I quite willingly and happily work more than nine hours a day (I do ten-hour days). In exchange, I get pretty much every Friday off, so I get three-day weekends 40+ weeks per year. I'll spend that little extra time at work Monday through Thursday (after all, I'm already at work, so the day's mostly shot) so I can have a full extra day off.
You'd have to pay me a lot more just to get me to go to a regular five-eights schedule.
I work 4-10s, 0600-1630. I spend the first two hours doing the administrative/minor stuff, and then I get on to actual work. I still get off at a reasonably early time in the afternoon, leaving time for a workout or other things while it's still light out.
I'm also more of a morning person than most; I'd be up early anyway and would rather just go straight to work than sit around for an hour or two, unable to do something too involved because I'm just going to have to go to work soon (like I would for a "traditional" 0800 or 0900 start).
We also get paid (straight time) for hours over 40, so sometimes I'll come in for a half day or so on Friday. Usually, though, I just enjoy the extra 52 days off every year; staying two hours more at work is a tiny price to pay for that.
What is with carrying stuff in your pockets? Do you really carry your smart phone in your pocket?
Yes, and it has an extended battery too. Doesn't matter what kind of pants I'm wearing.
Pockets are nice because they are accessible, can't be accidentally set down or lost, are harder to steal from, and don't scream "look, I have expensive items!". I carry everything in my pockets.
Who says anyone is "spraying and praying" all over? One shot is one shot, and neither the bullet nor the game animal cares what mechanism cycles the next round into the chamber. Lots of people (myself included) hunt with semiautos, not out of some crazy "must shoot everything in sight" urge, or a need to make up for poor shooting skills, but rather just because we already have one, it works fine, and there's no sense buying another rifle just to hunt.
The AR-10/AR-15 family is actually quite well-suited to hunting use (provided appropriate ammunition is used for the desired game), if you put aside asinine drivel about "spraying lead everywhere". Here's why:
Synthetic stocks are less susceptible to warping due to humidity and temperature changes.
Adjustable stocks (as commonly found on these rifles) make them usable by a wide range of ages and body types. My 6'3" friend and his 5'1" wife can easily use the same rifle to hunt, despite the large disparity in size.
The gas operation and large buffer tube reduce felt recoil, making it more comfortable for small or new shooters.
The placement and operation of the safety mean that it can be operated easily while already sighted on a target, unlike many bolt-action rifles where the safety is high on the receiver, or even on the back of the bolt. The safety can also be left engaged while loading and unloading, helping reduce the chances of accidental firing.
The detachable magazine makes loading and unloading much easier and reduces the chance of dropping cartridges while fumbling with the floorplate of a fixed magazine, or repeatedly cycling rounds through the action. Not only does this improve safety during these evolutions, but people are also more likely to follow safety rules like unloading when crossing ditches or fences, or climing into/out of tree stands.
A magazine-capacity limit makes about as much sense as the TSA restriction on liquids in containers larger than 3.4oz, or a state (NC?) only allowing liquor to be served from the little tiny 1.5oz bottles in an attempt to reduce drunk driving.
I like how it's always 10 rounds that seems to be the magic limit. There's never any kind of sound logical justification behind it, only gut feeling from people who have no idea what they're talking about.
I've printed (and designed) models that get sent to the 3D printer, and are articulated/movable fresh from build (after suitable cleanup), no post-printing assembly required.
The new idea is the "take a character and automatically place/design joints" part.
I tend to stick to high-end PC flight simulators (X-Plane, Orbiter, Falcon, etc.). Detail is crucial in these, not as much just visually as in physics and systems modeling. Being a pilot and aerospace engineer makes errors, omissions, or shortcuts even more glaring.
In Falcon's case, the flight model is numerically accurate, but has some limitations, the aircraft systems are fairly accurate too, but the terrain modeling and large-scale AI engine are very outdated. They've been dressed-up significantly, but it still has the feel of a 1998-vintage program--which it is. I hardly ever mess with it any more because it seems too game-like--I can spot the limitations of the 3D sim engine and where it switches over to the 2D theater-wide engine, I know exactly where the AI's blind spots are and how it reacts to things, etc. Suspension of disbelief is removed.
Unfortunately, I don't know if we'll ever see a military sim with that level of detail again. Getting data on modern equipment is too hard due to classification, developing a believable environment with ground and sea units takes a long time, and a dynamic campaign engine (instead of sets of scripted missions) hasn't been attempted since.
I've realized I don't much care anyway. I've got enough going on in my life that I don't have time for sims any more.
and the optimistic plan for a return to the moon has three times the development time of the original flight.
Actually about one and a half times once you understand that Apollo development actually started in the mid 50's. And, actually, not a bad thing once you understand the difference between a large budget and limited one.
The sad part isn't the time and development cost... it's that we're having to start all over again because we lost and threw away all the work we'd done before.
It charges at the same speed from a wall wart as it does from a computer....
Actually, a lot of smartphones don't. My understanding is that "standard" USB is limited to 500 milliamps or so; the wall chargers sold with most phones can output 1amp or more. The phone detects the difference (in my case, detecting whether pins 2 and 3 are shorted together) and will charge much faster off of an AC source--on the order of less than an hour vs 3-4 hours.
This is also true of Tasker -- while versatile, it is a resource and battery hog.
No it isn't, unless you're doing stupid things like constantly monitoring GPS position to trigger various tasks. Tasker is typically at the very bottom of the batter use percentage list, with cell standby, display, and my music player at the top.
Of course, my point would be - why would it be in a lawyer's best interest to reduce the number of suits? They generally get paid whether they win the case or not.
Perhaps the company's lawyers are on salary, and therefore want to limit their work?
Yes, everything OP wants can be done with Tasker, except that it can't parse email... unless you use K9mail. Tasker has support for that app, letting you parse the emails like you do with SMS. I've been debating whether to get K9mail myself, just for that reason.
Nice, two examples in a country with a population of almost 300 million.
Btw, what's the police is for then?
They were just the first two that came to mind. I could sit here all day and list them out.
As for the police, they try to deter crime, but generally they're just doing the investigation afterward and trying to catch the guy after the act. If you think that you will (a) be able to call them when someone decides to attack you and/or the place you are in, and (b) that they will be able to be there in seconds, you're fooling yourself. If the police aren't actually right there, then everything will likely be over by the time they arrive. Heck, it's going to take at least a minute or two just for the 911 call to be taken and for the call to go out.
Why hard sciences are the only "valuable" topics in this age?
Because they are necessary (but not sufficient) for the rest of society to function. It's also much harder to find people qualified to work and/or teach in STEM fields than the other ones.
As for your list of other subjects, I'd throw medicine under the STEM category. Sports have plenty of focus already--if anything, maybe a little too much focus. There are enough arts, history, and social studies majors sitting around with no job prospects already; they should be focusing on securing themselves financially before indulging in their hobbies. And WTF is "solidarity" doing on a list of areas of study?
This system may put out open flames, but it's not going to do anything about heated gases or smoldering combustion, and I don't think it'll do much to prevent reignition, flashover, backdraft, etc.
GP is from the UK. In British English, collective nouns (companies, sports teams, etc.) are treated as plural, and use the plural forms of verbs--hence "Microsoft have" and "Google don't".
In American English, collective nouns are treated as singular, in which case "Microsoft has" and "Google doesn't" would be correct. Unless the noun itself is plural (e.g., "the Atlanta Braves"), in which case the verbs are usually (but not always) plural.
It's like honor vs. honour, or color vs. colour. Either is correct, but you should be consistent with your usage.
The origin of this difference was once explained to me as being a result of the American Civil War. Previous to the war, plural collectives (as in British English) were used, and it was common to see "the United States are", since state identity was still important, and the prevailing mindset was one of a loose collection of independent states (albeit a little tighter than under the Articles of Confederation).
After the Civil War, the idea of the US as a single unified country was reinforced, hence "the United States is". This bled over into everyday speech.
When did we start referring to the parking brake as an emergency brake?
Probably about the same time people stopped using the parking brake when they parked. They prefer to slam the car into "park", and leave the whole weight of the oversized SUV/pickup/APC riding on one little half-engaged pin in their automatic transmission. And then they can pull that pin back out under load when they go to leave.
The best part is this... the majority opinion says
Congress did not intend the payment to be treated as a "tax" for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act. The Affordable Care Act describes the payment as a "penalty," not a "tax."
Therefore, it is not a tax for purposes of the Anti-Injuction Act (which says you can't challenge taxes beforehand; you have to pay first and then sue).
And then they go on to say Congress could have made it a tax, and that would have been ok, so we're calling it a tax and saying it's ok.
So, it's not a tax, but it is a tax. Which one is it?
This is the part I'm upset about. I don't really give two flying pieces of excrement about the law itself anymore; we're already doomed to Greece redux since our appetites are too big for our wallets. But the government blatantly saying "we'll just contort language however we need to so we can do anything we want" does not bode well at all.
I'm not aware of any public schools around here with shop programs; I believe they were phased out in the push to emphasize "college-prep" classes. We didn't have any when I went through (98-02).
My siblings and I grew up using tools--power saws, drills, rivet guns, and so on. We also learned all of the other independent living skills (laundry, cooking, basic home and car maintenance, etc.) well before leaving the house.
No, it's just an example of the old Soviet-style communist approach where the crew can't be trusted, so everything is set up to run automatically and/or from the ground. Once that has been proven to work, and if the crew is deemed reliable enough, they are allowed to try a manual docking.
Slashdot Mirror
I quite willingly and happily work more than nine hours a day (I do ten-hour days). In exchange, I get pretty much every Friday off, so I get three-day weekends 40+ weeks per year. I'll spend that little extra time at work Monday through Thursday (after all, I'm already at work, so the day's mostly shot) so I can have a full extra day off.
You'd have to pay me a lot more just to get me to go to a regular five-eights schedule.
I work 4-10s, 0600-1630. I spend the first two hours doing the administrative/minor stuff, and then I get on to actual work. I still get off at a reasonably early time in the afternoon, leaving time for a workout or other things while it's still light out.
I'm also more of a morning person than most; I'd be up early anyway and would rather just go straight to work than sit around for an hour or two, unable to do something too involved because I'm just going to have to go to work soon (like I would for a "traditional" 0800 or 0900 start).
We also get paid (straight time) for hours over 40, so sometimes I'll come in for a half day or so on Friday. Usually, though, I just enjoy the extra 52 days off every year; staying two hours more at work is a tiny price to pay for that.
What is with carrying stuff in your pockets? Do you really carry your smart phone in your pocket?
Yes, and it has an extended battery too. Doesn't matter what kind of pants I'm wearing.
Pockets are nice because they are accessible, can't be accidentally set down or lost, are harder to steal from, and don't scream "look, I have expensive items!". I carry everything in my pockets.
Who says anyone is "spraying and praying" all over? One shot is one shot, and neither the bullet nor the game animal cares what mechanism cycles the next round into the chamber. Lots of people (myself included) hunt with semiautos, not out of some crazy "must shoot everything in sight" urge, or a need to make up for poor shooting skills, but rather just because we already have one, it works fine, and there's no sense buying another rifle just to hunt.
The AR-10/AR-15 family is actually quite well-suited to hunting use (provided appropriate ammunition is used for the desired game), if you put aside asinine drivel about "spraying lead everywhere". Here's why:
Synthetic stocks are less susceptible to warping due to humidity and temperature changes.
Adjustable stocks (as commonly found on these rifles) make them usable by a wide range of ages and body types. My 6'3" friend and his 5'1" wife can easily use the same rifle to hunt, despite the large disparity in size.
The gas operation and large buffer tube reduce felt recoil, making it more comfortable for small or new shooters.
The placement and operation of the safety mean that it can be operated easily while already sighted on a target, unlike many bolt-action rifles where the safety is high on the receiver, or even on the back of the bolt. The safety can also be left engaged while loading and unloading, helping reduce the chances of accidental firing.
The detachable magazine makes loading and unloading much easier and reduces the chance of dropping cartridges while fumbling with the floorplate of a fixed magazine, or repeatedly cycling rounds through the action. Not only does this improve safety during these evolutions, but people are also more likely to follow safety rules like unloading when crossing ditches or fences, or climing into/out of tree stands.
Clarke's The Star was pretty depressing, as was The City and the Stars.
A magazine-capacity limit makes about as much sense as the TSA restriction on liquids in containers larger than 3.4oz, or a state (NC?) only allowing liquor to be served from the little tiny 1.5oz bottles in an attempt to reduce drunk driving.
I like how it's always 10 rounds that seems to be the magic limit. There's never any kind of sound logical justification behind it, only gut feeling from people who have no idea what they're talking about.
I've printed (and designed) models that get sent to the 3D printer, and are articulated/movable fresh from build (after suitable cleanup), no post-printing assembly required.
The new idea is the "take a character and automatically place/design joints" part.
I tend to stick to high-end PC flight simulators (X-Plane, Orbiter, Falcon, etc.). Detail is crucial in these, not as much just visually as in physics and systems modeling. Being a pilot and aerospace engineer makes errors, omissions, or shortcuts even more glaring.
In Falcon's case, the flight model is numerically accurate, but has some limitations, the aircraft systems are fairly accurate too, but the terrain modeling and large-scale AI engine are very outdated. They've been dressed-up significantly, but it still has the feel of a 1998-vintage program--which it is. I hardly ever mess with it any more because it seems too game-like--I can spot the limitations of the 3D sim engine and where it switches over to the 2D theater-wide engine, I know exactly where the AI's blind spots are and how it reacts to things, etc. Suspension of disbelief is removed.
Unfortunately, I don't know if we'll ever see a military sim with that level of detail again. Getting data on modern equipment is too hard due to classification, developing a believable environment with ground and sea units takes a long time, and a dynamic campaign engine (instead of sets of scripted missions) hasn't been attempted since.
I've realized I don't much care anyway. I've got enough going on in my life that I don't have time for sims any more.
and the optimistic plan for a return to the moon has three times the development time of the original flight.
Actually about one and a half times once you understand that Apollo development actually started in the mid 50's. And, actually, not a bad thing once you understand the difference between a large budget and limited one.
The sad part isn't the time and development cost... it's that we're having to start all over again because we lost and threw away all the work we'd done before.
"Especially when you get somebody like me who's convinced that sometimes killing something is the best solution..."
I'm afraid you need help.
If the other option is something like "I get killed" or "my wife gets raped", killing the other guy seems like a great option to me...
If you're making more than a couple, the ATF is going to come knocking...
It charges at the same speed from a wall wart as it does from a computer....
Actually, a lot of smartphones don't. My understanding is that "standard" USB is limited to 500 milliamps or so; the wall chargers sold with most phones can output 1amp or more. The phone detects the difference (in my case, detecting whether pins 2 and 3 are shorted together) and will charge much faster off of an AC source--on the order of less than an hour vs 3-4 hours.
This is also true of Tasker -- while versatile, it is a resource and battery hog.
No it isn't, unless you're doing stupid things like constantly monitoring GPS position to trigger various tasks. Tasker is typically at the very bottom of the batter use percentage list, with cell standby, display, and my music player at the top.
Of course, my point would be - why would it be in a lawyer's best interest to reduce the number of suits? They generally get paid whether they win the case or not.
Perhaps the company's lawyers are on salary, and therefore want to limit their work?
Yes, everything OP wants can be done with Tasker, except that it can't parse email... unless you use K9mail. Tasker has support for that app, letting you parse the emails like you do with SMS. I've been debating whether to get K9mail myself, just for that reason.
Nice, two examples in a country with a population of almost 300 million.
Btw, what's the police is for then?
They were just the first two that came to mind. I could sit here all day and list them out.
As for the police, they try to deter crime, but generally they're just doing the investigation afterward and trying to catch the guy after the act. If you think that you will (a) be able to call them when someone decides to attack you and/or the place you are in, and (b) that they will be able to be there in seconds, you're fooling yourself. If the police aren't actually right there, then everything will likely be over by the time they arrive. Heck, it's going to take at least a minute or two just for the 911 call to be taken and for the call to go out.
Otherwise, when you spend long periods of time in public, there is no reason to have one on you.
Tell that to the 71-year-old man in Florida who stopped an armed robbery because he was carrying. Or the 57-year-old grandmother who fought back against two armed carjackers. Yep, no reason at all. Because it won't do any good.
Why hard sciences are the only "valuable" topics in this age?
Because they are necessary (but not sufficient) for the rest of society to function. It's also much harder to find people qualified to work and/or teach in STEM fields than the other ones.
As for your list of other subjects, I'd throw medicine under the STEM category. Sports have plenty of focus already--if anything, maybe a little too much focus. There are enough arts, history, and social studies majors sitting around with no job prospects already; they should be focusing on securing themselves financially before indulging in their hobbies. And WTF is "solidarity" doing on a list of areas of study?
This system may put out open flames, but it's not going to do anything about heated gases or smoldering combustion, and I don't think it'll do much to prevent reignition, flashover, backdraft, etc.
GP is from the UK. In British English, collective nouns (companies, sports teams, etc.) are treated as plural, and use the plural forms of verbs--hence "Microsoft have" and "Google don't".
In American English, collective nouns are treated as singular, in which case "Microsoft has" and "Google doesn't" would be correct. Unless the noun itself is plural (e.g., "the Atlanta Braves"), in which case the verbs are usually (but not always) plural.
It's like honor vs. honour, or color vs. colour. Either is correct, but you should be consistent with your usage.
The origin of this difference was once explained to me as being a result of the American Civil War. Previous to the war, plural collectives (as in British English) were used, and it was common to see "the United States are", since state identity was still important, and the prevailing mindset was one of a loose collection of independent states (albeit a little tighter than under the Articles of Confederation).
After the Civil War, the idea of the US as a single unified country was reinforced, hence "the United States is". This bled over into everyday speech.
I have not independently verified this, however.
When did we start referring to the parking brake as an emergency brake?
Probably about the same time people stopped using the parking brake when they parked. They prefer to slam the car into "park", and leave the whole weight of the oversized SUV/pickup/APC riding on one little half-engaged pin in their automatic transmission. And then they can pull that pin back out under load when they go to leave.
SCOTUS also declared that the penalty wasn't a tax (and therefore wasn't affected by the Anti-Injuction Act), right before they declared that it was.
The best part is this... the majority opinion says
Congress did not intend the payment to be treated as a "tax" for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act. The Affordable Care Act describes the payment as a "penalty," not a "tax."
Therefore, it is not a tax for purposes of the Anti-Injuction Act (which says you can't challenge taxes beforehand; you have to pay first and then sue).
And then they go on to say Congress could have made it a tax, and that would have been ok, so we're calling it a tax and saying it's ok.
So, it's not a tax, but it is a tax. Which one is it?
This is the part I'm upset about. I don't really give two flying pieces of excrement about the law itself anymore; we're already doomed to Greece redux since our appetites are too big for our wallets. But the government blatantly saying "we'll just contort language however we need to so we can do anything we want" does not bode well at all.
I'm not aware of any public schools around here with shop programs; I believe they were phased out in the push to emphasize "college-prep" classes. We didn't have any when I went through (98-02).
My siblings and I grew up using tools--power saws, drills, rivet guns, and so on. We also learned all of the other independent living skills (laundry, cooking, basic home and car maintenance, etc.) well before leaving the house.
No, it's just an example of the old Soviet-style communist approach where the crew can't be trusted, so everything is set up to run automatically and/or from the ground. Once that has been proven to work, and if the crew is deemed reliable enough, they are allowed to try a manual docking.