All of them (Wranglers anyway) can likely still do that, or at least are as fit as they were in the mid 80s. The Rubicon Wrangler even has meaningful upgrades that improve its ability to handle trail driving, though that direct of a link between marketing and function is pretty rare these days.
That is kind of their job as they make laws that impact a wide variety of things. Or at least that is the convention on the public facing side of what they do, speaking to journalists as if they are experts and have first hand knowledge.
In reality, what they know outside of their particular field (mostly lawyering) comes mostly from subject matter experts and those come from whatever lobbying group musters them. So while politicians may be informed before they put forward a law, their information is often cherry picked or outright biased.
ESR is no different in this case as he has his own agenda he is trying to push. It would be hard to find subject matter experts without one. And this isn't confined to just the Interent or fast moving geek tech. "The shoulder thing that goes up" is one of the many famous examples where a politician was trying to have something outright banned from production despite having no clue what it was.
Cigarette smoking is falling out of favor in western countries, but increasing in developing countries. So you might see use of the word shift demographics a bit and we can't know where the AC is located.
Regardless, there are still quite a few smokers overall.
I care about the shape of the phone more than the pad, partly because I don't have a pad but also because these devices need to evolve into something more fit to hold in our hands.
Obviously there is some minimum screen size that people will want for a given device. So once that area is defined, and hardware can be crammed into some very thin space behind it, designers should be free to shape the rest of a device's case in some hand(s) friendly way.
I've seen some anecdotal data suggesting that iphones and other thin, candy bar format touchscreen phones, get dropped more often than older designs. Nokia has a couple of designs that appear to work on that problem.
Not really, because regardless of their false positive rate the evidence is what the evidence is.
Actually what you need is an eyes-wide-open, honest evaluation of the data, that isn't tainted by the interests of NASA or its subs or politicians who are have taken some positionon matters related to the above. And good luck with that.
If you read much Edward Tufte or attend one of his talks, he has a lot to say about the decision making processes for both the Challenger and Columbia incidents. I am dubious that an entire army of actual rocket scientists could have, of their own accord, made multiple data presentation choices that cast their employers in the best possible light. Laying out a graph that eventually helped a room full of smart people decide that the booster seals would be fine on the launch date. When those same data plotted differently showed an obvious direct correlation between failure and ambient temp and they were going to launch on the coldest day yet.
There is similar manipulating of the data from the Columbia.
People trying to serve some incidental interest, like preserving a contract or future funding, who are obviously cherry picking the information they share, aren't likely to be swayed by a low false positive rate. They made their decision long before they saw any evidence of anything anyway.
The 'potentially biohazardous material' is contained inside the patient when he boards the airplane to fly to Colorado. That he happens to be going to Colorado to have this procedure performed sets him aparts from the other airplane passengers not at all.
What the FDA is claiming and will probably be backed up by the executive on but possibly not the judicial, is that because the company performing the procedure purchases equipment from other states, their entire business can then be regulated per the commerce clause. This includes their performing the procedure.
It is the same line of thought that had the Clinton administration claiming it could confiscate a person's property simply because that property had once moved across state lines, no matter how long ago and no matter how many hands it had previously passed through, even within the same state. This is an enormous power to give to a government and the very idea that such a tenuous tie is enough to warrant it is insane. SCOTUS rebuked that just a bit recently, but not nearly enough.
I would never wave or point a weapon with the intent of terrorizing others
I've done so on orders from the US Government, so I agree with you to some extent, but also with the person you replied to. Gun owners sometimes get into this argument over open versus concealed carry.
The reality is that if enough people are afraid of your behavior, whatever it is, and those people organize themselves well enough, your behavior will be made illegal. Then just the act of looking at Noveske's web site on your phone in a public space will be enough to get you in trouble. Now, it can be enough cause for the FBI or local PD to just inconvenience you.
Because that was part of the requirements for getting the event held in Indianapolis. They likely spent a lot more to dig up Georgia street between the basketball stadium and the football one to rebuild it as a pedestrian corridor between the two, so they'd have room to install the super bowl village.
But the city went to the NFL and competed to get this thing, as did several other cities, because despite the up front costs it will make money from it. Thus why the NFL and the fans who attend the game don't have to pay for security out of their own pockets.
An insightful mod on a person who feels they can assess the 'expendability' of a human being based on whether or not they attend a single sporting event. Only at Slashdot.
Why a sporting event and not, say, which church they attend?
It is entirely relevant. Randy Weaver failed to pay a tax, and a soldier shot his wife on orders from the US government.
That quite directly contradicts what is being claimed, that US soldiers won't follow orders to kill US citizens.
If you've some specific beef with the example, there are plenty of others. Unsurprisingly, FBI snipers regularly train for and are expected to manage situations that are 'tense', by the very nature of their job. I was deployed for more than a year as an 8541 in the USMC and I can absolutely assure you that if you shoot people you aren't cleared to shoot you'll be in prison as fast as they can get you there, tense or not.
Lon Horiuchi was a West Point grad and former office in the US Army, as was his father. Do you think he had a change of heart only after joining the FBI?
Are you aware of any instances where an Oathkeeper refused an order that was not then carried out by someone else?
If so, does it happen more or less often than say, no knock warrants served on the wrong target?
You are quantifiably full of shit, in that US troops have killed US citizens and not only did it not spark some widespread rebellion among the population in general, it didn't even spark dissent among the ranks of those on the scene when it happened.
Call up Vicki Weaver and ask how that goes. She isn't answering the phone? Is Lon Horiuchi in prison?
And your idea of fighting alongside a bunch of weekend warriors is idiotic. Sit in the woods on opening day of deer season for evidence that most of those boobs can't hit something as large as a deer, at conversational distances, under not threat to their personal safety whatsoever. The idea just because a guy has a rifle in his closet he can mount some kind of resistance against a force as well equipped and trained as the 1% could muster is simply boneheaded. Like one day some clear signal will go out and you'll l get up off the couch and go live like Boers.
There is NO WAY that spam will ever be personalized enough to make it become priority mail
I think it could be. The baselines for creepiness in our interactions with machines is something that continually moves. I know a few older folks who find it creepy that their mobile phone knows when they've arrived at a certain location and can alert them to some reminder. Speaking to an 'assistant' program running on a phone is currently creepy (or just odd) to many people, but I bet in 5 years it will be absolutely normal behavior for 30 year olds.
The more comprehensive personal data collection becomes the better targeted spam will be, it is just a matter of applying some good predictive algorithms.
A friend texted me a bit ago about wanting to go to a certain taco shop for lunch. It may seem random, but I bet if looked hard enough at enough data his cravings for that taco shop are not random and could be modeled. So if he is sitting around one day around 10AM, which is when he normally thinks about where to go for lunch, and his phone showed him an ad for a different taco shop, that would be a nearly perfect time for that shop to advertise to him and he might actually appreciate the suggestion. That might seem creepy right now, maybe even in the next 5, but it isn't all that bug a step from saying "I want a taco" to your phone and getting the same recommendation.
Most projects, most laws in general, are sold via some hand waving and appeals to emotion. At this point anything quantatative is a step in the right direction.
I'm a big fan of good evidence but if you don't read Leo Strauss and discover that a critical component of neo-conservatism is having an enemy to unite people against, then find out that an entire war launched by neo-cons that dumped billions into the pockets of neo-con friendly businesses was based on entirely fabricated evidence against the enemy, then wonder if some elements of governments might be willing to engage in extreme hoodwinking to get what they want....maybe you are in denial.
Slashdot Mirror
There are already a multitude of solutions available
Then why are people in Monrovia Liberia shitting on the beach right now? Might it be that the problem requires a solution yet to be devised?
All of them (Wranglers anyway) can likely still do that, or at least are as fit as they were in the mid 80s. The Rubicon Wrangler even has meaningful upgrades that improve its ability to handle trail driving, though that direct of a link between marketing and function is pretty rare these days.
That is kind of their job as they make laws that impact a wide variety of things. Or at least that is the convention on the public facing side of what they do, speaking to journalists as if they are experts and have first hand knowledge.
In reality, what they know outside of their particular field (mostly lawyering) comes mostly from subject matter experts and those come from whatever lobbying group musters them. So while politicians may be informed before they put forward a law, their information is often cherry picked or outright biased.
ESR is no different in this case as he has his own agenda he is trying to push. It would be hard to find subject matter experts without one. And this isn't confined to just the Interent or fast moving geek tech. "The shoulder thing that goes up" is one of the many famous examples where a politician was trying to have something outright banned from production despite having no clue what it was.
That and it would be capable of processing more input data faster than a human driver, thus making better decisions.
Cigarette smoking is falling out of favor in western countries, but increasing in developing countries. So you might see use of the word shift demographics a bit and we can't know where the AC is located.
Regardless, there are still quite a few smokers overall.
Some are even big advocates of massive testosterone doses.
I care about the shape of the phone more than the pad, partly because I don't have a pad but also because these devices need to evolve into something more fit to hold in our hands.
Obviously there is some minimum screen size that people will want for a given device. So once that area is defined, and hardware can be crammed into some very thin space behind it, designers should be free to shape the rest of a device's case in some hand(s) friendly way.
I've seen some anecdotal data suggesting that iphones and other thin, candy bar format touchscreen phones, get dropped more often than older designs. Nokia has a couple of designs that appear to work on that problem.
Not really, because regardless of their false positive rate the evidence is what the evidence is.
Actually what you need is an eyes-wide-open, honest evaluation of the data, that isn't tainted by the interests of NASA or its subs or politicians who are have taken some positionon matters related to the above. And good luck with that.
If you read much Edward Tufte or attend one of his talks, he has a lot to say about the decision making processes for both the Challenger and Columbia incidents. I am dubious that an entire army of actual rocket scientists could have, of their own accord, made multiple data presentation choices that cast their employers in the best possible light. Laying out a graph that eventually helped a room full of smart people decide that the booster seals would be fine on the launch date. When those same data plotted differently showed an obvious direct correlation between failure and ambient temp and they were going to launch on the coldest day yet.
There is similar manipulating of the data from the Columbia.
People trying to serve some incidental interest, like preserving a contract or future funding, who are obviously cherry picking the information they share, aren't likely to be swayed by a low false positive rate. They made their decision long before they saw any evidence of anything anyway.
Note that supporting it was literal gold.
Facts do make a lot of people angry.
No it isn't.
The 'potentially biohazardous material' is contained inside the patient when he boards the airplane to fly to Colorado. That he happens to be going to Colorado to have this procedure performed sets him aparts from the other airplane passengers not at all.
What the FDA is claiming and will probably be backed up by the executive on but possibly not the judicial, is that because the company performing the procedure purchases equipment from other states, their entire business can then be regulated per the commerce clause. This includes their performing the procedure.
It is the same line of thought that had the Clinton administration claiming it could confiscate a person's property simply because that property had once moved across state lines, no matter how long ago and no matter how many hands it had previously passed through, even within the same state. This is an enormous power to give to a government and the very idea that such a tenuous tie is enough to warrant it is insane. SCOTUS rebuked that just a bit recently, but not nearly enough.
I would never wave or point a weapon with the intent of terrorizing others
I've done so on orders from the US Government, so I agree with you to some extent, but also with the person you replied to. Gun owners sometimes get into this argument over open versus concealed carry.
The reality is that if enough people are afraid of your behavior, whatever it is, and those people organize themselves well enough, your behavior will be made illegal. Then just the act of looking at Noveske's web site on your phone in a public space will be enough to get you in trouble. Now, it can be enough cause for the FBI or local PD to just inconvenience you.
Because that was part of the requirements for getting the event held in Indianapolis. They likely spent a lot more to dig up Georgia street between the basketball stadium and the football one to rebuild it as a pedestrian corridor between the two, so they'd have room to install the super bowl village.
But the city went to the NFL and competed to get this thing, as did several other cities, because despite the up front costs it will make money from it. Thus why the NFL and the fans who attend the game don't have to pay for security out of their own pockets.
An insightful mod on a person who feels they can assess the 'expendability' of a human being based on whether or not they attend a single sporting event. Only at Slashdot.
Why a sporting event and not, say, which church they attend?
It is entirely relevant. Randy Weaver failed to pay a tax, and a soldier shot his wife on orders from the US government.
That quite directly contradicts what is being claimed, that US soldiers won't follow orders to kill US citizens.
If you've some specific beef with the example, there are plenty of others. Unsurprisingly, FBI snipers regularly train for and are expected to manage situations that are 'tense', by the very nature of their job. I was deployed for more than a year as an 8541 in the USMC and I can absolutely assure you that if you shoot people you aren't cleared to shoot you'll be in prison as fast as they can get you there, tense or not.
Lon Horiuchi was a West Point grad and former office in the US Army, as was his father. Do you think he had a change of heart only after joining the FBI?
Are you aware of any instances where an Oathkeeper refused an order that was not then carried out by someone else? If so, does it happen more or less often than say, no knock warrants served on the wrong target?
You are quantifiably full of shit, in that US troops have killed US citizens and not only did it not spark some widespread rebellion among the population in general, it didn't even spark dissent among the ranks of those on the scene when it happened.
Call up Vicki Weaver and ask how that goes. She isn't answering the phone? Is Lon Horiuchi in prison?
And your idea of fighting alongside a bunch of weekend warriors is idiotic. Sit in the woods on opening day of deer season for evidence that most of those boobs can't hit something as large as a deer, at conversational distances, under not threat to their personal safety whatsoever. The idea just because a guy has a rifle in his closet he can mount some kind of resistance against a force as well equipped and trained as the 1% could muster is simply boneheaded. Like one day some clear signal will go out and you'll l get up off the couch and go live like Boers.
I was doing the same thing 1994 with cron and vacation. You owe me some money.
And of course in Siri stories many Android users just aid to get Vlingo.
Shouting your Slashdot posts into Siri is getting better, but still not all that good.
There is NO WAY that spam will ever be personalized enough to make it become priority mail
I think it could be. The baselines for creepiness in our interactions with machines is something that continually moves. I know a few older folks who find it creepy that their mobile phone knows when they've arrived at a certain location and can alert them to some reminder. Speaking to an 'assistant' program running on a phone is currently creepy (or just odd) to many people, but I bet in 5 years it will be absolutely normal behavior for 30 year olds.
The more comprehensive personal data collection becomes the better targeted spam will be, it is just a matter of applying some good predictive algorithms.
A friend texted me a bit ago about wanting to go to a certain taco shop for lunch. It may seem random, but I bet if looked hard enough at enough data his cravings for that taco shop are not random and could be modeled. So if he is sitting around one day around 10AM, which is when he normally thinks about where to go for lunch, and his phone showed him an ad for a different taco shop, that would be a nearly perfect time for that shop to advertise to him and he might actually appreciate the suggestion. That might seem creepy right now, maybe even in the next 5, but it isn't all that bug a step from saying "I want a taco" to your phone and getting the same recommendation.
At least it is a number.
Most projects, most laws in general, are sold via some hand waving and appeals to emotion. At this point anything quantatative is a step in the right direction.
The entire point of the post to which you replied is that sometimes it does indeed hurt to try.
I'm a big fan of good evidence but if you don't read Leo Strauss and discover that a critical component of neo-conservatism is having an enemy to unite people against, then find out that an entire war launched by neo-cons that dumped billions into the pockets of neo-con friendly businesses was based on entirely fabricated evidence against the enemy, then wonder if some elements of governments might be willing to engage in extreme hoodwinking to get what they want....maybe you are in denial.
Especially if they are DARPA's dumpsters.