Which is great if you don't mind having a stranger physically touching you without cause. Getting on an airplane isn't probable cause to conduct such an invasive search. The more people that put up with that crap, the longer it's going to take.
I've flown on planes in other countries and the Koreans, Chinese and Canadians don't feel the need to engage in such obvious sexual abuse of travelers. But, they still manage to get things confiscated as need be.
When people are capable of bringing 12" foam cutting blades through security, I think that requires a certain amount of reality check as doing an enhanced patdown or scan doesn't make any sense if items that larger are making it through just fine.
The reality here is that there were no security problems prior to 9/11, what we had was an intelligence failure. Beefing up security in chance somebody tries again is pointless, seeing as these machines have just moved the risk point outside of the security area.
Rather ironic, given that the right is way ahead on taking away rights with no cause and there is no left left at this stage. At least not in government anyways.
And how many of those people chose Windows versus had it installed by the OEM and didn't know how to switch? I'm not really sure that people care so much as they don't care enough to switch.
We hate BTC because it's indistinguishable from a scam.
The founders get to reap huge profits with little or no work at the expense of suckers that come late to the party. And your post just illustrates the problem. It's a token that's designed to allow for massive profits early on and eventual deflationary spiral when no new currency comes into existence and the liquidity dries up.
Are you a fucking moron? These aren't strange arguments they're ones that anybody with any knowledge of the subject or common sense would come to. Just because you're not smart enough to realize what's going on, doesn't mean that it's not going on.
BTC, unlike USD, CAD, Euros or Pounds has no value to it. No government on earth requires that people take it as payment for services rendered or in exchange for merchandise. I can't pay my taxes or buy food with it anywhere in the world without converting it. The GGP is boosting it as an investment.
And yes, I'm fully aware of what a Ponzi Scheme is, it's where you take new investors money to pay off the older investors and where the founders get automatic profits. Any difference between BTC and the famous scam is merely a technicality. It's going to end the same way eventually when no new BTC come into existence.
And yes, this is likely illegal, unlike other commodities markets, the SEC isn't regulating this one, which means there's likely all sorts of illegal activities going on.
If they do acknowledge the problem, how would he know if it's fixed? Once the data is out there, it's out there. Acknowledging it is likely to be against the advice of the company's attorneys whether or not it really is their fault.
This is a zero sum game. In order for you to win money, other people have to lose money. And because there's nothing being produced, you're guaranteed that the early adopters will wind up profiting even as the late comers end up footing the entire bill.
And hell yes you're a fool. Even fools get lucky, but in total, the people getting lucky will be vastly outnumbered by the people who get screwed because of the way in which the BTC are created. And the early fools will reap more rewards individually than the later fools will pay out individually.
Also, if you've bothered to read up at all, and I mean at all, on the Ponzi scheme, this is exactly what it looks like. The early adopters crow about how it's money for nothing, when they're being paid by the people getting in later. At some point the money runs low and it falls apart. We haven't yet hit the point where it falls apart, but when the deflationary spiral hits the system, those BTC that people have will be effectively worthless as there's no upside to buying them, assuming you even can buy them. And general instability as small purchases cause huge changes in value because of low trading volume.
It's also likely to be illegal as I doubt very much that the SEC is being permitted to oversee all of this, nor the equivalents in other nations.
But, BTC is more or less indistinguishable from a Ponzi scheme. The early adopters get massive amounts of BTC for basically nothing and later adopters are the ones that pump up the price. It may not technically be a Ponzi scheme, but that would only be by technicality. It's still early investors being paid by later investors and ultimately nothing is produced to justify anybody profiting.
I'm going to laugh my ass off when BTC ultimately does collapse. At some point it's going to hit a deflationary spiral when the last blocks are unlocked and no more BTC come into existence.
Where do you think that nuclear materials go when they're done with? The Federal government has been sending more materials to the Hanford Nuclear Reservation for decades, but refuses to pay the costs associated with cleaning up the stuff that was improperly stored there in the past.
Yucca Mountain was supposed to take a lot of the waste that the government wants to continue sending to HNR.
The producers will create a pilot, but after that the episodes are made to fulfill contractual obligations. If the network doesn't get what it wants, the network won't use any of that extra time and in the future won't order more episodes. And likely they won't even pay for the extra content as that will just be cut to show more commercials.
It's all well and good to pontificate, but the reality is that it's the networks that are the customers here, not the viewers and the networks tend to have a rather large say in what gets aired.
I briefly had a Motorola Backflip and I loved the concept of it. Unfortunately, it was underpowered to begin with and AT&T insisted upon larding it up with all sorts of things that would run and make it even slower.
It's a shame, because the device was actually fairly nice in other respects.
It is the USPTO's fault, they're supposed to have experts that cover the range of technology in house and if they don't have it, they're supposed to bring in experts that can.
The real problem here is that the USPTO receives its funding primarily from fees that people pay when applying for patents. In order for this silliness to end, we need to change that and just make it a government service again. Additionally because of the lack of funding there isn't a whole lot of time spent verifying any of this BS is even reasonable.
Good luck with that. If the content isn't compelling enough to put up with intellitext and flash spam, then I really doubt that it's compelling enough to get people to pay for.
It's not the writers and producers, it's the TV station owners that make those decisions. I doubt very much that the writers, producers and assorted people that work so hard to create the programming like to see the credits smashed up so that nobody can read them.
That's why you should use a utility like teracopy to do the copy. I use it to verify that the files have been copied and then immediately delete the files on the card. That way, I know that they made it to the disk. I wish that it supported MD5 rather than CRC, but it's better than nothing and much faster than individually verifying each file is the same one.
They're not that expensive. My latest set of 16gb CF cards were $16 a piece and even without the $5 off they were still quite cheap. It reads at 45mbps and writes at 40mbps. And I see ones for about triple the price that double the speed. Overkill for the vast majority of people, but cards last a long time and at $70 a pop, they're not that expensive for those that really need that kind of speed.
I know there are faster cards out there, but that's about half a second to write per RAW file. For most people, that's going to be more than enough speed. Now, for those that are regularly filling the buffer, that would be a different matter.
But, considering that the 266x cards are reading faster than what the HDD usually read at, I think that's probably good enough.
Well, it's the same amateur cameras that use SD cards that don't necessarily include enough buffer space either.
My Canon EOS 7D uses CF cards and includes a fairly hefty buffer as well. The people doing the article are idiots if they think that it's acceptable to have images sticking around in the buffer longer than necessary. The buffer is susceptible to going away instantly if the camera loses power for any reason, whereas the card itself is much more durable.
I personally, wish that camera manufacturers would wise up and ditch SC for CF like in olden times. My old Canon PowerShot s10 was still using new CF cards until they grew too large for FAT16 to handle. SD cards are a different matter as they don't include the controller.
How many people saw the older ones in real life? The only reason I saw the '80s era gear in person at all, was that the Science Center bought a rig 10 years after it was obsolete. I vaguely remember the '90s era consumer gear and it wasn't as good as the '80s era gear, except for the resolution. It lacked the interface and cost about half the price of a new computer of the era.
And your point is? All the high risk people were vaccinated probably 3 or 4 months ago, anybody that still hasn't been vaccinated probably doesn't really need to be vaccinated anyways.
Changing the advice now that pretty much everybody who's going to be vaccinated has been vaccinated just encourages anti-vax efforts with little or no medical gain. What's more, it takes time for changes to the recommendations to filter out.
No, I'm not ignoring that. If they knew what the efficacy rate was like without administering the injections, that would be a completely different thing. But, you can't sit there with the numbers from the real world and judge the doctors for not having access to them before they even existed.
I said, that 9% isn't a good number, but pretending like they were giving these shots out knowing that whom they would and would not work for is just plain wrong. You're also assuming that these people are shut ins. If they were shut ins, then there would be no point in vaccinating them as they wouldn't be exposed to the flu in the first place. For the folks that actually go outside, they're already going to be exposed, suggesting that this is represents a greater exposure is just the typical anti-vaccs bullshit.
And your point is? They need several months to produce the necessary doses and sometimes they get it wrong or it mutates in a significant way.
Also, this is a sample set of 2 doses and one person. The one time I got a flu shot, I wound up with basically every side effect except an allergic reaction, and would have been better off without it, but that doesn't mean that it isn't good in terms of herd immunity.
This is a virus, your two main options are to either have people avoid human contact or give them a vaccination. Sure, things like washing hands might help a bit, but ultimately, there aren't a lot of options for something like the flu.
What's more, you're ignoring the fact that this year it worked for 9% of the people over 65 who got it. That's really not a good number, but it's better than zero and ignores the other people who received the vaccination as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is great if you don't mind having a stranger physically touching you without cause. Getting on an airplane isn't probable cause to conduct such an invasive search. The more people that put up with that crap, the longer it's going to take.
I've flown on planes in other countries and the Koreans, Chinese and Canadians don't feel the need to engage in such obvious sexual abuse of travelers. But, they still manage to get things confiscated as need be.
When people are capable of bringing 12" foam cutting blades through security, I think that requires a certain amount of reality check as doing an enhanced patdown or scan doesn't make any sense if items that larger are making it through just fine.
The reality here is that there were no security problems prior to 9/11, what we had was an intelligence failure. Beefing up security in chance somebody tries again is pointless, seeing as these machines have just moved the risk point outside of the security area.
Rather ironic, given that the right is way ahead on taking away rights with no cause and there is no left left at this stage. At least not in government anyways.
And how many of those people chose Windows versus had it installed by the OEM and didn't know how to switch? I'm not really sure that people care so much as they don't care enough to switch.
We hate BTC because it's indistinguishable from a scam.
The founders get to reap huge profits with little or no work at the expense of suckers that come late to the party. And your post just illustrates the problem. It's a token that's designed to allow for massive profits early on and eventual deflationary spiral when no new currency comes into existence and the liquidity dries up.
Are you a fucking moron? These aren't strange arguments they're ones that anybody with any knowledge of the subject or common sense would come to. Just because you're not smart enough to realize what's going on, doesn't mean that it's not going on.
BTC, unlike USD, CAD, Euros or Pounds has no value to it. No government on earth requires that people take it as payment for services rendered or in exchange for merchandise. I can't pay my taxes or buy food with it anywhere in the world without converting it. The GGP is boosting it as an investment.
And yes, I'm fully aware of what a Ponzi Scheme is, it's where you take new investors money to pay off the older investors and where the founders get automatic profits. Any difference between BTC and the famous scam is merely a technicality. It's going to end the same way eventually when no new BTC come into existence.
And yes, this is likely illegal, unlike other commodities markets, the SEC isn't regulating this one, which means there's likely all sorts of illegal activities going on.
If they do acknowledge the problem, how would he know if it's fixed? Once the data is out there, it's out there. Acknowledging it is likely to be against the advice of the company's attorneys whether or not it really is their fault.
This is a zero sum game. In order for you to win money, other people have to lose money. And because there's nothing being produced, you're guaranteed that the early adopters will wind up profiting even as the late comers end up footing the entire bill.
And hell yes you're a fool. Even fools get lucky, but in total, the people getting lucky will be vastly outnumbered by the people who get screwed because of the way in which the BTC are created. And the early fools will reap more rewards individually than the later fools will pay out individually.
Also, if you've bothered to read up at all, and I mean at all, on the Ponzi scheme, this is exactly what it looks like. The early adopters crow about how it's money for nothing, when they're being paid by the people getting in later. At some point the money runs low and it falls apart. We haven't yet hit the point where it falls apart, but when the deflationary spiral hits the system, those BTC that people have will be effectively worthless as there's no upside to buying them, assuming you even can buy them. And general instability as small purchases cause huge changes in value because of low trading volume.
It's also likely to be illegal as I doubt very much that the SEC is being permitted to oversee all of this, nor the equivalents in other nations.
But, BTC is more or less indistinguishable from a Ponzi scheme. The early adopters get massive amounts of BTC for basically nothing and later adopters are the ones that pump up the price. It may not technically be a Ponzi scheme, but that would only be by technicality. It's still early investors being paid by later investors and ultimately nothing is produced to justify anybody profiting.
I'm going to laugh my ass off when BTC ultimately does collapse. At some point it's going to hit a deflationary spiral when the last blocks are unlocked and no more BTC come into existence.
Yeah, the GOP pretty much left him hanging. START was a good idea, but the concerns being voiced were absolutely ludicrous.
Where do you think that nuclear materials go when they're done with? The Federal government has been sending more materials to the Hanford Nuclear Reservation for decades, but refuses to pay the costs associated with cleaning up the stuff that was improperly stored there in the past.
Yucca Mountain was supposed to take a lot of the waste that the government wants to continue sending to HNR.
Indeed and let's not forget the fact that the numbers of people dieing on the roads has been decreasing in recent years.
It's not just Canon, all of the manufacturers of pro-dSLRs include them as well.
The producers will create a pilot, but after that the episodes are made to fulfill contractual obligations. If the network doesn't get what it wants, the network won't use any of that extra time and in the future won't order more episodes. And likely they won't even pay for the extra content as that will just be cut to show more commercials.
It's all well and good to pontificate, but the reality is that it's the networks that are the customers here, not the viewers and the networks tend to have a rather large say in what gets aired.
I briefly had a Motorola Backflip and I loved the concept of it. Unfortunately, it was underpowered to begin with and AT&T insisted upon larding it up with all sorts of things that would run and make it even slower.
It's a shame, because the device was actually fairly nice in other respects.
It is the USPTO's fault, they're supposed to have experts that cover the range of technology in house and if they don't have it, they're supposed to bring in experts that can.
The real problem here is that the USPTO receives its funding primarily from fees that people pay when applying for patents. In order for this silliness to end, we need to change that and just make it a government service again. Additionally because of the lack of funding there isn't a whole lot of time spent verifying any of this BS is even reasonable.
Good luck with that. If the content isn't compelling enough to put up with intellitext and flash spam, then I really doubt that it's compelling enough to get people to pay for.
It's not the writers and producers, it's the TV station owners that make those decisions. I doubt very much that the writers, producers and assorted people that work so hard to create the programming like to see the credits smashed up so that nobody can read them.
That's why you should use a utility like teracopy to do the copy. I use it to verify that the files have been copied and then immediately delete the files on the card. That way, I know that they made it to the disk. I wish that it supported MD5 rather than CRC, but it's better than nothing and much faster than individually verifying each file is the same one.
They're not that expensive. My latest set of 16gb CF cards were $16 a piece and even without the $5 off they were still quite cheap. It reads at 45mbps and writes at 40mbps. And I see ones for about triple the price that double the speed. Overkill for the vast majority of people, but cards last a long time and at $70 a pop, they're not that expensive for those that really need that kind of speed.
I know there are faster cards out there, but that's about half a second to write per RAW file. For most people, that's going to be more than enough speed. Now, for those that are regularly filling the buffer, that would be a different matter.
But, considering that the 266x cards are reading faster than what the HDD usually read at, I think that's probably good enough.
Well, it's the same amateur cameras that use SD cards that don't necessarily include enough buffer space either.
My Canon EOS 7D uses CF cards and includes a fairly hefty buffer as well. The people doing the article are idiots if they think that it's acceptable to have images sticking around in the buffer longer than necessary. The buffer is susceptible to going away instantly if the camera loses power for any reason, whereas the card itself is much more durable.
I personally, wish that camera manufacturers would wise up and ditch SC for CF like in olden times. My old Canon PowerShot s10 was still using new CF cards until they grew too large for FAT16 to handle. SD cards are a different matter as they don't include the controller.
How many people saw the older ones in real life? The only reason I saw the '80s era gear in person at all, was that the Science Center bought a rig 10 years after it was obsolete. I vaguely remember the '90s era consumer gear and it wasn't as good as the '80s era gear, except for the resolution. It lacked the interface and cost about half the price of a new computer of the era.
And your point is? All the high risk people were vaccinated probably 3 or 4 months ago, anybody that still hasn't been vaccinated probably doesn't really need to be vaccinated anyways.
Changing the advice now that pretty much everybody who's going to be vaccinated has been vaccinated just encourages anti-vax efforts with little or no medical gain. What's more, it takes time for changes to the recommendations to filter out.
No, I'm not ignoring that. If they knew what the efficacy rate was like without administering the injections, that would be a completely different thing. But, you can't sit there with the numbers from the real world and judge the doctors for not having access to them before they even existed.
I said, that 9% isn't a good number, but pretending like they were giving these shots out knowing that whom they would and would not work for is just plain wrong. You're also assuming that these people are shut ins. If they were shut ins, then there would be no point in vaccinating them as they wouldn't be exposed to the flu in the first place. For the folks that actually go outside, they're already going to be exposed, suggesting that this is represents a greater exposure is just the typical anti-vaccs bullshit.
And your point is? They need several months to produce the necessary doses and sometimes they get it wrong or it mutates in a significant way.
Also, this is a sample set of 2 doses and one person. The one time I got a flu shot, I wound up with basically every side effect except an allergic reaction, and would have been better off without it, but that doesn't mean that it isn't good in terms of herd immunity.
This is a virus, your two main options are to either have people avoid human contact or give them a vaccination. Sure, things like washing hands might help a bit, but ultimately, there aren't a lot of options for something like the flu.
What's more, you're ignoring the fact that this year it worked for 9% of the people over 65 who got it. That's really not a good number, but it's better than zero and ignores the other people who received the vaccination as well.