I'm not sure I'd go with fantastic, but yes, it was a good film.
Different to the original, not as good, but stands up as a good, well made and thoughful film in its own right. I thought the pacing was deliberate rather than slow, but I also rate Once Upon a Time in the West as one of the greatest films ever made so maybe I just like films that have the confidence to tell a story their own way.
Non-existent? https://www.theguardian.com/so... disagrees with you, and that doesn't take into account the very high percentage of women that like to play with the penis of male babies when they change a nappy.
Just because the justice system is inherently and excessively sexist doesn't mean that women don't commit crimes.
Which is to your credit, although as it happens, "awesome graphics cards" are no longer a good choice for bitcoin.
Dedicated hardware is used by major bitcoin farms. The high grade graphics cards are used for other scams. I mean, other cryptocurrencies.
Even there though, your basic economics kicks in. Miners want to optimise purchase price, power costs and output, so super awesome cards don't give the price/performance that stepping down to slightly less awesome cards offer.
My to-do lists are simple text files (one each for work and home) organised in a 'most important at the top' order.
The order constantly changes, new entries keep appearing, and the granularity can be massively different. e.g. 'Write book' is one row below 'get eyesight tested'.
My work to-do list can have four year old entries. They're still relevant, they'd still be nice to get done, but they've never been the best use of my working time. More immediately, the thing that was urgent for the end of this week may now be lower priority than four other things, and that also may mean it wont happen this month.
Putting stuff into a calendar would be pointless. My days just aren't that strictly structured, the work isn't that predictable, the opportunities aren't that limited. About as close as I get is a to-do entry to "Set up call to discuss X".
Someone that writes a to-do tracker clearly has completion issues. They need software to help them track what they need to do, because they're just not getting it done.
So abandonware suggests that either they completed their to-do list (which clearly they can't do, as they wouldn't need to write the software if they could) or that the updates/bugfixes/security patches are still on the to-do list, just lower priority than everything else.
When to Uber to the station, your own car is still parked at home, rather than being in traffic.
So fucking what? I'm still in a car that's in traffic, and wouldn't otherwise be.
Two people in one car, instead of two people in two cars.
No. Two people in one car, instead of one person in one car and one person doing a job that pays well instead.
In fact, this encourages more people to ride transit if a train would save money and/or time on your regular route.
Wait? Access to Uber encourages people to use the train? Is it really that shit?
In fact, I predict
Predict what you like, based on your demonstrated logic and analysis thus far I'm going to disregard you anyway. In fact, I didn't even bother reading the end of your post. You make that little sense.
. Because rideshare drivers do not have to loiter or deadhead like cabdrivers, there is no net contribution to traffic.
So if I use Uber to get to the train station, I teleport there and the road isn't used by a car taking me?
The car that doesn't exist doesn't also then have to use a road to get back to my village as that's where the driver lives and you've said he can't loiter by the station?
You're a fucking genius and no mistake. How could I have failed to spot the total absence of traffic in this. To think I might have done something stupid like catch the fucking bus instead.
I don't tolerate sexism or racism in the workplace, no matter who it's by or against. I speak up against it, I act against it and I've put my job on the line for it in the past.
So yeah, I'm against discrimination. Even against white people, and men.
I'm not going to apply to work at Google because their internal culture looks horrific from multiple perspectives, and anyway their recruiting policies would appear to prevent me having a chance anyway because of my gender and/or skin colour.
I do nonetheless want to find out whether they are in fact illegally discriminating in their recruitment practices, and if so, get seriously fucked by the Government (quite apart from any civil suits).
Hmm. It didn't seem certain that it was a single manager. It looked like one manager pushing a corporate policy, which the HR team mandated had to be hidden from view (but still followed) once they realised how illegal it was.
I could be misreading it though, and we don't have all the evidence to really assess.
Nobody was being excluded, but people were up in arms because women were choosing different careers and people from poor backgrounds couldn't meet the educational requirements.
They had no actual grounds to be up in arms, and their response is sexist and racist, but hey, you appear to think that calling this out is wrong.
Well, fuck you and fuck the racist sexist cunts that want to discriminate on gender or race.
The problem is that this anonymisation removes the inherent unconscious bias that leads to women getting better outcomes than men.
The Australian study basically says, "Don't use blind recruitment because it removes a disadvantage from men": https://pmc.gov.au/resource-ce...
Another company says they found no statistically significant difference - but even though they were trying to eliminate bias against women, men did better as a result of their gender being hidden: http://blog.interviewing.io/we...
So no, Google wont anonymise. It'd give them actual equality of opportunity and they appear not to want that at all.
The accusation is, the general American population is 78% white, 12% black, 10% Hispanic, 2% Asian, 2% Arab, x% Jewish, 51% female. If your work force does not have the same percentages you are discriminating.
Of course, this is made even more comical because only 60% of the people working for Google are white.
So they're not only discriminating against white people, but the very justification for doing so merely further demonstrates their racism.
Someone wearing a turban? sure. Someone wearing a hat? sure. Someone wearing a headscarf? sure.
Someone wearing some full face covering leaving only her eyes showing? No.
I can't hear her. I lipread to supplement poor hearing. Yet, somehow, if I ask her to remove the full face covering I'm the one that will be described as an intolerant bigot, even though she's the sexist discriminating against disabled men.
Slashdot Mirror
I think I'd struggle to describe BR2049 as using restraint when it comes to CGI.
Unless you interpret restraint as using CGI to support the film, not be the film. But I'd call that film making..
I'm not sure I'd go with fantastic, but yes, it was a good film.
Different to the original, not as good, but stands up as a good, well made and thoughful film in its own right. I thought the pacing was deliberate rather than slow, but I also rate Once Upon a Time in the West as one of the greatest films ever made so maybe I just like films that have the confidence to tell a story their own way.
Most women wearing such garments are willing to remove them in the presence of women, but not men.
You'll have to ask them why they're such sexist shits.
Non-existent?
https://www.theguardian.com/so... disagrees with you, and that doesn't take into account the very high percentage of women that like to play with the penis of male babies when they change a nappy.
Just because the justice system is inherently and excessively sexist doesn't mean that women don't commit crimes.
Which is to your credit, although as it happens, "awesome graphics cards" are no longer a good choice for bitcoin.
Dedicated hardware is used by major bitcoin farms. The high grade graphics cards are used for other scams. I mean, other cryptocurrencies.
Even there though, your basic economics kicks in. Miners want to optimise purchase price, power costs and output, so super awesome cards don't give the price/performance that stepping down to slightly less awesome cards offer.
That approach wouldn't work for me.
My to-do lists are simple text files (one each for work and home) organised in a 'most important at the top' order.
The order constantly changes, new entries keep appearing, and the granularity can be massively different. e.g. 'Write book' is one row below 'get eyesight tested'.
My work to-do list can have four year old entries. They're still relevant, they'd still be nice to get done, but they've never been the best use of my working time. More immediately, the thing that was urgent for the end of this week may now be lower priority than four other things, and that also may mean it wont happen this month.
Putting stuff into a calendar would be pointless. My days just aren't that strictly structured, the work isn't that predictable, the opportunities aren't that limited. About as close as I get is a to-do entry to "Set up call to discuss X".
Quite apart from that being a fucking awful development antipattern it's entirely fucking useless for people that want to track non-coding activities.
cashLedger += credit;
debtTracker -= debit;
TODO: buy milk, feed cat
output("This made sense when I wrote it, but only to me");
Look at this from another perspective.
Someone that writes a to-do tracker clearly has completion issues. They need software to help them track what they need to do, because they're just not getting it done.
So abandonware suggests that either they completed their to-do list (which clearly they can't do, as they wouldn't need to write the software if they could) or that the updates/bugfixes/security patches are still on the to-do list, just lower priority than everything else.
TODO:
- build web interface
- build server back-end
- develop branding
- secure investment
- find alpha testers
- start alpha
- finish alpha
- start beta
- finish beta
- set up launch party
- launch
- IPO
- crush microsoft
- buy google
- world domination
- create bug tracker
- meet parole officer
- write book
Which makes much more sense; it's a change in definition, rather than a massive swing in demographics.
When to Uber to the station, your own car is still parked at home, rather than being in traffic.
So fucking what? I'm still in a car that's in traffic, and wouldn't otherwise be.
Two people in one car, instead of two people in two cars.
No. Two people in one car, instead of one person in one car and one person doing a job that pays well instead.
In fact, this encourages more people to ride transit if a train would save money and/or time on your regular route.
Wait? Access to Uber encourages people to use the train? Is it really that shit?
In fact, I predict
Predict what you like, based on your demonstrated logic and analysis thus far I'm going to disregard you anyway. In fact, I didn't even bother reading the end of your post. You make that little sense.
People are willing to pay a premium for a premium experience, which is why Apple makes the money
What the fuck is premium about a shitty black block where your screen should be?
I wont pay for an Android version either.
The MIT authors seem to be taking the criticism seriously so maybe I just suck at reading
Nah, they just may have academic integrity and want to look into it in detail in case they did somehow miss something.
. Because rideshare drivers do not have to loiter or deadhead like cabdrivers, there is no net contribution to traffic.
So if I use Uber to get to the train station, I teleport there and the road isn't used by a car taking me?
The car that doesn't exist doesn't also then have to use a road to get back to my village as that's where the driver lives and you've said he can't loiter by the station?
You're a fucking genius and no mistake. How could I have failed to spot the total absence of traffic in this. To think I might have done something stupid like catch the fucking bus instead.
So, you get a fare to drive 40 miles to the airport. Then what? Wait around for another - unpaid? Drive back with no fare - unpaid?
I haven't read the MIT study but unless they're including that waiting/empty driving time in the hourly calculations then they're overstating income.
Uber will quote pay per hour with a passenger in the car, but that's not the actual time worked.
I don't tolerate sexism or racism in the workplace, no matter who it's by or against. I speak up against it, I act against it and I've put my job on the line for it in the past.
So yeah, I'm against discrimination. Even against white people, and men.
I'm not going to apply to work at Google because their internal culture looks horrific from multiple perspectives, and anyway their recruiting policies would appear to prevent me having a chance anyway because of my gender and/or skin colour.
I do nonetheless want to find out whether they are in fact illegally discriminating in their recruitment practices, and if so, get seriously fucked by the Government (quite apart from any civil suits).
Hmm. It didn't seem certain that it was a single manager. It looked like one manager pushing a corporate policy, which the HR team mandated had to be hidden from view (but still followed) once they realised how illegal it was.
I could be misreading it though, and we don't have all the evidence to really assess.
Yeah, I found it deeply curious that every one of his managers seemed to hate him from the outset.
"Talking too much in meetings" is an interesting reason to get fired too. It would be interesting to hear the other perspective on this one.
Are you a fucking moron?
Nobody was being excluded, but people were up in arms because women were choosing different careers and people from poor backgrounds couldn't meet the educational requirements.
They had no actual grounds to be up in arms, and their response is sexist and racist, but hey, you appear to think that calling this out is wrong.
Well, fuck you and fuck the racist sexist cunts that want to discriminate on gender or race.
You guys keep saying 74% but that's 2010 data. Today it is under 61% white and under 31% white male.
You're saying that people identified as 'white' have dropped from 74% to 61% of the population in 8 years?
I can't believe that's true. If it were there really would be a race war.
The problem is that this anonymisation removes the inherent unconscious bias that leads to women getting better outcomes than men.
The Australian study basically says, "Don't use blind recruitment because it removes a disadvantage from men":
https://pmc.gov.au/resource-ce...
Another company says they found no statistically significant difference - but even though they were trying to eliminate bias against women, men did better as a result of their gender being hidden: http://blog.interviewing.io/we...
So no, Google wont anonymise. It'd give them actual equality of opportunity and they appear not to want that at all.
The accusation is, the general American population is 78% white, 12% black, 10% Hispanic, 2% Asian, 2% Arab, x% Jewish, 51% female. If your work force does not have the same percentages you are discriminating.
Of course, this is made even more comical because only 60% of the people working for Google are white.
So they're not only discriminating against white people, but the very justification for doing so merely further demonstrates their racism.
Well sure, if I see a white male hired, I assume it's because of a more privileged background
So just for clarity, is that your sexism or your racism kicking in?
Or are you just an all round bigot?
Someone wearing a turban? sure.
Someone wearing a hat? sure.
Someone wearing a headscarf? sure.
Someone wearing some full face covering leaving only her eyes showing? No.
I can't hear her. I lipread to supplement poor hearing. Yet, somehow, if I ask her to remove the full face covering I'm the one that will be described as an intolerant bigot, even though she's the sexist discriminating against disabled men.