Your software is just crap - written in crayon, fictional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine as a punchline to a joke by mmell February 17, 2017
Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is fucking insane - by JazzLad April 20, 2016
his hosts "program" is actually a broken batch file by xenotransplant August 10 2015
his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to be a laughingstock while consuming excessive amounts of alcohol by alexgieg September 25 2015
I like your tinfoil hat by Karmashock September 09 2015
that APK nut, I can't get him to stop talking about his piece of shit file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015
I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017
APK
P.S.=> When YOU do better than THAT by our/. registered peers, then talk (from behind your FAKE NAME for your FAKE LIE of a "so-called" WASTED life) - ok? apk
He did however give plenty of recorded interviews, and he apparently did public magic performances in his youth. So yes, he did speak in public, despite his dislike of it.
Most drug discovery is done by academic, publicly funded researchers, who get paid fairly poorly considering their education, and the hazards of the field.
If that's true then why are most new drugs invented in the USA? Do all those other countries just have really shit universities? Or are you maybe just making things up?
Not to mention the fact that the current power grids of the world cannot support everyone having a plug in car. Fire back up the coal plants I guess since nuclear is politically not possible in most countries.
That is a big reason hydrogen is a good option. Ammonia can be created in bulk offsite using renewables and transported using current infrastructure then using membrane tech, which is not that power intensive, converted to hydrogen onsite at a filling station.
So... to paraphrase....
Problem: electric grids do not produce enough electricity to power all electric cars. This scares me because we will need more coal power plants.
Solution: ditch the relatively efficient battery and switch to a much more inefficient hydrogen fuel cell. Further reduce efficiency by having to create an intermediary gas and membranes which then convert that gas to a different gas. Make sure to waste a bunch of energy moving that liquid all over the place in trucks. It's OK that you're consuming way more energy than by just using batteries; the extra energy will be magically created "off site", which doesn't require any new coal power plants.
Sounds great. You get started on that, I'm sure the money will just pour in.
The current system is not working, and literally every single person on the planet knows that it's not.
There were a lot of stupid things in your rant, but this one takes the cake. Things are better than they've ever been in human history. Productivity is at record highs, violence is down, malnourishment is down, access to healthcare is way up (yes, even in the US), people have more free time, more access to information, more ability to travel, learn, and experience the world, and less risk of starving, dying of disease, or being violently killed than at any other point in the history of our species. But you think that "the system is broken" and, not only that, you've also somehow convinced yourself that everyone else also "knows" this. And you want to replace "the system" with some untested theory you've dreamed up which is going to change everything.
The only difference between you and Stalin is the moustache.
That's a lot of words to say "the most irresponsible/incompetent people should starve to death."
FTFY.
What's your position on having the government pay for abortions if a poor person wants one? Are you in favor of that, or do you prefer an increase in incestuous, mentally and physically disabled rape babies?
As long as we're letting them starve to death this seems like a non-problem. Bonus if you get rid of the "free" healthcare.
Governments are simply a true monopoly on violence
A monopoly on violence is the one thing which stable societies actually require. Gang warfare is what happens when you have entities which cannot take their conflicts before impartial central courts, and must thus resort to violence. Those occur even in societies in which the government is generally able to maintain a monopoly on violence, simply because the alternative dispute resolutions which it offers are unavailable to the criminal element. In societies where the government is completely incapable of enforcing a monopoly on violence you end up with rival warlords setting up their own little kingdoms.
No, they're arguing that they can't even take a single day off (i.e weekends) without it hitting their bottom line
Big fucking deal. They "work" maybe 5-6 hours a day tops, and in exchange they never have to worry about the menial shit the rest of us do. No 2 hours spent commuting every day. No cleaning, doing maintenance on the house, or even cooking; with $500,000 per month they can easily hire someone else to do all of it. I'll bet you any money you want that even without "weekends" they have a hell of a lot more spare time than the average salary worker.
At $500,000 a month you could spend 6 months working, quit, and spend the rest of your life living off the earnings. You won't have an extravagant lifestyle but for 6 months work? That's a fuck of a lot better than the vast majority of humans will ever achieve. A guy making $50,000 a year would have to work for 60 years to earn what you did in 6 months.
Anyone in that situation who has the audacity to whine should be dragged out into the streets and publicly flogged.
What they found is that the marginal value of individual income is essentially nil beyond $75,000 (at the time).
That's total horseshit. I would be a fuck of a lot happier making $75,000,000 in one year and then being able to relax and live a life of luxury for the rest of my life, than I would having to go to work every fucking day for 50 years just to bring home $75,000.
I think these researchers have been hitting the medical marijuana. Either that or you're misrepresenting their findings.
Plex does realtime transcoding to adjust the quality based on available bandwidth. How's your brilliant fucking file server solution going to help with that?
Yippee. I rsync the stuff I'm currently interested in onto a couple 5tb drives and bring them with me. No worrying about transcoding or having a connection at all. I can even watch my media at 40,000 feet over the Atlantic ocean. If I get to the other end and find that the 10+ TBs of shit I brought with me really isn't enough, I can SSH into my home system, transcode a media file with a single command to ffmpeg, and copy it over. Don't even have to wait for it to finish; VLC will play if just fine while it's being transcoded.
Plex used to be OK until they started constantly hassling me to sign up for an account. I got rid of it for that reason, but have found I have much more flexibility in how I use my media now that I'm no longer tied to it.
Of course they would. Your entire point is predicated on the assumption that scientists are probably shit.
Nonsense. I'm a fan of science and scientists in general; they're the only ones really doing the work to pull us out of the darkness. My entire point is predicated on the fact that scientists are human and prone to some of the same cognitive biases as the rest of us. I'm sure there's a handful of scientists out there who randomly think to themselves "hrm, the weather is nice today. I better find out why!" but those individuals are few and far between, and are unlikely to find nearly as much funding as the guys who want to go looking at why there are suddenly more hurricanes.
This problem is, of course, massively compounded by the fact that the news media and the average person on the street are even less rational and more prone to being misled by cognitive biases than are scientists. Even if scientists themselves were magically free from all of our failings as a species, it wouldn't stop everyone else from taking their findings out of context.
Your software is just crap - written in crayon, fictional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine as a punchline to a joke by mmell February 17, 2017
Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is fucking insane - by JazzLad April 20, 2016
his hosts "program" is actually a broken batch file by xenotransplant August 10 2015
his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to be a laughingstock while consuming excessive amounts of alcohol by alexgieg September 25 2015
I like your tinfoil hat by Karmashock September 09 2015
that APK nut, I can't get him to stop talking about his piece of shit file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015
I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017
APK
P.S.=> When YOU do better than THAT by our/. registered peers, then talk (from behind your FAKE NAME for your FAKE LIE of a "so-called" WASTED life) - ok? apk
40s, 50s, and 60s mechanical fuel injection systems are different beasts from O2-sensor and airflow-controlled feedback EFI systems.
Correct; the latter are far better. The fact that the former were being pursued despite their obvious shortcomings means that there were plenty of people in the automotive and aerospace industries who saw their potential.
The latter only came into their own after emissions regulations virtually mandated them. Efficient, clean, easier to fix, and actually simpler than carbs.
You're confusing the sequence in which these things occurred with actual causation. The thing that made modern fuel injection possible was the microchip. First invented in 1958, it would take at least a decade before they became both small and powerful enough to be practical in automotive use.
Had California made those laws in the 1940s it wouldn't have brought about the advent of electronic fuel injection any sooner. Had they waited until the 1990s, the technology would have already been in use anyway. The laws may have slightly sped up the adoption of the technology but it's ridiculous to suggest that they were directly responsible for it's invention. Their impact on innovation (let alone economics) was minimal.
Lastly, you're wrong about fuel injected vehicles being easier to repair. The carb is simpler in most ways, which is why it's still popular in third world nations despite the obvious economic drawback of using more fuel. Carbs can be fixed at home by a middle-school dropout with a few common tools. Fuel injection requires more equipment and training, and replacement parts which can be hard to come by.
Fuel injection was first developed in the 1920s or earlier, and was used mainly in WW2 aircraft. It started being used in racing cars after WW2, and was being utilized in some commercial cars by the 1950s. Only a fool would try to give credit for them to California's emissions standards which came in around the 60s/70s.
Anyway, even without that, you're completely missing the point. Setting reasonable emissions standards which slowly get more stringent over 50+ years is a fuck of a lot different than saying "we are going zero emission in the next 20 years!".
It seems likely that this is simply due to the fact that you are expected to accomplish a certain amount of work regardless of how much vacation time you take, and those who are gone more frequently just work their asses off to keep up with the other employees.
It's an interesting observation but it's certainly not very good evidence for the claim that reducing the work hours of ALL employees wouldn't result in a decrease in productivity. First you would have to show that there isn't an acclimation effect resulting in everyone simply putting in the same amount of effort as they did previously but doing it for 8 fewer hours. You can't really do that based on the observation of some outliers.
You're totally right, arbitrary state mandated directives are such a wonderful drivers of innovation and economic growth. Maybe California should make it a shorter period though. "The Five Year Plan" has a nice ring to it.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess. What's somalia like these days, anyway? Decent weather at least?
Yo momma.
Your software is just crap - written in crayon, fictional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine as a punchline to a joke by mmell February 17, 2017
Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is fucking insane - by JazzLad April 20, 2016
his hosts "program" is actually a broken batch file by xenotransplant August 10 2015
his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to be a laughingstock while consuming excessive amounts of alcohol by alexgieg September 25 2015
I like your tinfoil hat by Karmashock September 09 2015
that APK nut, I can't get him to stop talking about his piece of shit file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015
I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017
APK
P.S.=> When YOU do better than THAT by our /. registered peers, then talk (from behind your FAKE NAME for your FAKE LIE of a "so-called" WASTED life) - ok? apk
He did however give plenty of recorded interviews, and he apparently did public magic performances in his youth. So yes, he did speak in public, despite his dislike of it.
Most drug discovery is done by academic, publicly funded researchers, who get paid fairly poorly considering their education, and the hazards of the field.
If that's true then why are most new drugs invented in the USA? Do all those other countries just have really shit universities? Or are you maybe just making things up?
You've got that exactly backwards, I'm afraid.
Is that aquote from Stalin, or from Mao?
I'm pretty sure the article can be summarized as "texting in prison is every important".
Not to mention the fact that the current power grids of the world cannot support everyone having a plug in car.
Fire back up the coal plants I guess since nuclear is politically not possible in most countries.
That is a big reason hydrogen is a good option. Ammonia can be created in bulk offsite using renewables and transported using current infrastructure then using membrane tech, which is not that power intensive, converted to hydrogen onsite at a filling station.
So ... to paraphrase ....
Problem: electric grids do not produce enough electricity to power all electric cars. This scares me because we will need more coal power plants.
Solution: ditch the relatively efficient battery and switch to a much more inefficient hydrogen fuel cell. Further reduce efficiency by having to create an intermediary gas and membranes which then convert that gas to a different gas. Make sure to waste a bunch of energy moving that liquid all over the place in trucks. It's OK that you're consuming way more energy than by just using batteries; the extra energy will be magically created "off site", which doesn't require any new coal power plants.
Sounds great. You get started on that, I'm sure the money will just pour in.
The current system is not working, and literally every single person on the planet knows that it's not.
There were a lot of stupid things in your rant, but this one takes the cake. Things are better than they've ever been in human history. Productivity is at record highs, violence is down, malnourishment is down, access to healthcare is way up (yes, even in the US), people have more free time, more access to information, more ability to travel, learn, and experience the world, and less risk of starving, dying of disease, or being violently killed than at any other point in the history of our species. But you think that "the system is broken" and, not only that, you've also somehow convinced yourself that everyone else also "knows" this. And you want to replace "the system" with some untested theory you've dreamed up which is going to change everything.
The only difference between you and Stalin is the moustache.
That's a lot of words to say "the most irresponsible/incompetent people should starve to death."
FTFY.
What's your position on having the government pay for abortions if a poor person wants one? Are you in favor of that, or do you prefer an increase in incestuous, mentally and physically disabled rape babies?
As long as we're letting them starve to death this seems like a non-problem. Bonus if you get rid of the "free" healthcare.
Governments are simply a true monopoly on violence
A monopoly on violence is the one thing which stable societies actually require. Gang warfare is what happens when you have entities which cannot take their conflicts before impartial central courts, and must thus resort to violence. Those occur even in societies in which the government is generally able to maintain a monopoly on violence, simply because the alternative dispute resolutions which it offers are unavailable to the criminal element. In societies where the government is completely incapable of enforcing a monopoly on violence you end up with rival warlords setting up their own little kingdoms.
No, they're arguing that they can't even take a single day off (i.e weekends) without it hitting their bottom line
Big fucking deal. They "work" maybe 5-6 hours a day tops, and in exchange they never have to worry about the menial shit the rest of us do. No 2 hours spent commuting every day. No cleaning, doing maintenance on the house, or even cooking; with $500,000 per month they can easily hire someone else to do all of it. I'll bet you any money you want that even without "weekends" they have a hell of a lot more spare time than the average salary worker.
At $500,000 a month you could spend 6 months working, quit, and spend the rest of your life living off the earnings. You won't have an extravagant lifestyle but for 6 months work? That's a fuck of a lot better than the vast majority of humans will ever achieve. A guy making $50,000 a year would have to work for 60 years to earn what you did in 6 months.
Anyone in that situation who has the audacity to whine should be dragged out into the streets and publicly flogged.
What they found is that the marginal value of individual income is essentially nil beyond $75,000 (at the time).
That's total horseshit. I would be a fuck of a lot happier making $75,000,000 in one year and then being able to relax and live a life of luxury for the rest of my life, than I would having to go to work every fucking day for 50 years just to bring home $75,000.
I think these researchers have been hitting the medical marijuana. Either that or you're misrepresenting their findings.
Plex does realtime transcoding to adjust the quality based on available bandwidth. How's your brilliant fucking file server solution going to help with that?
Yippee. I rsync the stuff I'm currently interested in onto a couple 5tb drives and bring them with me. No worrying about transcoding or having a connection at all. I can even watch my media at 40,000 feet over the Atlantic ocean. If I get to the other end and find that the 10+ TBs of shit I brought with me really isn't enough, I can SSH into my home system, transcode a media file with a single command to ffmpeg, and copy it over. Don't even have to wait for it to finish; VLC will play if just fine while it's being transcoded.
Plex used to be OK until they started constantly hassling me to sign up for an account. I got rid of it for that reason, but have found I have much more flexibility in how I use my media now that I'm no longer tied to it.
Of course they would. Your entire point is predicated on the assumption that scientists are probably shit.
Nonsense. I'm a fan of science and scientists in general; they're the only ones really doing the work to pull us out of the darkness. My entire point is predicated on the fact that scientists are human and prone to some of the same cognitive biases as the rest of us. I'm sure there's a handful of scientists out there who randomly think to themselves "hrm, the weather is nice today. I better find out why!" but those individuals are few and far between, and are unlikely to find nearly as much funding as the guys who want to go looking at why there are suddenly more hurricanes.
This problem is, of course, massively compounded by the fact that the news media and the average person on the street are even less rational and more prone to being misled by cognitive biases than are scientists. Even if scientists themselves were magically free from all of our failings as a species, it wouldn't stop everyone else from taking their findings out of context.
Your software is just crap - written in crayon, fictional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine as a punchline to a joke by mmell February 17, 2017
Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is fucking insane - by JazzLad April 20, 2016
his hosts "program" is actually a broken batch file by xenotransplant August 10 2015
his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to be a laughingstock while consuming excessive amounts of alcohol by alexgieg September 25 2015
I like your tinfoil hat by Karmashock September 09 2015
that APK nut, I can't get him to stop talking about his piece of shit file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015
I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017
APK
P.S.=> When YOU do better than THAT by our /. registered peers, then talk (from behind your FAKE NAME for your FAKE LIE of a "so-called" WASTED life) - ok? apk
40s, 50s, and 60s mechanical fuel injection systems are different beasts from O2-sensor and airflow-controlled feedback EFI systems.
Correct; the latter are far better. The fact that the former were being pursued despite their obvious shortcomings means that there were plenty of people in the automotive and aerospace industries who saw their potential.
The latter only came into their own after emissions regulations virtually mandated them. Efficient, clean, easier to fix, and actually simpler than carbs.
You're confusing the sequence in which these things occurred with actual causation. The thing that made modern fuel injection possible was the microchip. First invented in 1958, it would take at least a decade before they became both small and powerful enough to be practical in automotive use.
Had California made those laws in the 1940s it wouldn't have brought about the advent of electronic fuel injection any sooner. Had they waited until the 1990s, the technology would have already been in use anyway. The laws may have slightly sped up the adoption of the technology but it's ridiculous to suggest that they were directly responsible for it's invention. Their impact on innovation (let alone economics) was minimal.
Lastly, you're wrong about fuel injected vehicles being easier to repair. The carb is simpler in most ways, which is why it's still popular in third world nations despite the obvious economic drawback of using more fuel. Carbs can be fixed at home by a middle-school dropout with a few common tools. Fuel injection requires more equipment and training, and replacement parts which can be hard to come by.
Fuel injection was first developed in the 1920s or earlier, and was used mainly in WW2 aircraft. It started being used in racing cars after WW2, and was being utilized in some commercial cars by the 1950s. Only a fool would try to give credit for them to California's emissions standards which came in around the 60s/70s.
Anyway, even without that, you're completely missing the point. Setting reasonable emissions standards which slowly get more stringent over 50+ years is a fuck of a lot different than saying "we are going zero emission in the next 20 years!".
If only consumption and expectations weren't increasing at the same rate as productivity ...
It seems likely that this is simply due to the fact that you are expected to accomplish a certain amount of work regardless of how much vacation time you take, and those who are gone more frequently just work their asses off to keep up with the other employees.
It's an interesting observation but it's certainly not very good evidence for the claim that reducing the work hours of ALL employees wouldn't result in a decrease in productivity. First you would have to show that there isn't an acclimation effect resulting in everyone simply putting in the same amount of effort as they did previously but doing it for 8 fewer hours. You can't really do that based on the observation of some outliers.
Yeah I rememberrememberthe day they signed that bill. "100% clean cars by 1980!", they said. What an amazing achievement it was.
I don't remember the commercial, but Wesley Crusher did work on development for the Toaster 4000.
You're totally right, arbitrary state mandated directives are such a wonderful drivers of innovation and economic growth. Maybe California should make it a shorter period though. "The Five Year Plan" has a nice ring to it.