Yeah, I drop in once or twice a year. Nothing's changed. Other tech sites have more straightforward news and Quora's comments have a much better signal to noise ratio.
Ah, but you're missing the point of these postings... It's not about helpful information (how many PCs/users affected? Root cause?), it's only bait to hate on MS.
Windows kills your family and destroys the world, Apple and Linux are flawless and have never had a single bug, exploit, or bad patch.
I guess trying to associate those who don't accept the concept (or claimed extent) of man made global warming with the holocaust with the term 'deniers' wasn't working... a new term has been coined.
It's only people who don't have a car who see that as a waste, those who do understand that their required associated costs like having insurance on your house or paying for you utilities. Imagine if you were homeless and didn't have to waste so much money on rent, electricity, heating, and water!
A habitable place to live (own or rent) isn't negotiable. Owning a plane, boat --or even a car, is. For many lower-income individuals, transportation is a significant percentage of their disposable income. A car may not be as expensive as housing, medical care, or food, but it's optional and only used 5% of the time. If there was a good alternative at a fraction of the price, most people would use it. This is why most residents of NYC and European cities don't own one.
You obviously have never owned a car that is fun to drive. Go out and buy a good used Miata. Get out of the city and onto rural roads. Come back in 6 months and tell us if you would still like to be carted around in a vehicle several other people have thrown up in.
LOL. I can't completely disagree with you. I gave up my Miata seven years ago (to get a "responsible" family car) and now I die a little every time I get in the Prius. The joy is gone and now I'm just getting from A to B.
It's odd to me that most people I talk to can't get past the idea of not owning a car. Consider what you could do with the money you waste every year on car payments, gas, parking, maintenance, and insurance. Why wouldn't the future be nearly everyone taking a robo-Uber whenever they need to? In the future, driving or owning a car will be just another interesting hobby.
There are still a lot of really smart people on/. with informed opinions --but it seems like there just as many weak-minded idiots, too emotionally committed to their beliefs to think rationally. And they have mod points. Why can't they stay on FoxNews.com or Yahoo Answers?
Sure, I can see that. String them along--just as long as they aren't "the guy." (You know, the only guy that understands how the mission-critical systems work. I've seen companies go under when they lose that guy, without a knowledge transfer, which may take months). The replacement coder costs the new going rate, delivering a fraction of the productivity in the months before they have equivalent institutional knowledge and understand the wage refugee's code.
Ironically, even if a penny pinching manager did save a little, it's behaviors like this that drive IT wage inflation.
The pattern I've seen time and again is that even if you find an employer that gives regular raises, the market rate for programmers moves much faster than a lame 3% cost of living raise. So, unless you're an assertive extrovert, with a high tolerance for uncomfortable moments with your boss, you probably aren't demanding a competitive raise each year. Easier to just interview every few years and get a big salary bump.
And the employers who lost you? They'll pay much more to replace you, learn nothing from the experience, then repeat the cycle again in a few years.
If they have links to the petroleum industry perhaps you'd like to share exactly how much they have made and exactly where this money is supposed to have come from.
As the old song goes, little things mean a lot. You couldn't see the difference between a little botulin toxin and a lethal dose without a microscope. And I'm sure you wouldn't notice a 0.7 C difference between one room in your house and another, but multiply that amount of energy to a global scale and it starts to add up. Consider what climatologist James Hansen said about the current rate of increase in global warming: “(it's) equivalent to exploding 400,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs per day, 365 days per year. That’s how much extra energy Earth is gaining each day.”
Climate change became the more popular phrase simply because so many people refused to accept that just because he planet as a whole is warming doesn't mean that every area also gets warmer.
In other words, the word with more play propaganda-wise got used. I go with the more accurate term.
Actually, it was Frank Luntz, a right-wing political consultant that's credited for the name change. He thought "climate change" sounded less scary and easier to ignore. Here's a quick read on Wikipedia with some of the back story on how climate science became a political football: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
Naturally, the platform has to be mainstream enough to appeal to everyone possible. The reality is that the party has been co-opted by extremists hostile to some important pieces of science that impact policy. Here's your cites:
Exhibit A Exhibit B (Yeah, it's Obama's list, but most would certainly embrace the denier label) Exhibit C [youtube.com]
There are enough dangerous nuts in the great GOP Venn diagram (and a considerable overlap with elected officials) that the GP is basically correct.
"His speech and music synthesis stuff is solid" was solid. Now it's decades old and he has done nothing. I have come to understand he wasn't some sort of genius, but just in the right place at the right time.
Really? He just got lucky, like those morons Da Vinci and Einstein? Sounds like a vineyard of sour grapes to me.
I'm really excited, but I doubt the live broadcast will measure up to the bitchin' action movie NASA made of Curiosity's "Seven Minutes of Terror!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzqdoXwLBT8 Enjoy!
So... Grampa finally croaks at the age of 101. Hasn't been able to see, hear, taste, smell, or think straight for the last 15 years. When his magic soul is divinely uploaded to a new, angelic, ether-based model, is his consciousness just like it was when he died? Senile, socially disengaged, and slow to understand anything going on around him? Or, as many believe, would it be transformed to its former glory, when gramps was a young adult.
O.K... Now think about how differently you looked at the world; the skills, interests, and personality you had when you were much younger. Grandfather is a categorically different person from the vital young man he once was (he'd probably yell at him to get off his lawn if they met). So, in what sense would that angelic being be the same guy that died and not more so a recreation of somebody that existed 75 years ago?
I just can't see how the Judeo-Christian concept of an afterlife is anything but a big pile of paradox.
Amen. If de Grey, Kurzweil, and friends are right, by the end of the century religion and the clamoring for its promised afterlife will naturally extinguish. Who in their right mind would sign up for suppressing their sexual urges, spending their money building churches, and ruining several hours every Sunday, when there's no pay off?
Belief in an afterlife being just some made up story is simply your opinion.
Finally someone who "gets" it. They keep telling me that Spiderman is a fictional character, but I have read his texts and heard his message of justice and good deeds. I know that there are different versions of his tale, but that certainly doesn't mean that my understanding of his powers isn't de facto truth.
Will his consciousness cease to exist or will his ability to show us it exist cease?
That's sort of a serious part of the question. Does someone's consciousness really cease to exist or just our ability to perceive it.
I have a magical unicorn that shits gold bars. The downside is that you won't be able to perceive it until you buy it from me for $10,000 (no personal checks, please). But, considering the value of gold, obviously you can simply assume the unicorn exists, right?
Slashdot Mirror
Have my criticism and observations upset you AC? Struck a nerve?
Gotta love irony.
Yeah, I drop in once or twice a year. Nothing's changed. Other tech sites have more straightforward news and Quora's comments have a much better signal to noise ratio.
This daily MS-bashing circle jerk, the nauseating fanboyism, and politically motivated anti-science goons are the three reasons I stopped using /.
Ah, but you're missing the point of these postings... It's not about helpful information (how many PCs/users affected? Root cause?), it's only bait to hate on MS.
Windows kills your family and destroys the world, Apple and Linux are flawless and have never had a single bug, exploit, or bad patch.
Wash, rinse, repeat.
I guess trying to associate those who don't accept the concept (or claimed extent) of man made global warming with the holocaust with the term 'deniers' wasn't working... a new term has been coined.
Yes, "losers."
It's only people who don't have a car who see that as a waste, those who do understand that their required associated costs like having insurance on your house or paying for you utilities. Imagine if you were homeless and didn't have to waste so much money on rent, electricity, heating, and water!
A habitable place to live (own or rent) isn't negotiable. Owning a plane, boat --or even a car, is. For many lower-income individuals, transportation is a significant percentage of their disposable income. A car may not be as expensive as housing, medical care, or food, but it's optional and only used 5% of the time. If there was a good alternative at a fraction of the price, most people would use it. This is why most residents of NYC and European cities don't own one.
You obviously have never owned a car that is fun to drive. Go out and buy a good used Miata. Get out of the city and onto rural roads. Come back in 6 months and tell us if you would still like to be carted around in a vehicle several other people have thrown up in.
LOL. I can't completely disagree with you. I gave up my Miata seven years ago (to get a "responsible" family car) and now I die a little every time I get in the Prius. The joy is gone and now I'm just getting from A to B.
It's odd to me that most people I talk to can't get past the idea of not owning a car. Consider what you could do with the money you waste every year on car payments, gas, parking, maintenance, and insurance. Why wouldn't the future be nearly everyone taking a robo-Uber whenever they need to? In the future, driving or owning a car will be just another interesting hobby.
There are still a lot of really smart people on /. with informed opinions --but it seems like there just as many weak-minded idiots, too emotionally committed to their beliefs to think rationally. And they have mod points. Why can't they stay on FoxNews.com or Yahoo Answers?
Sure, I can see that. String them along--just as long as they aren't "the guy." (You know, the only guy that understands how the mission-critical systems work. I've seen companies go under when they lose that guy, without a knowledge transfer, which may take months). The replacement coder costs the new going rate, delivering a fraction of the productivity in the months before they have equivalent institutional knowledge and understand the wage refugee's code.
Ironically, even if a penny pinching manager did save a little, it's behaviors like this that drive IT wage inflation.
The pattern I've seen time and again is that even if you find an employer that gives regular raises, the market rate for programmers moves much faster than a lame 3% cost of living raise. So, unless you're an assertive extrovert, with a high tolerance for uncomfortable moments with your boss, you probably aren't demanding a competitive raise each year. Easier to just interview every few years and get a big salary bump.
And the employers who lost you? They'll pay much more to replace you, learn nothing from the experience, then repeat the cycle again in a few years.
People that need debuggers will never be any good.
People who work with trivially-simple applications and never have to deal with someone else's legacy mess will never be any good either.
People are going to be lining up around the block for the "learn slower" electric charge.. if our society's obsession with alcohol is any indication.
Alcohol? The continued success of America's two political parties seems like better evidence.
In other news, Exxon Mobil CEO mercilessly ridicules /. poster that can't spell company name correctly.
If they have links to the petroleum industry perhaps you'd like to share exactly how much they have made and exactly where this money is supposed to have come from.
Admittedly, it has gotten harder. The money used to follow a much more transparent path. See http://www.scientificamerican....
Nicely done. I'd post AC too if I was so ignorant I didn't understand the distinction between climate and weather.
As the old song goes, little things mean a lot. You couldn't see the difference between a little botulin toxin and a lethal dose without a microscope. And I'm sure you wouldn't notice a 0.7 C difference between one room in your house and another, but multiply that amount of energy to a global scale and it starts to add up. Consider what climatologist James Hansen said about the current rate of increase in global warming: “(it's) equivalent to exploding 400,000 Hiroshima atomic bombs per day, 365 days per year. That’s how much extra energy Earth is gaining each day.”
Climate change became the more popular phrase simply because so many people refused to accept that just because he planet as a whole is warming doesn't mean that every area also gets warmer.
In other words, the word with more play propaganda-wise got used. I go with the more accurate term.
Actually, it was Frank Luntz, a right-wing political consultant that's credited for the name change. He thought "climate change" sounded less scary and easier to ignore. Here's a quick read on Wikipedia with some of the back story on how climate science became a political football:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
Naturally, the platform has to be mainstream enough to appeal to everyone possible. The reality is that the party has been co-opted by extremists hostile to some important pieces of science that impact policy. Here's your cites:
Exhibit A
Exhibit B (Yeah, it's Obama's list, but most would certainly embrace the denier label)
Exhibit C [youtube.com]
There are enough dangerous nuts in the great GOP Venn diagram (and a considerable overlap with elected officials) that the GP is basically correct.
"His speech and music synthesis stuff is solid"
was solid. Now it's decades old and he has done nothing. I have come to understand he wasn't some sort of genius, but just in the right place at the right time.
Really? He just got lucky, like those morons Da Vinci and Einstein? Sounds like a vineyard of sour grapes to me.
I'm really excited, but I doubt the live broadcast will measure up to the bitchin' action movie NASA made of Curiosity's "Seven Minutes of Terror!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzqdoXwLBT8 Enjoy!
So... Grampa finally croaks at the age of 101. Hasn't been able to see, hear, taste, smell, or think straight for the last 15 years. When his magic soul is divinely uploaded to a new, angelic, ether-based model, is his consciousness just like it was when he died? Senile, socially disengaged, and slow to understand anything going on around him? Or, as many believe, would it be transformed to its former glory, when gramps was a young adult.
O.K... Now think about how differently you looked at the world; the skills, interests, and personality you had when you were much younger. Grandfather is a categorically different person from the vital young man he once was (he'd probably yell at him to get off his lawn if they met). So, in what sense would that angelic being be the same guy that died and not more so a recreation of somebody that existed 75 years ago?
I just can't see how the Judeo-Christian concept of an afterlife is anything but a big pile of paradox.
What a waste of money!
Why not give the money to Aubrey de Grey and/or the SENS Foundation
Amen. If de Grey, Kurzweil, and friends are right, by the end of the century religion and the clamoring for its promised afterlife will naturally extinguish. Who in their right mind would sign up for suppressing their sexual urges, spending their money building churches, and ruining several hours every Sunday, when there's no pay off?
Belief in an afterlife being just some made up story is simply your opinion.
Finally someone who "gets" it. They keep telling me that Spiderman is a fictional character, but I have read his texts and heard his message of justice and good deeds. I know that there are different versions of his tale, but that certainly doesn't mean that my understanding of his powers isn't de facto truth.
Will his consciousness cease to exist or will his ability to show us it exist cease?
That's sort of a serious part of the question. Does someone's consciousness really cease to exist or just our ability to perceive it.
I have a magical unicorn that shits gold bars. The downside is that you won't be able to perceive it until you buy it from me for $10,000 (no personal checks, please). But, considering the value of gold, obviously you can simply assume the unicorn exists, right?