You are sidestepping the real question though. He should know not to use it on the school network (whatever profanity is.... silly concept anyway) but... is it right to expect him to know that he is, indeed, on the school network vs home. Clearly he has a home internet connection.
I mean, for me with work, its easy. I am either connected to the VPN or not, and if I am, then its all through their netowork... but I do this shit for a living...I am not even sure if people outside of the IT department understand this.... but... a HS kid is expected to?
The lack of inflation. Its not a currency, its a digital commodity. Commodities are great for many things but, they are not really currencies. They encourage hoarding, whereas I have come to appreciate the hoarding penalty of a nice inflation number. Inflation is actually a good thing as long as you are not trying to use it as a store of value.
However, they don't have an insulator creating a space between the leaves and the ground. If this explanation ends up being it, then I would imagine it like being in a very large, air dielectric, capacitor. The ions are dielectric loss in the huge and oddly constructed capacitor. Even though each leaf is small and, while it might build a reasonable voltage, I have never gotten a shock from touching a leaf, so I am thinking there isn't much charge per unit area....but.... all those leaves make for a pretty good surface area.
I thought the upside was in not having to admit that your parents abused you by giving you an obviously fabricated and useless model for how the world works. At least, thats what I assumed other people must see in it.
Bitcoin, last I checked, had not failed, and was still in use. Having used it in the past myself, I remember it being rather easy to get my money in and out. So... failed? So rising to $5/coin is failure? Or is it just because the $30 bubble burst?
Bitcoin is deeply flawed, but, as of one of just a handful of largish attempts at a non-soverign digital currency, I would say the lack of government backing is hardly a proven requirement, any more than a few early flight failures proved that flight was impossible.
Disclaimer: I've spent thirty odd years studying nuclear and strategic technologies and related issues.
I wouldn't dream of arguing the techology with you but....
Haven't you ever wondered why every current and past declared nuclear state (save South Africa) has pursued ballistic missile technology? (South Africa didn't because they built them with express purpose of threatening to nuke their (Soviet backed) neighbors in order to blackmail the West into assisting them.)
Your thoughts on the subject seem to revolve around people actually USING these capabilities, something which has,....never happened. The ONLY country to EVER use nukes in a conflict is the US, and we committed both of those crimes against humanity (call em like I see em) with bombers.
They are political devices, used to increase stature and force enemies to the negotiating table. So far, I have yet to see any downside to any country getting them since they prevent wars and make people continue diplomacy, which is always the right answer.
It will "work" as in provide money to line the pockets of all the contractors. And the contractors do the same for the politicians....so it definitely "works" already.
However to "not work" it would have to fail. For that to happen, it would actually have to miss a missle.... which would require one be actually fired. So its unlikely to work unless the politicians here are so fucking stupid.....fuck....
However, Apple pointed out... the only time I have ever seen this type of metric... that due to internal housekeeping its effectively ends up being about 2.6 MHz.
I imagine nobody lists that sort of stat since the available MHz has so outstripped any internal overhead that may be separate from the OS that its ridiculous.... but it is indeed what they claimed.
well the thing is... if you want to play chess against a computer, you can. Why have a league where humans just act as move proxies for computers? If all I did was input my oponennets moves and make the moves I was told to make, then, am I even playing the game? Or am I just taking credit for the work of the people who created the chess program?
If you suggested an AI vs non-AI league, where competitors could pit their AIs against eachother, then yes, absolutely. Or even a league where people pit their AI players against real ones... but... to have a person stand as a proxy for an AI and then try to claim credit as a player....that seems absurd to me.
In the past, when I was in my early teens, I never made the connection between the high bit and the negative sign. Seeing it now it makes perfect sense though.
Wow.... what a geek. lol. I didn't know they had removed it in the mid-line models.
You may not have remembered that, but I forgot all about the monitor and the ! to jump to the assembler. Was the call address negative because it was in ROM? (kind of makes sense, I remember reading how the architecture reserved half the address space for ROM).
I had an Apple ][GS, the last of the line, and the assembler was alive and well ("call 151" if I remember properly... can't really test without crawling through storage)
If the system had no disk, it would come up to an errror. You could use some key combo (I forget wow its been a while), to break out to the BAISC prompt, and then the assembler was easily available through a "call" command.
Aside from that, very cool. It really always amazed me what people did with them. You know by the mid 90s (long after Apple had abandoned the ][ line) someone produced an ethernet and VGA graphics cards for the GS. Hell, I pulled down my first IP address (no more text mode modem connections) on an IP stack on the GS that someone had put together. I even heard of people pushing the GS as high as around 14 MHz (9 was the most you could easily get an expansion card for and not need a soldering iron to do the upgrade),
][ Forever motherfuckers! Still sore about the total lack of an upgrade path.... and with it the complete abandonment of that early geeky coolness. You could bring those up with no disk at all, start writting basic, drop into the built in assembler. Maybe it wasn't that useful like that, but boy did it ever get my curiosity going as a kid.
and for every one of those guys, there are two people who actually thought they turned theirs off, three who are totally oblivious, and two more who just don't give a shit about themselves or others and just ignore all safety instructions that are the least bit inconvenient.... and at least one guy like me who just thinks its bullshit and isn't going to comply with the rules for the sake of doing so.
What is it ~250 passengers on a big plane? If a single one takes off in a year with less than 5 phones, and various wifi/bluetooth/etc, I would be shocked.
It would be trivially easy to end the whole debate. All someone would need to do is take radio survey of how many devices were transmitting on planes, then compare the rates of devices taking off on planes to the rates of communications problems.... The overall lack of issues, combined with knowing how good people really are at shutting devices off when asked.... well.... I know what I expect the outcome to be.... I would put money on it if I was a betting man.
Except, I would argue, that the number of passengers involved ensures that the rules are never fully complied with. I would bet that not a single commercial passenger flight leaves a tarmac without cell phones and/or other devices on. So all this talk of interference is stupid. Its not happening.
Only if you pre-suppose that people actually comply with the rule. Given the numbers involved, I imagine the number of flights without multiple people not turning their phones off, at the least, is probably even closer to 0.
Why would you apply security to theater? The first rule of theater is: The show must go on.
Their job is to keep their budget flowing in. As a government agency, there is only one way to do that....and that is to put on a good show and spend all of the old budget. Even better is to go a bit over budget.... that way its clear that you need more. However, adding a fee to look responsible.... even if the whole thing is just a scheme to funnel money to some company thats overcharging for background checks. I bet they pay every penny of that $100 to some overpriced background check to a company owned by somebodies cousin.
That.... THAT is the first rule of government.... Get in...then profit.
This is why good sized companies can be great. Get in at the help desk...hell...get in driving the bus. I worked for a company where one of the Directors had started as a bus driver. Once you are in, if its a good place, and big ones tend to be good for this, internal movement is much easier.... hell a few places I have worked they do yearly reviews where you can tell your manager what you want to be doing in 5 years and part of his job is help you develop a plan to get there.
But definitely IT is a merit game. Degrees and whatnot help get your foot in the door, but, technical people don't tend to care how many certs you have or even how nice you are (or smell), if you know your shit and can show that you can get the job done.
I generally look at job hunting like dating. Yes her profile says you are a few years out of her age range, and you do a few things she isn't keen on. Fine... but as long as you are marginally appropriately socialised, the worst she can say is no, and usually that just means not responding at all. (yes, its exactly like sending out resumes).... but once its in her inbox.... she just may find what you had to say interesting enough to ignore those "requirements".
"Requirements" are just there to lower the number of applicants, because without them, every dickhead who ever installed a linux distro from a text mode installer is going to apply for your sysadmin position. At least, that's what I always assumed. I am not sure I have ever even expressed interest in a job that didn't have an official description listing a degree as required. If not having one ever hindered me it was probably just in that I know my entry level salaries were on the low side (hard to blame them, given the circumstances... took a chance)
Sure but you can up the dosage and do it again once or twice. I have known a few real party bingers, they are a class by themselves and are seldom picky about what they take, so switching from LSD to MDA, with occasional drops into a K hole.... or whatever the kids have been up to since they scheduled K... and I started wishing they would get off my lawn....
Of course, such use with abandon is not exactly normal for people who use lsd and lsd specifically, but, to say it never happens...I mean.... there are always extreme cases. I think its important to recognise them as such though... and certainly not to encourage them... now... a weekend every few months thats more my speed.... sure... every few um...what year is it? I swear I am still young at heart.... if I just wasn't busy tomorow....
Depends on who you are I think. Some people enjoy it, some say its profound, some say its hard. I think it depends on how you relate to the image in the mirror to begin with. Actually I recommend that people who are inclined to trip try this particular activity at least once, because I do think it says something about who you are to see how you react to looking back on yourself.
Not just lies but misinformation. I mean, LSD is often a far more exotic of a drug to the people who haven't done it than have. It isn't habbit forming. In fact, after a trip, I often said that if someone put more acid in front of me and suggested I do it again, I might punch them. At its best its long and draining, physically and emotionally. Do some people go crazy and do it every day? Sure, but they are hardly the norm.
Don't get me wrong, I saw some people have some difficult times, and see things that sounded far more amazing than anything I ever saw. And I have seen it change lives.
I had a friend who had a few very difficult experiences. He was a bit religious, and talked of seeing deamons around him and being convinced he was going to die. Took him a long time to get over that. Though, it also was the catalyst that changed his life, to become a better person, to get off the myriad of drugs he was using and get a career instead of going into his 20s as a petty crook on his way to jail.
So do I think it can cure alcoholism? No. I think its a tool that could be used to gain perspective and insight and to become invested in change. That may very well be what enables a person to change... however, I don't think its a magic switch... and it might be a difficult ride.
Actually LSD has been used in this manner, I highly recomend "LSD Psychotherapy" by Stanislav Groff. Excellent book on the subject, where clinics have been run outside the US for many years. However, its not just "LSD does the work", it is the entire therapy session surrounding it that guides it.
Slashdot Mirror
You are sidestepping the real question though. He should know not to use it on the school network (whatever profanity is.... silly concept anyway) but... is it right to expect him to know that he is, indeed, on the school network vs home. Clearly he has a home internet connection.
I mean, for me with work, its easy. I am either connected to the VPN or not, and if I am, then its all through their netowork... but I do this shit for a living...I am not even sure if people outside of the IT department understand this.... but... a HS kid is expected to?
I wonder how federal hacking laws would apply. As you point out, its a clear violation of the TOS, it is, in fact, explicitly unauthorized access.
Ooh... so since the user who agreed to the TOS and the employer are acting together for this unauthorized access to happen, would that be conspiracy?
The lack of inflation. Its not a currency, its a digital commodity. Commodities are great for many things but, they are not really currencies. They encourage hoarding, whereas I have come to appreciate the hoarding penalty of a nice inflation number. Inflation is actually a good thing as long as you are not trying to use it as a store of value.
However, they don't have an insulator creating a space between the leaves and the ground. If this explanation ends up being it, then I would imagine it like being in a very large, air dielectric, capacitor. The ions are dielectric loss in the huge and oddly constructed capacitor. Even though each leaf is small and, while it might build a reasonable voltage, I have never gotten a shock from touching a leaf, so I am thinking there isn't much charge per unit area....but.... all those leaves make for a pretty good surface area.
I thought the upside was in not having to admit that your parents abused you by giving you an obviously fabricated and useless model for how the world works. At least, thats what I assumed other people must see in it.
Bitcoin, last I checked, had not failed, and was still in use. Having used it in the past myself, I remember it being rather easy to get my money in and out. So... failed? So rising to $5/coin is failure? Or is it just because the $30 bubble burst?
Bitcoin is deeply flawed, but, as of one of just a handful of largish attempts at a non-soverign digital currency, I would say the lack of government backing is hardly a proven requirement, any more than a few early flight failures proved that flight was impossible.
I play plenty of violent video games but you know....
NOTHING makes me so violently angry as listening to politicians and their machinations. Can't we outlaw them?
Doesn't matter which ones it is.... Democrats, Republicans.... they all piss me off to no end...pretty much anytime they open their mouths.
Disclaimer: I've spent thirty odd years studying nuclear and strategic technologies and related issues.
I wouldn't dream of arguing the techology with you but....
Haven't you ever wondered why every current and past declared nuclear state (save South Africa) has pursued ballistic missile technology? (South Africa didn't because they built them with express purpose of threatening to nuke their (Soviet backed) neighbors in order to blackmail the West into assisting them.)
Your thoughts on the subject seem to revolve around people actually USING these capabilities, something which has,....never happened. The ONLY country to EVER use nukes in a conflict is the US, and we committed both of those crimes against humanity (call em like I see em) with bombers.
They are political devices, used to increase stature and force enemies to the negotiating table. So far, I have yet to see any downside to any country getting them since they prevent wars and make people continue diplomacy, which is always the right answer.
Might be cheaper too if we had them build it... why not? If it ever gets used, it already failed miserably. May as well not work as work.
It will "work" as in provide money to line the pockets of all the contractors. And the contractors do the same for the politicians....so it definitely "works" already.
However to "not work" it would have to fail. For that to happen, it would actually have to miss a missle.... which would require one be actually fired. So its unlikely to work unless the politicians here are so fucking stupid.....fuck....
However, Apple pointed out... the only time I have ever seen this type of metric... that due to internal housekeeping its effectively ends up being about 2.6 MHz.
I imagine nobody lists that sort of stat since the available MHz has so outstripped any internal overhead that may be separate from the OS that its ridiculous.... but it is indeed what they claimed.
well the thing is... if you want to play chess against a computer, you can. Why have a league where humans just act as move proxies for computers? If all I did was input my oponennets moves and make the moves I was told to make, then, am I even playing the game? Or am I just taking credit for the work of the people who created the chess program?
If you suggested an AI vs non-AI league, where competitors could pit their AIs against eachother, then yes, absolutely. Or even a league where people pit their AI players against real ones... but... to have a person stand as a proxy for an AI and then try to claim credit as a player....that seems absurd to me.
Cool, yah thats what I assumed.
In the past, when I was in my early teens, I never made the connection between the high bit and the negative sign. Seeing it now it makes perfect sense though.
Wow.... what a geek. lol. I didn't know they had removed it in the mid-line models.
You may not have remembered that, but I forgot all about the monitor and the ! to jump to the assembler. Was the call address negative because it was in ROM?
(kind of makes sense, I remember reading how the architecture reserved half the address space for ROM).
Your information is incorrect.
I had an Apple ][GS, the last of the line, and the assembler was alive and well ("call 151" if I remember properly... can't really test without crawling through storage)
If the system had no disk, it would come up to an errror. You could use some key combo (I forget wow its been a while), to break out to the BAISC prompt, and then the assembler was easily available through a "call" command.
Aside from that, very cool. It really always amazed me what people did with them. You know by the mid 90s (long after Apple had abandoned the ][ line) someone produced an ethernet and VGA graphics cards for the GS. Hell, I pulled down my first IP address (no more text mode modem connections) on an IP stack on the GS that someone had put together. I even heard of people pushing the GS as high as around 14 MHz (9 was the most you could easily get an expansion card for and not need a soldering iron to do the upgrade),
][ Forever motherfuckers! Still sore about the total lack of an upgrade path.... and with it the complete abandonment of that early geeky coolness. You could bring those up with no disk at all, start writting basic, drop into the built in assembler. Maybe it wasn't that useful like that, but boy did it ever get my curiosity going as a kid.
Loved Apple of the 80s.
and for every one of those guys, there are two people who actually thought they turned theirs off, three who are totally oblivious, and two more who just don't give a shit about themselves or others and just ignore all safety instructions that are the least bit inconvenient.... and at least one guy like me who just thinks its bullshit and isn't going to comply with the rules for the sake of doing so.
What is it ~250 passengers on a big plane? If a single one takes off in a year with less than 5 phones, and various wifi/bluetooth/etc, I would be shocked.
It would be trivially easy to end the whole debate. All someone would need to do is take radio survey of how many devices were transmitting on planes, then compare the rates of devices taking off on planes to the rates of communications problems.... The overall lack of issues, combined with knowing how good people really are at shutting devices off when asked.... well.... I know what I expect the outcome to be.... I would put money on it if I was a betting man.
Except, I would argue, that the number of passengers involved ensures that the rules are never fully complied with. I would bet that not a single commercial passenger flight leaves a tarmac without cell phones and/or other devices on. So all this talk of interference is stupid. Its not happening.
Only if you pre-suppose that people actually comply with the rule. Given the numbers involved, I imagine the number of flights without multiple people not turning their phones off, at the least, is probably even closer to 0.
Why would you apply security to theater? The first rule of theater is: The show must go on.
Their job is to keep their budget flowing in. As a government agency, there is only one way to do that....and that is to put on a good show and spend all of the old budget. Even better is to go a bit over budget.... that way its clear that you need more. However, adding a fee to look responsible.... even if the whole thing is just a scheme to funnel money to some company thats overcharging for background checks. I bet they pay every penny of that $100 to some overpriced background check to a company owned by somebodies cousin.
That.... THAT is the first rule of government.... Get in...then profit.
This is why good sized companies can be great. Get in at the help desk...hell...get in driving the bus. I worked for a company where one of the Directors had started as a bus driver. Once you are in, if its a good place, and big ones tend to be good for this, internal movement is much easier.... hell a few places I have worked they do yearly reviews where you can tell your manager what you want to be doing in 5 years and part of his job is help you develop a plan to get there.
But definitely IT is a merit game. Degrees and whatnot help get your foot in the door, but, technical people don't tend to care how many certs you have or even how nice you are (or smell), if you know your shit and can show that you can get the job done.
I generally look at job hunting like dating. Yes her profile says you are a few years out of her age range, and you do a few things she isn't keen on. Fine... but as long as you are marginally appropriately socialised, the worst she can say is no, and usually that just means not responding at all. (yes, its exactly like sending out resumes).... but once its in her inbox.... she just may find what you had to say interesting enough to ignore those "requirements".
"Requirements" are just there to lower the number of applicants, because without them, every dickhead who ever installed a linux distro from a text mode installer is going to apply for your sysadmin position. At least, that's what I always assumed. I am not sure I have ever even expressed interest in a job that didn't have an official description listing a degree as required. If not having one ever hindered me it was probably just in that I know my entry level salaries were on the low side (hard to blame them, given the circumstances... took a chance)
Sure but you can up the dosage and do it again once or twice. I have known a few real party bingers, they are a class by themselves and are seldom picky about what they take, so switching from LSD to MDA, with occasional drops into a K hole.... or whatever the kids have been up to since they scheduled K... and I started wishing they would get off my lawn....
Of course, such use with abandon is not exactly normal for people who use lsd and lsd specifically, but, to say it never happens...I mean.... there are always extreme cases. I think its important to recognise them as such though... and certainly not to encourage them... now... a weekend every few months thats more my speed.... sure... every few um...what year is it? I swear I am still young at heart.... if I just wasn't busy tomorow....
Depends on who you are I think. Some people enjoy it, some say its profound, some say its hard. I think it depends on how you relate to the image in the mirror to begin with. Actually I recommend that people who are inclined to trip try this particular activity at least once, because I do think it says something about who you are to see how you react to looking back on yourself.
Talk? More like entire 12 hour therapy session, with support staff on hand.
So yah, I know, not going to happen.
Not just lies but misinformation. I mean, LSD is often a far more exotic of a drug to the people who haven't done it than have. It isn't habbit forming. In fact, after a trip, I often said that if someone put more acid in front of me and suggested I do it again, I might punch them. At its best its long and draining, physically and emotionally. Do some people go crazy and do it every day? Sure, but they are hardly the norm.
Don't get me wrong, I saw some people have some difficult times, and see things that sounded far more amazing than anything I ever saw. And I have seen it change lives.
I had a friend who had a few very difficult experiences. He was a bit religious, and talked of seeing deamons around him and being convinced he was going to die. Took him a long time to get over that. Though, it also was the catalyst that changed his life, to become a better person, to get off the myriad of drugs he was using and get a career instead of going into his 20s as a petty crook on his way to jail.
So do I think it can cure alcoholism? No. I think its a tool that could be used to gain perspective and insight and to become invested in change. That may very well be what enables a person to change... however, I don't think its a magic switch... and it might be a difficult ride.
Actually LSD has been used in this manner, I highly recomend "LSD Psychotherapy" by Stanislav Groff. Excellent book on the subject, where clinics have been run outside the US for many years. However, its not just "LSD does the work", it is the entire therapy session surrounding it that guides it.