Shouldn't the device say what it wants, the computer (for instance) say what it can do, and if the cable can't do it then fail gracefully? In other words, I'm not really seeing why this is a requirement in the first place. I know *what* it does (I think) but I do not know *why* they bothered with it. It seems like it'd be much easier to just establish some standards with communications protocols and such and then, if the cable doesn't support it, just fail gracefully, function at a lower level, or send an error message. I'm not really sure why we'd need smart cables? Nobody has really established why such would be a good idea over dumb cables and just a decent set of standards.
Maybe I'm missing something? It seems like a silly waste of time, to me.
Device - I want this and that. Computer - I only got this and not that 'cause the cable sucks. Device - LOL 'K Gimme data slow, kthxbie! Computer - brrrgghhh grruffferquizzle pop (that's the data and device charging - I might be a little high) Device - Cool beans - now just charge me up the rest of the way and I'll send a signal when I'm done eating.
Slashdot's not letting me login so I'll have to check for replies manually.;-) I'm not sure why you'd want to start an argument, a nice discussion is always possible. I'm capable of a well reasoned debate but I'm not sure there's anything to argue here. I have no idea how much we, as a society, spend on practices and defenses for mitigating germ transfer in a medical setting but I'm going to wager that it's on par, or greater than, the expenses we incur for safety in our automobiles, or at least proportionate to it. I have yet to see numbers on that and I kind of would be surprised if they were refined such and available while actually being accurate. I'm not sure that those stats would be easily compiled or even which items to include - do we include the price of disinfectants and the costs of the labor to apply it? The disposable equipment such as masks and gowns?
I'm not sure which side of the debate you want me to pick, really. I mean, yeah, if you want then I'll try to present a well reasoned and logical argument about something I've not spoken about and have no expertise in - nor offered an actual opinion on. I can do my level best, if you want. It's not like I'm doing anything better. I was unable to sleep and it is now nearly 0700 so don't expect too much from me.
To touch on the MRSA, again, that was just an example. Your 99,000 figure really doesn't add up to a whole lot of people in the scale of things. There's a good chance of catching nasties when you go to places full of sick people. That happens. I suspect (and I'm not positive) that the prevalence is also partially to do with diagnostics improvements but I could be mistaken - I did mention that I'm not an expert and that this isn't even remotely a factor in my point.
If doctors aren't washing their hands and doctors are wearing contaminated clothing (in a hospital setting, where they're coming into contact with contagious, germ carrying, patients?) then there probably *is* existing regulatory restrictions concerning health and probably best practices. If these infractions or malpractice-type behaviors are occurring then we should probably report them. There are almost certainly things in place to deal with it.
What more do you want to do? How much do you want to spend? Why do you want to spend it? How can you quantify the benefits? Where do you want to spend the money? How do you propose paying for it?
I mean, yeah, if we're going to have an argument then I'll try my best but I don't think that's actually what I was saying. I'll try to oblige, though. I'd much prefer a conversation - I might even learn something. I'm still not sure why you view this as a statistically significant number or you think the valuation of automotive death prevention methods is a metric to be considered. Either way, I'll try to keep you amused and give you a well reasoned rebuttal but it's certainly not my domain and isn't even really related (perhaps tangentially, I guess) to my point.
Hmm... I appear to be able to log in, so here you have it.:D
Holy shit! I am, indeed, mistaken and I offer my most humble apologies. I thought the electrons moved faster than that? Heh. I should know this stuff.:/
Welp... Where's my crow? I shall eat it and dine on it in public.
They'll just include sharks with lasers to fight on your behalf - they'll deflect the lasers with their lasers and you'll not have to worry about the lasers hitting your eyes. SOLVED PROBLEM!
How would these work for not just virtual reality but for augmented reality? Is there a chance at putting a camera on the front of them and passing that through to the VR headset and then intersecting that with data? I'm thinking something more utilitarian... I'll try to think of an example...
Say you're looking at a new house - you're there physically. You toss on a headset and scan the room by looking around. Then you put furniture in the room. Then you can move the furniture around, and check it out, and decide if you're easily able to make the room look like what you'd want. You can paint the walls, put in curtains, and look out the window. This needn't have the house's layout already programmed into it - just some stock furniture or other types of things.
Something like Google Glasses but more useful and less spying. Err... Except they could be used for invasive shit too but, oh well... The above is just one type of example of things to do with it. I can think of a bunch more but the idea occurred to me while driving across the Skyway over to Niagara a while back. I was curious as to how old the highway was, how tall it was, what the buildings were off to the left, what ships those were when I saw a bunch anchored, etc... It'd be nice to be able to pull that information up - then mix it with VR, in some cases. So, more functional than just Google Glasses and more immersible.
Also, no, obviously one shouldn't wear them while driving. That doesn't negate the idea and doesn't mean a passenger couldn't wear them. It'd need some small attached horsepower but we can do that these days. Coupled with speedy connectivity via cell, it might be interesting. I think the realty idea above is a good example, they can walk over and move the furniture, move about the room, etc... I'm kind of assuming they don't already have a camera mounted on the front of them. I played with a VR headset a long time ago and it was horrific - this probably would have been like ten years ago at a convention. I'm assuming that they've progressed a long ways since then.
Which doesn't do much for "your" case. The deaths by automobiles doesn't even phase me. I know, it makes me an ass. It really doesn't, in my opinion but I'm sure people will disagree. Yes, it seems bad for the people who were close to them but these are trivial numbers and nothing to get worked up about as a society. Just like we overacted for a trivial number of deaths after 9/11, there's no reason to incite panic over a small number of deaths where people are getting infected with bacteria at a place that's full of sick people.
Again, I'm pretty sure that this makes me seem like a monster but I'm not. At least I don't think so. There's lots of reasons to try to lower these numbers but they'll never be a number equal to zero. There's no reason to get excited. It's a hospital, it's full of sick people. There's a chance you'll get something bad, mutated, and straight up going to kill you - the choice is to not go and that's a bad choice so we've got to accept certain risks. This isn't an excuse for negligence, those who are negligent should be subject to whatever penalties there are and that's a whole other point entirely.
I guess, my point is, this isn't very many people. Yet people are really bad with numbers. They see the figure you quoted and assume it's some sort of epidemic. The reality is that we probably have more people than that who die on the toilet every year. (It turns out, a lot of people do die on the toilet. I did not look up the number, however.) The "three times the number of deaths by automobile" type of response is an appeal to emotion. It's really not a whole lot of people and, while sure, we can work on it - it's not like it's worth getting upset about.
Also, note that I'm not accusing you of doing so. If I'd been referring to you then I'd have mentioned you being the one engaging in the histrionics. You are, inasmuch as I know, not guilty of that. I was referring to those who have raised an outcry over this in the recent past. We had one person die at a local hospital, early this year, and the activists got their pitchforks out. It was rather absurd considering it was the only infection (an antibiotic resistant strain of some staph that ended up being a flesh eater) known about compared to the many people who were treated and remained entirely unaffected.
If it seemed like I was referring, specifically, to you then, my sincere apologies. Such was not my intent. No, if I were referring to you as the "we" (specifically to you - it was we as in we silly humans) then I'd have been much more specific, deriding, disparaging, and generally an asshole about it.;-) I mean, it is Friday (or was) after all. You may, however, be guilty of such - in which case then, yes, I am referring to you. If you're guilty then, by all means, it's okay - no need to worry your head about it. They're working on it, we're aware of it, and it's okay. *nods*
According to someone from the UK, in a previous thread on this subject, TalkTalk is actually large service provider (internet and cellular phone services - as I recal) in the UK with some fairly decent numbers. Though, a quick bit of math in my head indicates this number is only 4,000,000 or slightly less. So, I'm not sure how that relates to the prior comments about the business? Maybe there were only four million customers for this particular service? The prior poster indicated that TalkTalk was 4th in one market and 2nd in the other. Which was which is a memory that is gone - it didn't seem important at the time and isn't important enough for me to actually go to Google and figure out the applicable keywords.
It would be awesome to have a small finger sticker and analytics device, like used for diabetes blood sugar testing kits, that, maybe, hooked into a USB port and did the work there and was able to spit the data out. Then you could do all sorts of things, up to and including things like removing any easily identified PII and sharing the results with the research communities of your own volition.
They took a bunch of blood when I joined the military. While this was, indeed, many years ago (mid 1980s when I went back in to get more funding for school) - I'm not naive enough to think that they don't still have that vial on ice somewhere or haven't already run it through the various machines to get a copy of my DNA. So, I no longer have control of that data. In hindsight, well, I guess I'm okay with it - the rewards were worth the loss, currently. However, I wish I'd a choice in the matter as to them keeping the data after I left. I'm quite certain that they did.
If I could do the test locally and then opt to strip it of 'exif' data (for wont of a better word) then I'd probably be willing to donate it to a responsible research party provided they gave me something in return - like a markup that indicated my heritage and whatnot. There's a bit of Black African in me and we can't trace the history back beyond the Revolutionary War and I'm curious about that. There are also heritage aspects that I'd like to know more about. I'd give up my data, to a responsible research group, for that benefit.
No way in hell would I give it to this company or to any other commercial enterprise. Not willingly, at least. With my luck someone in the government's already sold it to them. Or, rather, given them access in quid pro quo for campaign donations or for employing a few friends from within their district.
Well, you could try going to live like the San people. I suspect you're probably not smart enough to do that. Point being, intelligence is a difficult thing to quantify and an IQ test isn't necessarily the best tool to determine such. It's just not a good quantifier. We could also argue the relevance of morality and situational ethics. We could also discuss the impact of poverty on intelligence or, more specifically, how it correlates to test results. I'd also submit that the IQ, as mentioned, is hardly a good metric. To have a standardized result then, if you insist, we can use that but it's up to you to demonstrate the importance.
All-in-all, it's rather subjective but I don't think we shouldn't talk about it. I just think we should talk about it like grownups.
So, how about you go ahead and tell us what your point is, what you think we should do about it, and how you feel it is relevant to the topic at hand. I'll be more than happy to have a mature and reasonable conversation with you.
Full disclosure: I'm mixed racially. I'm Native American (Micmac), Irish/English, and Black African (in order of percentage). I am not a geneticist. I do hold a Ph.D in Applied Mathematics and can understand statistics and have a reasonable grasp of logic.
So, sure... Let's have that discussion. What's your point? What do you think we should do? Why? How will it help? What's the goal? And how does it tie in with this research?
There's a huge difference between a country doing it to itself and a country invading another and committing atrocities up to and including medical experiments on life human beings. That you somehow think pointing to another country and claiming that they did something bad too is kind of unusual. I'm not actually sure what you're trying to prove. They pointed out that Japan has a rich cultural heritage and I pointed out that they do, indeed, have such a thing - albeit an immoral one. Hell, not even moral relativism helps this out.
It was bad. Just bad. They've a huge history or such behavior but, usually, kept it to themselves. Then they kind of flipped a cookie in the early 1900s and decided to try that whole empire thing. Pointing to others and saying, "You did it too!" Is not a valid rebuttal, it's just silly and childish. Accept it and move on. You'll be okay - you probably weren't even there. They seem to have, mostly, cleaned up their society since then. The only disconcerting thing that remains (that I know of) is their continued fascination with ancestral worship of war criminals but that's mostly harmless. I'd not call that culturally rich, however.
The height of culture must be anime and little girl panties out of a vending machine... Or preteen tentacle rape...
Alright, so that last line's kind of trolling. It's Friday (well Saturday morning) so I do insist on a little leeway and not have completely salient points.
If we wanted to get into the nitty gritty of every single culture on the planet, well, they're all probably lacking in some way. So, if you wanted to make a valid rebuttal that's how I'd have suggested you go about it. Hell, even my people have their faults and frailties. I'm Native American, from the Micmac tribe - mostly, and it seems my people hoarded a bunch of food and let a whole bunch of other natives die during some hard winters. We weren't really a warring people but evidence suggests that we could have shared our food and still been kept alive. Even my Irish and English heritage isn't without blight. I have a small amount of African in me, I don't know much about it, however. We can only trace ourselves back to around the Revolutionary War.
So, I guess my point is, lighten up Francis. Japan does have some culturally rich aspects but they've also committed (as a country, largely dead now) some atrocities that resulted in tens of millions of deaths. Some of those deaths were, shall we say, quite unnecessary. I'm pragmatic enough to understand the desire to expand and create an empire. Things like the Rape of Nanking were wholly unnecessary, however. I mean, c'mon now... At least Hitler had the decency to try to hide it.
Either way, pointing out things that a country has done to itself as a comparative to something done to them by a different country isn't really a good logical argument. I'm not sure what you were hoping to prove by that. Surely you had a point, right?
I got mugged once, years ago, on the outside of the swamp headed into Miami (just after alligator highway or whatever it's called - not the main route, the one south of it). The guy was nervous as fuck and carrying what appeared to be an unloaded Jennings.25. (I could not see the small tab that protrudes where the magazine goes but wasn't going to risk it.) Hell, it's a Jennings and a.25 - it might not even have fired.
Anyhow, he was nervous as fuck and I talked to him calmly and gave him my money and not my wallet. He said just give me your wallet and I told him that I could not do that but that I'd give him my cash. Meh... It was pretty tame, really. I was more calm than he was. I'd say, if you're getting mugged then, by all means, pay up but remain calm. Chances are they're scared. I'm not worried about someone who's holding a firearm and pointing it at me with seriousness. I'm worried about the idiot who's pointing a firearm vaguely in my direction and is scared. The first one would have already shot me, the second one is quite likely to screw the whole situation up. Just stay calm and give them the money.
There's more to the story but that's the gist of it. It was over in what felt like a few minutes but was probably closer to just one minute. Time seems to slow and you get hyper-alert. My first thought was to attempt to disarm them and then I realized that would be a terribly stupid thing to do. The last thing I wanted to do was cause a scene which would make them nervous or, worse, turn a mugging into a hostage situation or, worse, get someone else hurt. If someone were threatening to DDoS a service or extort money then I'd probably either let the cops follow the money or I'd put a notice up on the page saying something along the lines that service will likely be disrupted because $group expects us to be cowards. I'd rather prorate customer bills than be subjected to blackmail in the future and it's not likely to be a life and death situation or anything.
A couple of days ago, the poster you replied to, claimed that electrons move at a couple of centimeters per second. Yes, they insinuated that I could outrun electricity. Not bad for a guy who's 58.
Anyhow, my point is that they're not that bright but have a strange tendency to tell others that they're stupid. There's a lot of things that I don't know but I can't imagine being quite so dumb as to think I knew everything. You can safely giggle at them. I don't think anyone will complain.
Are you seriously arguing for less testing of drugs before their unleashed on society as a whole and trusting ethics and the free market to ensure the system is equitable?
Dude, I'm a 40 year member of the Libertarian Party, and even I think that's straight up stupid. There's a time and place for governance. One of those places is where the GENERAL WELFARE is concerned. Ya know, preventing companies from releasing untested or barely tested medication to the citizenry kinda qualifies as the general welfare...
No, I just figure that we can use the same method to figure out how much voltage to send to it, for example. Something like {idVoltage}.
You're right. I probably should have worded it better. Send a trivial amount of voltage (a standard, low amount) and use that to get the attributes from the device (in a nice, open, standard) and then apply that voltage.
And no - in the device, not in the cable. Putting it in the cable just seems silly to me. It either works or it doesn't. Well, it should. Cables should be dumb. Let the device say what it needs. If it doesn't send a signal on pairs 2 and 4 then don't use those pairs or features that rely on those pairs.
Out of 300,000,000 people, that's a rounding error. Sorry to be so cold sounding but, well... It is. I'm not actually sure why we get worked up over such small numbers? Is it bad? Sure. Is it that bad? No, not really.
That is, in part, why my son went to Peru. They wanted to preserve some flora before it was destroyed, to research it, in hopes of finding medical uses for it. He met a native girl (very pretty) and is still living in Peru, sexing a native, and smoking more pot than I do. *sighs*
At least he's happy and he's not the one bitching in this article?
Anyhow, it strikes me as an ego thing. "I found this! It must be great!" The various companies looked at it and said, "No, not so much, thanks." That's what it looks like but, I guess, that's speculation on my part. It's far more likely that that's the case than he's discovered one of the wonder drugs that show up in the various documentaries that I see from time to time.
I may be wrong but I've come across a few articles that claim the US basically subsidizes a great deal of the medical research and pharmaceutical research that other countries rely on. They don't often consider that in their equations. I do, on the other hand, support single payer health care. I could probably be convinced to agree to an argument for nationalized medical research though I may have moral qualms about the suspected outcome.
Meh, those don't even come close to the total number of dead due to Japanese atrocities. Hell, you can even include all the natives wiped out by the various diseases in that number and it's still not even close. Shit, just in China they killed more and raped more. That's a mighty fine culture you've got there. Don't you still worship dead war criminals?
I did my own initial code with the help of a comp sci grad. Eventually, we grew to the point where I was no longer able to do everything and things got increasingly complex - more than my ability, or were working in that direction. The first couple of hires came from people with a proven track record in a related field (they were in the transportation engineering realm - similar enough). After that, I had them sit in on the interviews - that's the person they'd be working with, after all. I also figured it was more likely that they could tell me if the person would be a good hire than I could judge for myself. They did, indeed, ask for programming examples on a giant pad of paper that sat on an easel. This would have been the early/mid 1990s.
Slashdot Mirror
Shouldn't the device say what it wants, the computer (for instance) say what it can do, and if the cable can't do it then fail gracefully? In other words, I'm not really seeing why this is a requirement in the first place. I know *what* it does (I think) but I do not know *why* they bothered with it. It seems like it'd be much easier to just establish some standards with communications protocols and such and then, if the cable doesn't support it, just fail gracefully, function at a lower level, or send an error message. I'm not really sure why we'd need smart cables? Nobody has really established why such would be a good idea over dumb cables and just a decent set of standards.
Maybe I'm missing something? It seems like a silly waste of time, to me.
Device - I want this and that.
Computer - I only got this and not that 'cause the cable sucks.
Device - LOL 'K Gimme data slow, kthxbie!
Computer - brrrgghhh grruffferquizzle pop (that's the data and device charging - I might be a little high)
Device - Cool beans - now just charge me up the rest of the way and I'll send a signal when I'm done eating.
Slashdot's not letting me login so I'll have to check for replies manually. ;-) I'm not sure why you'd want to start an argument, a nice discussion is always possible. I'm capable of a well reasoned debate but I'm not sure there's anything to argue here. I have no idea how much we, as a society, spend on practices and defenses for mitigating germ transfer in a medical setting but I'm going to wager that it's on par, or greater than, the expenses we incur for safety in our automobiles, or at least proportionate to it. I have yet to see numbers on that and I kind of would be surprised if they were refined such and available while actually being accurate. I'm not sure that those stats would be easily compiled or even which items to include - do we include the price of disinfectants and the costs of the labor to apply it? The disposable equipment such as masks and gowns?
I'm not sure which side of the debate you want me to pick, really. I mean, yeah, if you want then I'll try to present a well reasoned and logical argument about something I've not spoken about and have no expertise in - nor offered an actual opinion on. I can do my level best, if you want. It's not like I'm doing anything better. I was unable to sleep and it is now nearly 0700 so don't expect too much from me.
To touch on the MRSA, again, that was just an example. Your 99,000 figure really doesn't add up to a whole lot of people in the scale of things. There's a good chance of catching nasties when you go to places full of sick people. That happens. I suspect (and I'm not positive) that the prevalence is also partially to do with diagnostics improvements but I could be mistaken - I did mention that I'm not an expert and that this isn't even remotely a factor in my point.
If doctors aren't washing their hands and doctors are wearing contaminated clothing (in a hospital setting, where they're coming into contact with contagious, germ carrying, patients?) then there probably *is* existing regulatory restrictions concerning health and probably best practices. If these infractions or malpractice-type behaviors are occurring then we should probably report them. There are almost certainly things in place to deal with it.
What more do you want to do? How much do you want to spend? Why do you want to spend it? How can you quantify the benefits? Where do you want to spend the money? How do you propose paying for it?
I mean, yeah, if we're going to have an argument then I'll try my best but I don't think that's actually what I was saying. I'll try to oblige, though. I'd much prefer a conversation - I might even learn something. I'm still not sure why you view this as a statistically significant number or you think the valuation of automotive death prevention methods is a metric to be considered. Either way, I'll try to keep you amused and give you a well reasoned rebuttal but it's certainly not my domain and isn't even really related (perhaps tangentially, I guess) to my point.
Hmm... I appear to be able to log in, so here you have it. :D
Holy shit! I am, indeed, mistaken and I offer my most humble apologies. I thought the electrons moved faster than that? Heh. I should know this stuff. :/
Welp... Where's my crow? I shall eat it and dine on it in public.
They'll just include sharks with lasers to fight on your behalf - they'll deflect the lasers with their lasers and you'll not have to worry about the lasers hitting your eyes. SOLVED PROBLEM!
How would these work for not just virtual reality but for augmented reality? Is there a chance at putting a camera on the front of them and passing that through to the VR headset and then intersecting that with data? I'm thinking something more utilitarian... I'll try to think of an example...
Say you're looking at a new house - you're there physically. You toss on a headset and scan the room by looking around. Then you put furniture in the room. Then you can move the furniture around, and check it out, and decide if you're easily able to make the room look like what you'd want. You can paint the walls, put in curtains, and look out the window. This needn't have the house's layout already programmed into it - just some stock furniture or other types of things.
Something like Google Glasses but more useful and less spying. Err... Except they could be used for invasive shit too but, oh well... The above is just one type of example of things to do with it. I can think of a bunch more but the idea occurred to me while driving across the Skyway over to Niagara a while back. I was curious as to how old the highway was, how tall it was, what the buildings were off to the left, what ships those were when I saw a bunch anchored, etc... It'd be nice to be able to pull that information up - then mix it with VR, in some cases. So, more functional than just Google Glasses and more immersible.
Also, no, obviously one shouldn't wear them while driving. That doesn't negate the idea and doesn't mean a passenger couldn't wear them. It'd need some small attached horsepower but we can do that these days. Coupled with speedy connectivity via cell, it might be interesting. I think the realty idea above is a good example, they can walk over and move the furniture, move about the room, etc... I'm kind of assuming they don't already have a camera mounted on the front of them. I played with a VR headset a long time ago and it was horrific - this probably would have been like ten years ago at a convention. I'm assuming that they've progressed a long ways since then.
Which doesn't do much for "your" case. The deaths by automobiles doesn't even phase me. I know, it makes me an ass. It really doesn't, in my opinion but I'm sure people will disagree. Yes, it seems bad for the people who were close to them but these are trivial numbers and nothing to get worked up about as a society. Just like we overacted for a trivial number of deaths after 9/11, there's no reason to incite panic over a small number of deaths where people are getting infected with bacteria at a place that's full of sick people.
Again, I'm pretty sure that this makes me seem like a monster but I'm not. At least I don't think so. There's lots of reasons to try to lower these numbers but they'll never be a number equal to zero. There's no reason to get excited. It's a hospital, it's full of sick people. There's a chance you'll get something bad, mutated, and straight up going to kill you - the choice is to not go and that's a bad choice so we've got to accept certain risks. This isn't an excuse for negligence, those who are negligent should be subject to whatever penalties there are and that's a whole other point entirely.
I guess, my point is, this isn't very many people. Yet people are really bad with numbers. They see the figure you quoted and assume it's some sort of epidemic. The reality is that we probably have more people than that who die on the toilet every year. (It turns out, a lot of people do die on the toilet. I did not look up the number, however.) The "three times the number of deaths by automobile" type of response is an appeal to emotion. It's really not a whole lot of people and, while sure, we can work on it - it's not like it's worth getting upset about.
Also, note that I'm not accusing you of doing so. If I'd been referring to you then I'd have mentioned you being the one engaging in the histrionics. You are, inasmuch as I know, not guilty of that. I was referring to those who have raised an outcry over this in the recent past. We had one person die at a local hospital, early this year, and the activists got their pitchforks out. It was rather absurd considering it was the only infection (an antibiotic resistant strain of some staph that ended up being a flesh eater) known about compared to the many people who were treated and remained entirely unaffected.
If it seemed like I was referring, specifically, to you then, my sincere apologies. Such was not my intent. No, if I were referring to you as the "we" (specifically to you - it was we as in we silly humans) then I'd have been much more specific, deriding, disparaging, and generally an asshole about it. ;-) I mean, it is Friday (or was) after all. You may, however, be guilty of such - in which case then, yes, I am referring to you. If you're guilty then, by all means, it's okay - no need to worry your head about it. They're working on it, we're aware of it, and it's okay. *nods*
*crickets*
According to someone from the UK, in a previous thread on this subject, TalkTalk is actually large service provider (internet and cellular phone services - as I recal) in the UK with some fairly decent numbers. Though, a quick bit of math in my head indicates this number is only 4,000,000 or slightly less. So, I'm not sure how that relates to the prior comments about the business? Maybe there were only four million customers for this particular service? The prior poster indicated that TalkTalk was 4th in one market and 2nd in the other. Which was which is a memory that is gone - it didn't seem important at the time and isn't important enough for me to actually go to Google and figure out the applicable keywords.
It would be awesome to have a small finger sticker and analytics device, like used for diabetes blood sugar testing kits, that, maybe, hooked into a USB port and did the work there and was able to spit the data out. Then you could do all sorts of things, up to and including things like removing any easily identified PII and sharing the results with the research communities of your own volition.
They took a bunch of blood when I joined the military. While this was, indeed, many years ago (mid 1980s when I went back in to get more funding for school) - I'm not naive enough to think that they don't still have that vial on ice somewhere or haven't already run it through the various machines to get a copy of my DNA. So, I no longer have control of that data. In hindsight, well, I guess I'm okay with it - the rewards were worth the loss, currently. However, I wish I'd a choice in the matter as to them keeping the data after I left. I'm quite certain that they did.
If I could do the test locally and then opt to strip it of 'exif' data (for wont of a better word) then I'd probably be willing to donate it to a responsible research party provided they gave me something in return - like a markup that indicated my heritage and whatnot. There's a bit of Black African in me and we can't trace the history back beyond the Revolutionary War and I'm curious about that. There are also heritage aspects that I'd like to know more about. I'd give up my data, to a responsible research group, for that benefit.
No way in hell would I give it to this company or to any other commercial enterprise. Not willingly, at least. With my luck someone in the government's already sold it to them. Or, rather, given them access in quid pro quo for campaign donations or for employing a few friends from within their district.
You can call him Pontiff and his last name is Ratzo, he'd not make this up. They can't tell lies on the internet, you know.
Well, you could try going to live like the San people. I suspect you're probably not smart enough to do that. Point being, intelligence is a difficult thing to quantify and an IQ test isn't necessarily the best tool to determine such. It's just not a good quantifier. We could also argue the relevance of morality and situational ethics. We could also discuss the impact of poverty on intelligence or, more specifically, how it correlates to test results. I'd also submit that the IQ, as mentioned, is hardly a good metric. To have a standardized result then, if you insist, we can use that but it's up to you to demonstrate the importance.
All-in-all, it's rather subjective but I don't think we shouldn't talk about it. I just think we should talk about it like grownups.
So, how about you go ahead and tell us what your point is, what you think we should do about it, and how you feel it is relevant to the topic at hand. I'll be more than happy to have a mature and reasonable conversation with you.
Full disclosure: I'm mixed racially. I'm Native American (Micmac), Irish/English, and Black African (in order of percentage). I am not a geneticist. I do hold a Ph.D in Applied Mathematics and can understand statistics and have a reasonable grasp of logic.
So, sure... Let's have that discussion. What's your point? What do you think we should do? Why? How will it help? What's the goal? And how does it tie in with this research?
How do you know? They might be typing with their flippers.
What? It could happen.
There's a huge difference between a country doing it to itself and a country invading another and committing atrocities up to and including medical experiments on life human beings. That you somehow think pointing to another country and claiming that they did something bad too is kind of unusual. I'm not actually sure what you're trying to prove. They pointed out that Japan has a rich cultural heritage and I pointed out that they do, indeed, have such a thing - albeit an immoral one. Hell, not even moral relativism helps this out.
It was bad. Just bad. They've a huge history or such behavior but, usually, kept it to themselves. Then they kind of flipped a cookie in the early 1900s and decided to try that whole empire thing. Pointing to others and saying, "You did it too!" Is not a valid rebuttal, it's just silly and childish. Accept it and move on. You'll be okay - you probably weren't even there. They seem to have, mostly, cleaned up their society since then. The only disconcerting thing that remains (that I know of) is their continued fascination with ancestral worship of war criminals but that's mostly harmless. I'd not call that culturally rich, however.
The height of culture must be anime and little girl panties out of a vending machine... Or preteen tentacle rape...
Alright, so that last line's kind of trolling. It's Friday (well Saturday morning) so I do insist on a little leeway and not have completely salient points.
If we wanted to get into the nitty gritty of every single culture on the planet, well, they're all probably lacking in some way. So, if you wanted to make a valid rebuttal that's how I'd have suggested you go about it. Hell, even my people have their faults and frailties. I'm Native American, from the Micmac tribe - mostly, and it seems my people hoarded a bunch of food and let a whole bunch of other natives die during some hard winters. We weren't really a warring people but evidence suggests that we could have shared our food and still been kept alive. Even my Irish and English heritage isn't without blight. I have a small amount of African in me, I don't know much about it, however. We can only trace ourselves back to around the Revolutionary War.
So, I guess my point is, lighten up Francis. Japan does have some culturally rich aspects but they've also committed (as a country, largely dead now) some atrocities that resulted in tens of millions of deaths. Some of those deaths were, shall we say, quite unnecessary. I'm pragmatic enough to understand the desire to expand and create an empire. Things like the Rape of Nanking were wholly unnecessary, however. I mean, c'mon now... At least Hitler had the decency to try to hide it.
Either way, pointing out things that a country has done to itself as a comparative to something done to them by a different country isn't really a good logical argument. I'm not sure what you were hoping to prove by that. Surely you had a point, right?
I got mugged once, years ago, on the outside of the swamp headed into Miami (just after alligator highway or whatever it's called - not the main route, the one south of it). The guy was nervous as fuck and carrying what appeared to be an unloaded Jennings .25. (I could not see the small tab that protrudes where the magazine goes but wasn't going to risk it.) Hell, it's a Jennings and a .25 - it might not even have fired.
Anyhow, he was nervous as fuck and I talked to him calmly and gave him my money and not my wallet. He said just give me your wallet and I told him that I could not do that but that I'd give him my cash. Meh... It was pretty tame, really. I was more calm than he was. I'd say, if you're getting mugged then, by all means, pay up but remain calm. Chances are they're scared. I'm not worried about someone who's holding a firearm and pointing it at me with seriousness. I'm worried about the idiot who's pointing a firearm vaguely in my direction and is scared. The first one would have already shot me, the second one is quite likely to screw the whole situation up. Just stay calm and give them the money.
There's more to the story but that's the gist of it. It was over in what felt like a few minutes but was probably closer to just one minute. Time seems to slow and you get hyper-alert. My first thought was to attempt to disarm them and then I realized that would be a terribly stupid thing to do. The last thing I wanted to do was cause a scene which would make them nervous or, worse, turn a mugging into a hostage situation or, worse, get someone else hurt. If someone were threatening to DDoS a service or extort money then I'd probably either let the cops follow the money or I'd put a notice up on the page saying something along the lines that service will likely be disrupted because $group expects us to be cowards. I'd rather prorate customer bills than be subjected to blackmail in the future and it's not likely to be a life and death situation or anything.
A couple of days ago, the poster you replied to, claimed that electrons move at a couple of centimeters per second. Yes, they insinuated that I could outrun electricity. Not bad for a guy who's 58.
Anyhow, my point is that they're not that bright but have a strange tendency to tell others that they're stupid. There's a lot of things that I don't know but I can't imagine being quite so dumb as to think I knew everything. You can safely giggle at them. I don't think anyone will complain.
Of course medical establishments are bad for you. It's full of sick people. What do you expect? Sheesh! ;-)
Are you seriously arguing for less testing of drugs before their unleashed on society as a whole and trusting ethics and the free market to ensure the system is equitable?
Dude, I'm a 40 year member of the Libertarian Party, and even I think that's straight up stupid. There's a time and place for governance. One of those places is where the GENERAL WELFARE is concerned. Ya know, preventing companies from releasing untested or barely tested medication to the citizenry kinda qualifies as the general welfare...
No, I just figure that we can use the same method to figure out how much voltage to send to it, for example. Something like {idVoltage}.
You're right. I probably should have worded it better. Send a trivial amount of voltage (a standard, low amount) and use that to get the attributes from the device (in a nice, open, standard) and then apply that voltage.
And no - in the device, not in the cable. Putting it in the cable just seems silly to me. It either works or it doesn't. Well, it should. Cables should be dumb. Let the device say what it needs. If it doesn't send a signal on pairs 2 and 4 then don't use those pairs or features that rely on those pairs.
Yes? No?
Out of 300,000,000 people, that's a rounding error. Sorry to be so cold sounding but, well... It is. I'm not actually sure why we get worked up over such small numbers? Is it bad? Sure. Is it that bad? No, not really.
That is, in part, why my son went to Peru. They wanted to preserve some flora before it was destroyed, to research it, in hopes of finding medical uses for it. He met a native girl (very pretty) and is still living in Peru, sexing a native, and smoking more pot than I do. *sighs*
At least he's happy and he's not the one bitching in this article?
Anyhow, it strikes me as an ego thing. "I found this! It must be great!" The various companies looked at it and said, "No, not so much, thanks." That's what it looks like but, I guess, that's speculation on my part. It's far more likely that that's the case than he's discovered one of the wonder drugs that show up in the various documentaries that I see from time to time.
I may be wrong but I've come across a few articles that claim the US basically subsidizes a great deal of the medical research and pharmaceutical research that other countries rely on. They don't often consider that in their equations. I do, on the other hand, support single payer health care. I could probably be convinced to agree to an argument for nationalized medical research though I may have moral qualms about the suspected outcome.
Meh, those don't even come close to the total number of dead due to Japanese atrocities. Hell, you can even include all the natives wiped out by the various diseases in that number and it's still not even close. Shit, just in China they killed more and raped more. That's a mighty fine culture you've got there. Don't you still worship dead war criminals?
Yeah? So what if your office is suddenly in the middle of a conflict zone and there's active gun fire in the office next door, huh?
Yeah, I thought so...
I did my own initial code with the help of a comp sci grad. Eventually, we grew to the point where I was no longer able to do everything and things got increasingly complex - more than my ability, or were working in that direction. The first couple of hires came from people with a proven track record in a related field (they were in the transportation engineering realm - similar enough). After that, I had them sit in on the interviews - that's the person they'd be working with, after all. I also figured it was more likely that they could tell me if the person would be a good hire than I could judge for myself. They did, indeed, ask for programming examples on a giant pad of paper that sat on an easel. This would have been the early/mid 1990s.
I typed that in. WTF is that emoji supposed to be? I don't think it will work here but... Nope, preview says it doesn't work. WTF is that?