Congrats on finding someone who lets you penetrate their holes, I guess.
Thanks! I'd have counted myself fortunate to simply meet someone...I do drop it into the posts where it adds something or acknowledges her role in something, just as I would with "a coworker and I" or "a friend and I..."
I appreciate your eloquent answer to an obvious troll. But I think a simple "go away, the adults are talking here" could have worked the same. Jealousy is a stinky cologne.
That and Amazon always uses bubble wrap, never paper? Why not paper Amazon
I have a small bit (about 2 years) of experience on this one. I used to pack boxes for a company that shipped all sorts of hardware. (Hardware store kind of stuff, not like computer hardware.) Paper is a HUGE pain in the ass. It certainly is an effective packing material, but I can't stress enough how much overhead is involved.
We had two types: 30" wide rolls and 2'x3' sheets. (like this and this) The first problem, shit's heavy. 30-50 lbs per roll/bundle. It takes a lot of work to just move it around, it takes up a lot of space to stack it and store it. Likely Amazon's biggest problem with it, the labor costs to shove it into a box. A small-ish (6x8x4) box that's half-full of whatever takes about 3-5 feet off a roll, or 2-3 sheets off a stack. And it goes up fast for bigger boxes. I realize that doesn't sound like a lot, but if your job is to stuff 100 boxes/hour (probably more, for Amazon) that's a whole lot of paper you have to pay someone to shove into a box.
From a labor perspective, the air pillow are amazing. The rolls of feed-stock are lighter. The pillows themselves are essentially weightless. It takes a lot less effort to pull them out of the hopper than to unspool/crumple up kraft. And they take less time to shove them into a box.
Their downfall, and why we quit using them, they didn't hold up well enough for the type of stuff we were shipping... They don't do well with heavy/pointy things. But I can see why Amazon would use them, a lot of the stuff they ship is already in a box.
I've had Comcast for 6 years, 5 of those years with cable+Internet, now just Internet. OVERALL the company has been fine to deal with, they have met my expectations on the Internet side. I've had at most 1 or 2 outages that weren't my fault. Speed is always what it's advertised, and they have bumped it up a few times. Any time I've had a billing issue, which was rare, they dealt with it. As far as pricing, it seems to be in-line with the rest of the industry.
Now, talking cable TV... Pricing for cable is insane, complicated, opaque, and misleading. I love seeing the "TV for $49.99***" ads, $49.99 (for the first year of your 2 year contract)+$25 in taxes/regional broadcasting/sports fees, $5 for an additional tv, $15 for HD service, $10 for DVR service, $10 equipment fee. Again, this is 100% inline with the rest of the cable TV industry.
That being said, there is exactly one competitor of Comcast for Internet in my area, and the best they can do is something like 40/2 DSL for $10/month less than I'm paying for 150/5.
I believe I understand where the disconnect is (maybe). The difference between "did what it was designed to do" and "behaved as designed". The rocket did not meet the intent of its design, landing on the landing pad. But given the failure, it did behave as designed, failing in as safe a manner as possible. Is that a reasonable statement?
And you would say that a system which only meets some requirements due to mechanical failure is a system which worked as designed?
That depends on the requirements and the end result. Specifically in the case of the Block 5 Falcons, yes, the system so far has demonstrated it works as designed.
No, the rocket didn't work as INTENDED this time, I will give you that, 100%. If it worked as intended it wouldn't be bobbing in the ocean. However, they have proven that their design works, because they have landed their rocket on a pad before. They've met requirement 1. It was also designed to land in the ocean if it isn't safe to land on the landing pad. So yes, the god damn thing did what it was designed to do: fail safely. Requirement 2 met.
Again; You're intelligent, I've read quite a few of your comments, you are capable of making good arguments. I also get that you are just here to argue, so with that, I say good day.
I'd be surprised if any significant component of this rocket flies again. Just my 2c, but with unknown impact damage from falling over, being immersed in salt water (even "briefly") all of the systems are too compromised to risk flying again. My guess, it'll be evaluated for failure mode, used for testing, and scrapped.
If all of those things failed, and you're still alive to evaluate if the radio is still working, I'd say the system operated as intended. In the aircraft example, engine fails but aircraft is able to return safely, the system worked as designed because it was designed to be able to "limp home" without killing everybody on board. In this case, the rocket system was designed to fail in a way that didn't imperil the landing site or nearby people. Seems to have worked as designed.
You can design something to meet multiple requirements. Requirement 1: Rocket should be able to return to earth and land. Requirement 2: If unplanned events occur, rocket should crash into the ocean instead of the launch pad. The design took into account a known likely failure mode and acted according to design.
Obviously you wouldn't knowingly start driving a car with bad brakes, or take off in a jet with one less engine than intended, because that would be using them against their intended design. But I also think you are smart enough to comprehend all of that, and are just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Really... Really? Burning kittens instead of coal would be an example of "alternative energy", but likely not sustainable/renewable. (And likely not going to pass public muster.) Last I checked, the tides still come in and out every day, regardless of how much energy we extract from the process.
Not a lawyer, but I believe the act of ordering is entering into a verbal contract. "I would like a coffee." followed by "Ok, that will be $5.99" is the extent of what would be required to enter into the contract. Same reason it's not legal to go into a restaurant, order a bunch of food, then just leave after the waitstaff enters the order.
It would be interesting to get an actual lawyer's interpretation of how this applies. The whole "both parties must agree to the terms" stuff in there that seems to blow my theory right out of the water.
Also, plenty of great minds and ideas have come from India.
Yes, if enough shit is thrown at a wall, some sticks.
You do realize you've described just about every country on Earth, right? (Or do you just think that the ones with predominantly brown people are below you?) As you have so eloquently illustrated with your post, even the good ol' US of A (or where the hell you are from) has some pretty shitty people too.
Don't damn a people because you are ignorant about them.
I'm not ignorant of them, I have come across plenty and not just phone scammers. I even had an Indian GF once, and she was OK - an edge case. But the thought of her cooking for me was the deal breaker.
So you've met a couple "of them" and feel as though you are now authoritative on the subject? You dated one and kicked her to the curb because you don't know how to cook for yourself? I hope she is aware of this so she knows how much of a bullet she dodged when she rid herself of you.
If the individual parts don't have any environmental impact, neither does the whole.
That's not necessarily true. It's the same reason tic-tacs can represent their product as "sugar free": "Tic Tac® mints do contain sugar as listed in the ingredient statement. However, since the amount of sugar per serving (1 mint) is less than 0.5 grams, FDA labeling requirements permit the Nutrition Facts to state that there are 0 grams of sugar per serving."
If a given project is only allowed to cause so much of an environmental impact, but the project as a whole will exceed that limit, you're not allowed to split it up into smaller projects in such a way that each sub-project will be under that limit.
Pretty much. Like watching Football? OTA will get you the ABC/NBC/CBS Sunday games. (Good luck if you don't like the local team, though.) Monday night? Those are on ESPN, so now you have Sling. Thursday games? Those are on the NFL network, so you need the "other" sling, or Amazon Prime.
more than 80% of respondents believed the green lock indicated a website was either legitimate and/or safe
Really? Is that level of misunderstanding so pervasive?
As with everything, it depends on the demographic. Probably gets closer to 100% when you start asking 50+ year olds.
Can our schools start to teach things like this, instead of "how to use javascript 101" for people who'll never in their life need to write a line of javascript?
I took probably 10+ semesters of math (and various "life skills" classes) throughout my educational career, but I still had to teach myself how to do my taxes.
The padlock does not say "safe", it says "secure connection".
To my grandmother, the padlock doesn't "say" anything. It's an icon that is designed to indicate security. You and I know that it means "secure connection", not "safe site". I love the fact that letsencrypt allows me to get a signed certificate for my personal sites. I hate the fact that it has lowered the barrier of entry for nefarious people. Like it or not, the little padlock adds credibility to a site. And the removal of the "This site isn't secure, are you sure you want to send your credit card information." message from before doesn't help.
Analyzing a batch of embryos' genetics and selecting ones that have desirable traits is one thing. Enhanced selective breeding. Actually editing the genes is a completely different ballgame. And hasn't been done in human embryos that were carried to term, as far as I can tell.
You're a bit slow or uninformed.
You know it's not necessary to be dick to prove a point, right?
The movie Gattaca isn't that far off. Designer babies will be a thing within my lifetime. Obviously, assuming this doctor's claim is true, the Chinese couldn't care less about the ethical implication (shocker) and are willing to push the field. I can't wait for the first batch of bio-engineered Chinese Super Soldiers(tm) to show up on our shores.
I've always had a delusional idea similar to what you were proposing. A questionnaire is developed that addresses "key" issues, let's call it 15 of them. The politicians privately respond to each question, the answers are "scrubbed" to obscure the candidate. (Not change the fundamental answer, just make it clear, concise, and not obvious who it is. "How do you feel about immigration?" wouldn't have the answer "Build that wall")
At voting time, the voter assigns a priority to the 15 items, and selects one of the proposed solutions. A magical algorithm would then match the answers with the candidate, and that's the person's vote.
I realize there are about three thousand "holes" in this idea...
I would be all for some sort of live voting system that is extended to the entire populace. As long as you could figure out a way to prove that the mob is educated on what they are voting on. I don't trust the general public with important issues if the format can be equated to a Facebook poll.
Yes, your statement is pedantically correct. A "pound" can be expressed as a mass, disproving the OPs statement that a pound is a strictly a weight. But your post is also incomplete, in that it tends to imply that a pound is ONLY a mass. My intent was to point out that you were both correct.
Slashdot Mirror
Congrats on finding someone who lets you penetrate their holes, I guess.
Thanks! I'd have counted myself fortunate to simply meet someone...I do drop it into the posts where it adds something or acknowledges her role in something, just as I would with "a coworker and I" or "a friend and I..."
I appreciate your eloquent answer to an obvious troll. But I think a simple "go away, the adults are talking here" could have worked the same. Jealousy is a stinky cologne.
That and Amazon always uses bubble wrap, never paper? Why not paper Amazon
I have a small bit (about 2 years) of experience on this one. I used to pack boxes for a company that shipped all sorts of hardware. (Hardware store kind of stuff, not like computer hardware.) Paper is a HUGE pain in the ass. It certainly is an effective packing material, but I can't stress enough how much overhead is involved.
We had two types: 30" wide rolls and 2'x3' sheets. (like this and this) The first problem, shit's heavy. 30-50 lbs per roll/bundle. It takes a lot of work to just move it around, it takes up a lot of space to stack it and store it. Likely Amazon's biggest problem with it, the labor costs to shove it into a box. A small-ish (6x8x4) box that's half-full of whatever takes about 3-5 feet off a roll, or 2-3 sheets off a stack. And it goes up fast for bigger boxes. I realize that doesn't sound like a lot, but if your job is to stuff 100 boxes/hour (probably more, for Amazon) that's a whole lot of paper you have to pay someone to shove into a box.
From a labor perspective, the air pillow are amazing. The rolls of feed-stock are lighter. The pillows themselves are essentially weightless. It takes a lot less effort to pull them out of the hopper than to unspool/crumple up kraft. And they take less time to shove them into a box. Their downfall, and why we quit using them, they didn't hold up well enough for the type of stuff we were shipping... They don't do well with heavy/pointy things. But I can see why Amazon would use them, a lot of the stuff they ship is already in a box.
I've had Comcast for 6 years, 5 of those years with cable+Internet, now just Internet. OVERALL the company has been fine to deal with, they have met my expectations on the Internet side. I've had at most 1 or 2 outages that weren't my fault. Speed is always what it's advertised, and they have bumped it up a few times. Any time I've had a billing issue, which was rare, they dealt with it. As far as pricing, it seems to be in-line with the rest of the industry.
Now, talking cable TV... Pricing for cable is insane, complicated, opaque, and misleading. I love seeing the "TV for $49.99***" ads, $49.99 (for the first year of your 2 year contract)+$25 in taxes/regional broadcasting/sports fees, $5 for an additional tv, $15 for HD service, $10 for DVR service, $10 equipment fee. Again, this is 100% inline with the rest of the cable TV industry.
That being said, there is exactly one competitor of Comcast for Internet in my area, and the best they can do is something like 40/2 DSL for $10/month less than I'm paying for 150/5.
Talk about a good mix of useful and useless measurements:
It felt as though the value proposition that has made Apple products no-brainers might unravel
I can't tell, was this written tongue-in-cheek? When was the Apple choice a "no-brainer"?
I believe I understand where the disconnect is (maybe). The difference between "did what it was designed to do" and "behaved as designed". The rocket did not meet the intent of its design, landing on the landing pad. But given the failure, it did behave as designed, failing in as safe a manner as possible. Is that a reasonable statement?
And you would say that a system which only meets some requirements due to mechanical failure is a system which worked as designed?
That depends on the requirements and the end result. Specifically in the case of the Block 5 Falcons, yes, the system so far has demonstrated it works as designed.
No, the rocket didn't work as INTENDED this time, I will give you that, 100%. If it worked as intended it wouldn't be bobbing in the ocean. However, they have proven that their design works, because they have landed their rocket on a pad before. They've met requirement 1. It was also designed to land in the ocean if it isn't safe to land on the landing pad. So yes, the god damn thing did what it was designed to do: fail safely. Requirement 2 met.
Again; You're intelligent, I've read quite a few of your comments, you are capable of making good arguments. I also get that you are just here to argue, so with that, I say good day.
I'd be surprised if any significant component of this rocket flies again. Just my 2c, but with unknown impact damage from falling over, being immersed in salt water (even "briefly") all of the systems are too compromised to risk flying again. My guess, it'll be evaluated for failure mode, used for testing, and scrapped.
If all of those things failed, and you're still alive to evaluate if the radio is still working, I'd say the system operated as intended. In the aircraft example, engine fails but aircraft is able to return safely, the system worked as designed because it was designed to be able to "limp home" without killing everybody on board. In this case, the rocket system was designed to fail in a way that didn't imperil the landing site or nearby people. Seems to have worked as designed.
You can design something to meet multiple requirements. Requirement 1: Rocket should be able to return to earth and land. Requirement 2: If unplanned events occur, rocket should crash into the ocean instead of the launch pad. The design took into account a known likely failure mode and acted according to design.
Obviously you wouldn't knowingly start driving a car with bad brakes, or take off in a jet with one less engine than intended, because that would be using them against their intended design. But I also think you are smart enough to comprehend all of that, and are just arguing for the sake of arguing.
saying that the press is ganging up on Facebook
Stop being a dick, maybe? Sometimes the bully deserves to get their ass kicked.
Really... Really? Burning kittens instead of coal would be an example of "alternative energy", but likely not sustainable/renewable. (And likely not going to pass public muster.) Last I checked, the tides still come in and out every day, regardless of how much energy we extract from the process.
This seems like an interesting, relevant, response: https://www.usatoday.com/story...
Not a lawyer, but I believe the act of ordering is entering into a verbal contract. "I would like a coffee." followed by "Ok, that will be $5.99" is the extent of what would be required to enter into the contract. Same reason it's not legal to go into a restaurant, order a bunch of food, then just leave after the waitstaff enters the order.
It would be interesting to get an actual lawyer's interpretation of how this applies. The whole "both parties must agree to the terms" stuff in there that seems to blow my theory right out of the water.
Also, plenty of great minds and ideas have come from India.
Yes, if enough shit is thrown at a wall, some sticks.
You do realize you've described just about every country on Earth, right? (Or do you just think that the ones with predominantly brown people are below you?) As you have so eloquently illustrated with your post, even the good ol' US of A (or where the hell you are from) has some pretty shitty people too.
Don't damn a people because you are ignorant about them.
I'm not ignorant of them, I have come across plenty and not just phone scammers. I even had an Indian GF once, and she was OK - an edge case. But the thought of her cooking for me was the deal breaker.
So you've met a couple "of them" and feel as though you are now authoritative on the subject? You dated one and kicked her to the curb because you don't know how to cook for yourself? I hope she is aware of this so she knows how much of a bullet she dodged when she rid herself of you.
If the individual parts don't have any environmental impact, neither does the whole.
That's not necessarily true. It's the same reason tic-tacs can represent their product as "sugar free": "Tic Tac® mints do contain sugar as listed in the ingredient statement. However, since the amount of sugar per serving (1 mint) is less than 0.5 grams, FDA labeling requirements permit the Nutrition Facts to state that there are 0 grams of sugar per serving."
If a given project is only allowed to cause so much of an environmental impact, but the project as a whole will exceed that limit, you're not allowed to split it up into smaller projects in such a way that each sub-project will be under that limit.
I bet you'd be a lot of fun at a party.
Pretty much. Like watching Football? OTA will get you the ABC/NBC/CBS Sunday games. (Good luck if you don't like the local team, though.) Monday night? Those are on ESPN, so now you have Sling. Thursday games? Those are on the NFL network, so you need the "other" sling, or Amazon Prime.
more than 80% of respondents believed the green lock indicated a website was either legitimate and/or safe
Really? Is that level of misunderstanding so pervasive?
As with everything, it depends on the demographic. Probably gets closer to 100% when you start asking 50+ year olds.
Can our schools start to teach things like this, instead of "how to use javascript 101" for people who'll never in their life need to write a line of javascript?
I took probably 10+ semesters of math (and various "life skills" classes) throughout my educational career, but I still had to teach myself how to do my taxes.
The padlock does not say "safe", it says "secure connection".
To my grandmother, the padlock doesn't "say" anything. It's an icon that is designed to indicate security. You and I know that it means "secure connection", not "safe site". I love the fact that letsencrypt allows me to get a signed certificate for my personal sites. I hate the fact that it has lowered the barrier of entry for nefarious people. Like it or not, the little padlock adds credibility to a site. And the removal of the "This site isn't secure, are you sure you want to send your credit card information." message from before doesn't help.
Ah yes. Happened to get a disease, possibly from nothing you did "wrong"? NO KIDS FOR YOU! Sounds like a solid argument to me. /s
Read up on PGD.
Analyzing a batch of embryos' genetics and selecting ones that have desirable traits is one thing. Enhanced selective breeding. Actually editing the genes is a completely different ballgame. And hasn't been done in human embryos that were carried to term, as far as I can tell.
You're a bit slow or uninformed.
You know it's not necessary to be dick to prove a point, right?
The movie Gattaca isn't that far off. Designer babies will be a thing within my lifetime. Obviously, assuming this doctor's claim is true, the Chinese couldn't care less about the ethical implication (shocker) and are willing to push the field. I can't wait for the first batch of bio-engineered Chinese Super Soldiers(tm) to show up on our shores.
I've always had a delusional idea similar to what you were proposing. A questionnaire is developed that addresses "key" issues, let's call it 15 of them. The politicians privately respond to each question, the answers are "scrubbed" to obscure the candidate. (Not change the fundamental answer, just make it clear, concise, and not obvious who it is. "How do you feel about immigration?" wouldn't have the answer "Build that wall")
At voting time, the voter assigns a priority to the 15 items, and selects one of the proposed solutions. A magical algorithm would then match the answers with the candidate, and that's the person's vote.
I realize there are about three thousand "holes" in this idea...
I would be all for some sort of live voting system that is extended to the entire populace. As long as you could figure out a way to prove that the mob is educated on what they are voting on. I don't trust the general public with important issues if the format can be equated to a Facebook poll.
Yes, your statement is pedantically correct. A "pound" can be expressed as a mass, disproving the OPs statement that a pound is a strictly a weight. But your post is also incomplete, in that it tends to imply that a pound is ONLY a mass. My intent was to point out that you were both correct.