Or at least allow say 500 characters of a correction notice at the bottom. If you discover a typo and entered a notice, then the bottom of your original entry would have a section titled "Correction Notice" with the text of the your correction notice, along with a time-stamp.
The industry needs to come up with a "social networking standard" (SNS) so that the IT oligopolies don't control all the data. The SNS would allow smaller providers to host social network data that can coordinate with other providers. The people you share with wouldn't have to use the same vendor. It's kind of like SMTP for social networking and chat apps.
SNS ideally should allow users to carefully limit what is shared with who, and by default be fairly strict.
It could practically kill Facebook, Twitter, and Snapchat, but that's probably a good thing.
I'm also okay with the idea that one can get cheap or free SNS hosting by accepting ads, as long as the nature of the ads are clear, such as how frequent they are and what kind of data is shared with which organizations. The same infrastructure (conventions) that control which people or groups can see or participate in your groups could also be used to control sharing info with advertisers, if one chooses to that route to get cheaper hosting.
One of the criticisms of ACA was that "there are not enough doctors" to fill demand. But if the reason is because more sick are being healed, isn't that a "good problem"?
The problem with proof-reading is that it's hard to mentally divorce what one intends to say versus what they are reading back. Others have complained about their own "intention bias" before, not just me, so I know I'm not alone.
There's a point of diminishing returns on repeat re-reads to proof the copy. Time is often the best solution to clearing one's mind of intention bias. (A second opinion is also good, but hard to come by.)
If you by chance have a special brain that is immune to this, I congratulate you, but us muggles want a muggle-friendly edit system.
A well-engineered system can indeed be significantly cheaper and easier to manage and maintain than a "cowboy created" system. It's just that it's difficult for the customer and/or managers to know the difference, and thus don't reward such sufficiently.
They judge books by covers partly because they don't know enough about systems design, which is generally expected, and partly because they don't take the time to probe and ask questions, which is largely their own fault.
Economics *is* largely about investor and consumer perception. But how long an economy can ride a particular wave of perception is nebulous. Bubbles are caused by perceptions out of tune with reality.
I've been building and using various "tracking" systems and applications for almost 3 decades to track people, projects, issues, equipment, etc.
They usually end up disappointing. If you put too few features in, people complain it doesn't do enough. If you put too many features in, then it's confusing and either requires systematic training or people avoid using it.
And anything that becomes popular enough to be used heavily becomes a political football such that high-ranking people want to muck with it to make themselves look better. It's hard to prevent such pressure from gumming things up.
If you want a successful one, then it at least needs enough meta-ability to be flexible: hierarchical when you need it to be or formatted hierarchically, yet apply some set theory when needed (such as potentially overlapping groups/categories), and neither trees nor sets alone will make everybody happy: it has to be able to project (display) as both.
And further, managers often want to see it in a tabular format such as a project/issue status list. If users don't encode (categorize) notes, requests, questions, etc. correctly, it comes out wrong, and it may be difficult to get a hold of the person who did it wrong such that you need some kind of "override" permission tracking so that a back-up person is allowed to fix it. And it helps if it's tied to Active Directory or similar to avoid needing a user account management army.
Somebody with sufficient rank and smarts has to manage the system in a clean way, and have the ability to say "no" when needed without being booted out. Otherwise, it will turn into a sprawling mess the way SharePoint typically ends up. Great technology alone is not enough; it has to be managed and controlled by people with skills, motivation, and sufficient backing and/or power to enforce conventions and keep it clean. That's hard to come by.
so that you can hide behind a name that you can keep shifting like moving goal posts is disingenuous.
I assure you I have no sinister intent. More precision would have made the writing verbose, and most people prefer short over precise in my experience.
No it is more than just a label because it is purely motivated by FUD and pseudo-science.
Categorizing GMO and "organic", improving the metrics, and characterizing related potential risks are long and involved subjects. I don't wish to delve there today. Maybe if those topics become primary/. topics I'll revisit.
Having part-time employees could be more expensive to companies. Let's not force them to have more part-time employees without studying the cost. Otherwise, full-time countries will clean our clocks in the market-place if part-timing hurts their bottom line.
It never killed anybody to put a GMO indicator on the package label. If GMO's don't bother you, then go ahead and buy the product. Most progressives are NOT for outright banning GMO's, just a label. Freedom.
Sorry, I don't know what you are talking about. You appear to be meandering now. Homeopathy wasn't mentioned before. Are you claiming homeopathy is a progressive thing?
Slashdot Mirror
Some proposed whimsical nick-names for T's ADA replacement:
* AynRandCare
* WealthCare
* MadMaxCare
* SOLcare
* DieCare
* NoCare
* GopDontCare
* CowBoyCare
* YouGetNoCare
* ChaosCare
* CaveManCare
* FakeCare
* OrangeCare
* WeDontCare
* DuctTapeCare
* GoToTheVetsCare
Supply a link that shows old versions.
Or at least allow say 500 characters of a correction notice at the bottom. If you discover a typo and entered a notice, then the bottom of your original entry would have a section titled "Correction Notice" with the text of the your correction notice, along with a time-stamp.
The industry needs to come up with a "social networking standard" (SNS) so that the IT oligopolies don't control all the data. The SNS would allow smaller providers to host social network data that can coordinate with other providers. The people you share with wouldn't have to use the same vendor. It's kind of like SMTP for social networking and chat apps.
SNS ideally should allow users to carefully limit what is shared with who, and by default be fairly strict.
It could practically kill Facebook, Twitter, and Snapchat, but that's probably a good thing.
I'm also okay with the idea that one can get cheap or free SNS hosting by accepting ads, as long as the nature of the ads are clear, such as how frequent they are and what kind of data is shared with which organizations. The same infrastructure (conventions) that control which people or groups can see or participate in your groups could also be used to control sharing info with advertisers, if one chooses to that route to get cheaper hosting.
One of the criticisms of ACA was that "there are not enough doctors" to fill demand. But if the reason is because more sick are being healed, isn't that a "good problem"?
But I wouldn't put it beyond certain politicians to try.
The problem with proof-reading is that it's hard to mentally divorce what one intends to say versus what they are reading back. Others have complained about their own "intention bias" before, not just me, so I know I'm not alone.
There's a point of diminishing returns on repeat re-reads to proof the copy. Time is often the best solution to clearing one's mind of intention bias. (A second opinion is also good, but hard to come by.)
If you by chance have a special brain that is immune to this, I congratulate you, but us muggles want a muggle-friendly edit system.
We have underestimated his "ability" as a politician multiple times before; I won't rule this one out either.
A well-engineered system can indeed be significantly cheaper and easier to manage and maintain than a "cowboy created" system. It's just that it's difficult for the customer and/or managers to know the difference, and thus don't reward such sufficiently.
They judge books by covers partly because they don't know enough about systems design, which is generally expected, and partly because they don't take the time to probe and ask questions, which is largely their own fault.
It seems that way after enough LDS LSD.
That didn't happen to me. You did something wrong.
As far as your theory on taxing the rich, let's try it, enough arm-chair theory already.
Economics *is* largely about investor and consumer perception. But how long an economy can ride a particular wave of perception is nebulous. Bubbles are caused by perceptions out of tune with reality.
You are trying to use logic to figure out Trump?
Proof of a manned mission: you just arrived from another planet.
640 cores oughtta be enough for anyone.
- Cloud B. Gates
It's very important that we start renting them from India!
I also invented such a tool. It's accurate 70% of the time.
Here's the code:
Back in the dot-com fast times of the late 90's, I was with a start-up and floated a draft expansion plan for the servers.
But was told, "Forgettaboutit, our main goal is to get purchased by a bigger co, not grow."
Neither happened. They died a painful death.
I've been building and using various "tracking" systems and applications for almost 3 decades to track people, projects, issues, equipment, etc.
They usually end up disappointing. If you put too few features in, people complain it doesn't do enough. If you put too many features in, then it's confusing and either requires systematic training or people avoid using it.
And anything that becomes popular enough to be used heavily becomes a political football such that high-ranking people want to muck with it to make themselves look better. It's hard to prevent such pressure from gumming things up.
If you want a successful one, then it at least needs enough meta-ability to be flexible: hierarchical when you need it to be or formatted hierarchically, yet apply some set theory when needed (such as potentially overlapping groups/categories), and neither trees nor sets alone will make everybody happy: it has to be able to project (display) as both.
And further, managers often want to see it in a tabular format such as a project/issue status list. If users don't encode (categorize) notes, requests, questions, etc. correctly, it comes out wrong, and it may be difficult to get a hold of the person who did it wrong such that you need some kind of "override" permission tracking so that a back-up person is allowed to fix it. And it helps if it's tied to Active Directory or similar to avoid needing a user account management army.
Somebody with sufficient rank and smarts has to manage the system in a clean way, and have the ability to say "no" when needed without being booted out. Otherwise, it will turn into a sprawling mess the way SharePoint typically ends up. Great technology alone is not enough; it has to be managed and controlled by people with skills, motivation, and sufficient backing and/or power to enforce conventions and keep it clean. That's hard to come by.
We need more focus on our stem rather than STEM.
I assure you I have no sinister intent. More precision would have made the writing verbose, and most people prefer short over precise in my experience.
Categorizing GMO and "organic", improving the metrics, and characterizing related potential risks are long and involved subjects. I don't wish to delve there today. Maybe if those topics become primary /. topics I'll revisit.
Having part-time employees could be more expensive to companies. Let's not force them to have more part-time employees without studying the cost. Otherwise, full-time countries will clean our clocks in the market-place if part-timing hurts their bottom line.
It never killed anybody to put a GMO indicator on the package label. If GMO's don't bother you, then go ahead and buy the product. Most progressives are NOT for outright banning GMO's, just a label. Freedom.
They should change their name to "RadioShaft"
Only if you ignore their snoopware push.
Vague fool.
Sorry, I don't know what you are talking about. You appear to be meandering now. Homeopathy wasn't mentioned before. Are you claiming homeopathy is a progressive thing?