You didn't read the article
He explicitly stated that if you do if because you like doing it, that's richness. He explicitly fucking says it.
307 posts • joined 23 Apr 2007
He explicitly stated that if you do if because you like doing it, that's richness. He explicitly fucking says it.
Given that at the moment you routinely have to put up with idiot meatbags coming up behind you on the motorway at seventy plus, removing meatbags from the equation is an improvement.
"that couldn't be better served by improved public transport"
That's exactly what they ARE. Improved public transport. Here is my wish-list for public transport:
1) Picks me up wherever I am, at my convenience.
2) Delivers me exactly at the location I want to go to, without detours or other stops.
3) Don't have to share it with strangers.
Right now, I am describing a taxi, which is perfect but for the cost. If only there was some way to remove the largest cost of a taxi; the driver's time.
Hey presto, driverless car IS the ideal public transport.
I'd heard internet in the states was expensive thanks to the competition-busting cartels, but 67 dollars a MONTH? For what looks like a pretty basic internet connection? Blimey.
The overriding duty is to promote the company's success. Which by no means is to be taken as "as much money as possible given to shareholders". There are a lot more stakeholders than just the shareholders.
Here is some reading to get started with.
The chaps at OutLaw have a lot more where that comes from. It certainly is not all about maximising money for the company and giving it to shareholders.
" is likely to find themselves down the job centre about 20 nanoseconds after agreeing to do so"
Bullshit. For decades, company after company has senior executives visibly lining their own pockets instead of paying more to shareholders. The shareholders sit there and take it, time after time after time.
"The companies can't volunteer to pay more, because their shareholders would react badly - with a lawsuit."
Under what law? A company doesn't have any legal obligation to maximise shareholder value.
Indeed, it may HAVE helped me out. My suggestion stands, though; I would expect to see proportionally more faces from ethnicity X on Crimewatch if economic opportunities are more limited for ethnicity X.
Given that in 2011 the UK was about 87% white, I'm seeing a lot of non-white faces in that link; it may well be a mixed bunch, but it's certainly not representative of the UK population.
On the other hand, if we had a situation in which white men were routinely relegated to the shallow end of the employment pool, we would see Crimewatch heaving with white faces. Perhaps you've got cause and effect backwards?
Get a life. Exactly. Stop doing what you love and satisfying your own desire to know things just because it's there to be known. Fuck all that shit. Just do what you're told like johnnymotel. Drink what you're told to drink, aspire to copy those you're told are "cool", be attracted to the people the media tells you are atractive. Interested in exoplanets? What a loser. You've been told so many times you're meant to enjoy getting drunk and watching some kind of sport, so do it. Get a dull job like you see on the soap operas you're supposed to watch. That's a proper life.
Your modern PC gamer pays that kind of money on Steam and doesn't have so much as a single cardboard counter to show for it. The hipsters come out ahead if you're scoring purchases in cardboard and plastic acquired.
"can we look forward to the UK ship HMS Queer ?"
You've already had HMS Oberon, king of the fairies :)
"The most we can ask for is that we are not robbed, murdered, or worse."
For crying out loud, aspire to something. Aim higher! This poverty of ambition is likie a disease. We can do better.
" Presumably, nursing's rejection of men will follow later? (Please don't bother)."
So sick of hearing this ignorant bullshit. Nursing has been trying to attract more men for decades.
It did give me paws, barking mad as it seemed.
I've always found the crucial difference is the quality of the programmer, rather than the quality of the supporting libraries and learning material.
"Alongside the blessings ... there are the plotters, the proliferators, and the paedophiles.”
Every fucking time, they throw about the word "paedophile" and expect us to react like Pavlovian half-wits raised on a diet of the Daily Mail and the Daily Express. Just say "paedophile" and the stupid fucking public will let us do whatever we like to them.
I cannot be the only person now who automatically discounts anything said by "authority" that uses the term. Even when I don't want to or they might have a sensible point to make, I can't help it; if you say "paedophile", your credibility vanishes.
"You are really struggling to put the case forward that Antarctica is losing land ice aren't you?"
Is that aimed at me? I've got no opinion on that. My assertion is that it is possible to melt some ice, put the freshwater on a cold sea, and observe the freshwater freeze. This is a well-known meterological phenomenon, often observed (unsurprisingly) where freshwater rivers meet cold oceans.
"How does the pure water flow if it's surroundings are < 0 C?"
It flows when it is warm. Some will be warm all the way to the sea. The cold, cold sea. It freezes when it gets cold again. Some of it will get cold enough before it gets to the sea and will freeze again before it gets to the sea. Some of it will get cold enough when it gets to the sea.
Being surrounded by something less than 0C does not make water freeze instantly. It takes time. In that time, the water can move. Put a pan of warm water outside on a freezing cold day. Observe that the pan of water does not freeze instantly.
"Can anyone see the problem with this? ;)"
So you've got salt water (which has a freezing point below zero, typically about minus 2 C), at a temperature of minus something, and you then put some freshwater on top of it, which then gets colder and freezes in its new surroundings of less than zero. What's the problem with this?
Absolutely right. The ridiculous power of doctors is astonishing to people from other walks of life. Educated, specialised body-mechanics are just that; the idea that they inherently have a superior opinion (compared to every other hospital employee and associated personnel) on broad aspects of running a hospital is ludicrous, but hard to dislodge (although, to be fair, hard to dislodge only from their minds).
Reminds me of the (thankfully, now fading) attitude of surgeons in the operating theatre. The surgeon doing the actual cutting is one of the worst choices of people in the room to be in charge, but so often is (even if not officially).
So who *was* it made by? I happily pay a premium for domestic appliances that last a very long time.
" Atheism denies the possibility of such a thing existing."
No it doesn't. Atheism says there is no god. Anything beyond that you choose to read into it is entirely your own.
if ( input != 'y' || input != 'n')
I get asked why this doesn't work at least once a fortnight. Oh Gods, yes please, some kind of logic priming.
If it's any consolation, you're not tha target audience. Go back to your Dan Brown and whatever Jack Reacher recycling has been churned out recently.
"If you're not getting the respect you believe you deserve then that needs to be dealt with internally, inside your head"
"this is 100% an issue of self respect, or lack thereof."
"you coming off as the weak person"
"you are presenting yourself as the easiest to dominate"
"start by respecting yourself. Which you clearly don't. "
" tits or no tits, they will put your severed head on a pike by the gate as a warning"
You forgot to finish by saying that it's a woman's own fault if she gets raped. That's what you're building to. Quite clearly, you believe that to be the case. I doubt you'll say it that clearly, and you might even deny it, but secretly, deep inside, you really believe it's true.
Which conferences will you be going to?
How about some kind of middle ground? Instead of you cutting your holiday short to replace the fuse, ask a friend/neighbour/family member to pop round and replace the fuse for you.
Is there something particularly helpful to building companies to have to build on a resevoir? Presumably, you'd have to drain it and fill it in, and only then could you start building on it. The drainage would be an ongoing problem during the construction and afterwards. Why not just build on land?
Taxis are very expensive because you're paying for the drivers time, and that time also needs to be covered when there is no fare. At the point that the taxis no longer need drivers, what you suggest will suddenly become viable.
Did you actually look, or did you assume that because you don't see such campaigns on a tech blog, they don't exist?
and so on.
"Your housemate (and presumably yourself) haven't heard of usb pen drives then?"
Whilst I can't speak for the OP, I have worked in places where a policy forbade copying company data to unauthorised USB sticks, but was mute on the subject of eMailing it around.
Speaking as an aforementioned white male, I've got to say that the evidence around me indicates that the scales are still massively balanced in my favour.
I discount your credentials roughly 80% and consider you to be more of an idiot for relying on credentials to bolster your arguments. I can spout credentials too. Check this:
I also have worked in the IT industry for the last 30 years, including in biometric, supercomputing , and security fields, and unicorns.
I current work in financial IT where I look after a great deal of Cisco ASA firewalls, but fior a bigger more important company than you.
See. Meaningless. You know I made that up. I suspect that you didn't make yours up, but it counts about as much and says heaps about you that you rely on it this way.
You're an idiot with no imagination. If you ever come to their attention, they've got (as suggested in the article) 15 years of data to sift back through. They don't need to watch you constantly. When you come to their attention they pick something from the last 15 years of automated collection of your life to get you with.
"But will the wimps in the Council of Ministers do anything practical like this?"
Perhaps they're simply better people with higher standards who think that someone being a dickhead doesn't actually magically make being a dickhead acceptable.
"(and find time to update the CV)"
Good idea! I didn't even think of that. "Worked on Sony PS4 Operating System" should look good tucked in there. Providing Sony's PS4 doesn't go all Skynet and start killing people, in which case I'll probably keep quiet about it.
"I have a 64-bit version of Windows sitting on this laptop.. and the benefit to me? Bugger all. "
I find that being able to address more than 4GB of memory is invaluable; without it, my virtual machines would have cripplingly small amounts of RAM and be basically unusable, and large media file playback (and other very high resolution graphical operations) would be significantly affected.
Maybe you just use your laptop for eMail and Minesweeper, and don't need so much addressable memory, but an awful lot of other people do.
"This topic is someone complaining who has it far easier than loads of other women in the same situation with a really crappy job."
Ah, there's the problem. You've got the reading comprehension skills of a child, coupled with a totally unjustified confidence in your own abilities, leading you to miss the point but invent one of your own instead to carry away on your poorly explained tangent.
So you've got someone very good at their job, and in an emergency they're happy to come in on their day off and do some extra work. That's got nothing to do with the topic at hand.
"I am a woman in IT, a super woman if you will."
We will not. You have missed the point entirely. The point is not that working in IT makes you some kind of superwoman, and it's also not even about IT. It's about trying to keep up in any male-dominated work environment that relies on long hours, whilst at the same time trying to meet society's expectations with regards to married life (which you do not have) and the raising of children (which you do not have).
You absolutely are not a "superwoman" in this context.
Given that it has been possible to spoof Mayday messages easily by use of a radio for decades, this has been possible already for decades.
AIS was knocked together a bit over a decade ago (well into the internet age) with the intentions of collision avoidance and, secondarily, sending of meta-data about the ship. It's not meant to be used for secure communications. It's meant to be used to save lives (and ships).
Sure, we could encrypt everyone's outgoing messages. Except how would that help anyone? If I can't decrypt it, I don't know where they are so how can I avoid running into them? The only way it can work is to broadcast a ship's position, course and speed in the clear. I suppose I could have some kind of big database of known vessels that I trust, but that's insane; if I get a signal from an unknown ship that we're about to collide, I'm going to take action. The fact that I don't have them on my list of trusted ships becomes irrelevant.
AIS is simply not meant to be a secure communications system. It works by everyone being able to tell everyone else within VHF range their position, course and speed. The cost of making it universally readable is that someone can spoof it (although when I look out the window and see that actually there isn't a ship out there to collide with, I think I might guess it was a bad signal, so it's really not an issue).
"From memory, if the sensor fails, the green pilot light on the dashboard turns yellow and you get an announcement that the system is no longer operative. "
That's not a failure. That's doing exactly what it's meant to do in the event of some problem arising with the sensor. It's a success. Well done designers and builders, good job.
A failure is doing what it's NOT meant to do; in this case, the failure state posited is that it reports the existence of something that isn't there.
I disagree. I think that if a failure causes the erroneous, identical presentation of a "something is there" signal state, the rest of the system will treat that "something is there" signal state as it would treat a completely identical "something is there" signal state.
When my ABS decides the signal state indicates a wheel has locked, it acts as if the wheel has locked. Assuming that any positive signal state is not, in fact, a real reading and it's actually some kind of error, is insanity. For starters, nobody's ABS system would ever work; any time your wheels locked up, you'd get a dashboard light instead of a life-saving ABS intervention.
The error-checking mechanisms that exist, if they work correctly, can present a "your system is broken" signal state, but that is a different signal state. This is a ""something is there" signal state.
Well, let's take this logically. I expect that if the sensor fails, and decides there is something there, it will take avoiding action just as if there really was something there,
I have to say, as puzzlers go, that one was pretty simple. Could you really not work it out for yourself?
Despite having already been stabbed once (with a pen), he apparently fails to finish the thought with "We are animals. When you annoy an animal enough, it will try to kill you." I look forwards to reading about him in the Darwin Awards.
At the bottom of this page:
Interesting to see that they mention " Selection into the pilot scheme will recognise the unique attributes and potential contribution of individuals who might otherwise not be attracted or able to serve in the Reserve forces." I wonder what they're willing to overlook; massively impaired social skills, horrific levels of physical fitness, criminal records, mental instability?
"And no, it did not increase the leisure time in Europe, unless you count being on the dole as such."
I think it did. The amount of time I had to work to continue to buy all the things I was buying went down a lot as all the things became so much cheaper. It's all so cheap now that I can quit my job every few years and just take a few months off.
Most people choose to not to work less, but to simply take the savings they make and waste them on more junk; they could have had more leisure time, and chose instead to keep working.