definitely significant, but it was Woz and the guys at PARC that ought to get the lion's share of the credit there. Woz for allowing for the Apple ][ to be produced at a price that people could afford and PARC for creating all the stuff that Apple ultimately ripped off for the Mac. Take away either of those and you probably wouldn't have Apple computers still on sale by Apple.
Computing power was increasing, even without Apple, machines would have been powerful enough to run Unix before too long. Sure, Apple sped the process up, but it's really hard to suggest that it wouldn't have happened. Unix OTOH, was completely revolutionary and between it and C, you have a very hard time finding products that don't at some point come into contact with either of those things during production. Apple products, not so much.
It doesn't mean that Steve Jobs didn't contribute, but it does lead to questions as to why he's deserving of a day, when somebody who gave so much more hasn't.
Which is precisely why Ritchie is in need of a day of recognition. The work he did was influential in a way that Steve Jobs can only dream of. Hell, even the products that Apple sells these days make heavy use of innovations from C and Unix.
California had a day to recognize Steve Jobs, Dennis Ritchie had a much larger impact on the world at large than Steve did. Steve just was really good at PR.
Except that even in China Chinese goods have a reputation for being crap. Most of them would much rather buy American when they can afford it, rather than having to worry about safety and quality issues.
I"ve noticed that myself, my rig should run The Witcher 2 without too much trouble according to the site, but in practice the system plays laggy and ultimately it's not playable. Kind of like Quake when I first bought it.
Pretty much, the Mexican government would have to grant permission for the US to send forces down there. Not politically popular, despite the violence. The US has been providing surveillance. As long as the NRA is fighting to defend the rights of people to buy firearms with little or no documentation it's going to be hard to prevent or slow the flow of weapons to Mexico which would have a significant impact on the cartels.
Same goes for all the drug users that insist that it's a personal decision, despite them funding the cartels.
If the customer's getting the finger, wouldn't that make it more of an Erotic Load Balancer?
There is always that possibility, but you have an officer on site and there's accountability there. And don't forget that innocent civilians aren't typically expecting death from above. What happens if there's a glitch in the system? These presumably aren't going to be fully automated, but you still have the risk of mistakes happening, and people being vulnerable that wouldn't otherwise be vulnerable. You also don't have any information about the scene that isn't specifically accounted for by one of the sensors. Police are far from perfect, but having personnel deployed is a significant advantage if you need to worry about killing innocent civilians.
This strikes me as a significant move towards a fascist dictatorship.
As for grenade launcher type weapons, the summary pretty clearly implied that it was actual grenades. Tear gas is typically less than lethal. Of course I suppose that there is a remote risk of death, like with rubber bullets, but they are intended to be less than lethal, unlike grenades.
The Clinton administration failed to account for the sort of drunken spending orgy that only Republicans can manage. And I can't blame him for not seeing it coming, the GOP has been quite adament about no new taxes and one would naturally assume that they'd recognize that it would entail no new spending as well.
President Bush, during his term in office, managed to blow trillions of dollars on pointless expenditures and funds for his cronies. There's no way that Obama is going to be able to predict what spending is going to happen to whomever it is that's President after he's out of office.
You do realize that the officials under the Clinton administration that were studying these things were conservative economists, right?
Given that a balanced portfolio will include bonds for protection during times where the stock market isn't doing well, where are those investment dollars supposed to go? You need investment in order to grow the economy, unless you take the alternate route of nationalizing all the industries and fund it directly via tax dollars. If you don't have adequate protection from the temporary risks associated with stocks, you're probably not going to put as much money into investments as you would have.
Those economists are idiots. The only reason that's at all a risk is because the Federal Reserve has allowed the wealth to accumulate in the hands of a small group of people. Basically, robbing the poor to pay the rich by keeping treasury yields low. And they keep the yields low by issuing additional bonds.
The problem is that it has the effect of discouraging the poor from saving any money and gaining the advantage of savings while artificially increasing the numbers in the bank accounts of the rich.
So, in a sense it could cause a deflationary spiral, but only if there's criminal negligence on the part of the Fed as it would require a prolonged period of significant debt retirement rather than a smoother more predictable payment plan.
You have a state that doesn't seem to mind executing people that might be innocent and where there's little concern for courts convicting innocent people in general.
Yeah, those are the people that I'd want to be operating armed drones over my house. Thankfully, I live way away from, Texas, but this ought to scare the crap out of anybody who lives there. Precisely what happens when this thing hits somebody that isn't the intended target? Or how about collateral damage? I don't think that police forces typically arm themselves with grenade launchers in the US>
I'm pretty sure that's not true. PDF has been an open standard for a few years now, and I'm not sure how any document would know what reader was trying to read it anyways.