<Jenny McCarthy>
My child didn't eat a tuna steak 5 minutes before he was diagnosed with autism!
</Jenny McCarthy>

-

It seems there's a portion of the population that will compulsively latch onto hear-say and pseudoscience nonsense and conspiracy theories, no matter what we do. Maybe we should just accept that. Just deal with it and make the best of things.

I've got this totally scientific evidence that autism is caused by the ink in lottery tickets. The ink doesn't affect adults, but the chemicals stick to your fingers. Then when you touch your kids the chemicals get absorbed through their skin and disrupt their developing brains. My kid was perfectly healthy one morning, and at a routine checkup that afternoon my child was diagnosed with autism! And the only thing that happened in between was that I bought lottery tickets and hugged by child! You can't imagine how devastating that is to a parent, unless of course you're a parent who bought a lottery ticket and immediately had their child diagnosed with autism.

Have the so-called "scientists" tested the lottery ticket ink? HELL NO! The government rakes in millions of dollars on lottery tickets! Scientists all want grant money (our money taken in taxes!) to do their research. And is the government going to give them money if the government doesn't like the results of that research! OF COURSE the scientists are going to be biased and tow the government line.

I am not anti-lottery-tickets.
I just want to reduce the ink and reduce the toxins. Lottery tickets are fine when the government proves that that new ink ensures no children will get autism.
If you ask a parent of an autistic child if they want their kid to have autism, or whether they'd choose to pass up on a lousy lottery ticket, well duh they'll pass up on the lousy lottery ticket.

What parent would ever knowingly risk giving their child autism? It's unthinkable! It's just not worth the risk.

-

Because the percentage of scientists who say anti-vax is nonsense is within a rounding error of 100%,
and because the percentage of scientists who say global warming is real and serious is within a rounding error of 100%.

(Not that I know jack squat about James Cameron's movie, but the question was why one celebrity voice would be credible while another would not be. A celebrity who doesn't speak French, but who accurately recites a French dictionary, is backed by the full credibility of that dictionary.)

-

The tone was intended to be playfully humorous. I called you a "dick" for the sole purpose of invoking the "right and a dick" thing in a self-referential manner. "Whistling innocently" was my best effort to hang a guilty-of-mischief hat on it.

C'est la vie, c'est la internet.

-

Calling people "overbearing assholes" makes you a total dick.

::whistles innocently and wanders away::

-

I know nothing about the merits (or lack of merits) of a "European schedule" vs any other schedule, but reading your post all I can think is...

People are screaming that flowers attract fairies and fairies are eating children's brains, to which you reply:
"Just plant European bushes outside the schools. European flowers don't attract fairies."

-

To sum it up, if you don't realize that backups are needed...

He's saying that he realizes that backups are needed, but a core backup program has had the inability to restore from incremental backups for over 2 years, and no-one is screaming about it. So he's asking if everyone else is ignoring their backups.

I fly between 4 and 6 sectors per month, on average. I can practically recite the various safety briefings for two different airlines, across 5 different aircraft types. Yes, I've heard them. Yes, I find it ridiculous that after 30 years of flying, I still have to listen to them telling people how to put on their seatbelt. And I'm certainly not a fan of blind adherance to authoritarian protocols.

However, I have had experience in designing risk minimisation procedures, and safety/security system design. And over the many flights I've been on, I've frequently thought about how I would re-design the process, if I was appointed benevolent dictator over the aviation industry.

Ultimately, the question is: what process will increase the chance that the average person on the average flight will do the right thing under emergency conditions? (With the secondary goal of providing the least annoyance to regular customers.)

* Some sort of opt-out for those who fly frequently on the same service? How would you record/manage it?

* Only taking new customers through the briefing? Now you have to do the spiel 25 times for 25 different passengers in different parts of the plane, rather than once for all 190 passengers.

* Pre-flight training? On that scale?

* Better designed spiels? What would need to be included? What could we take out?

* More detailed instructions? Then they'd be longer and even less interesting than at present...

* Humour? (Like the Independence Air celebrity safety briefings?)

And when I think through the options and all the implications, the best thing I can come up with amounts to little more than minor tweaking to the existing safety demonstration.

Nothing I said is limited to landings on runways (other than my use of the phrase "touches down"). Yeah, my wording was a little sloppy, which made it sound like I was talking about a "taxiway fender-bender", but I meant in any situation where the pilot makes an unexpected landing, whether on land or water.

If the plane lands in a way which leads to the plane disintegrating, nothing will save you.

If the plane lands in a way which is unusual, but leaves large chunks of the plane undestroyed, following simple safety procedures will significantly reduce the amount of physical injury you experience.

The safety instructions contemplate the latter situation, not the former.

yeah I was wondering if they had to use the whole fist when I tried windows 8

SystemD makes sense as it is event based. Solaris and MacOSX have moved beyond init and it makes sense.

How do you setup initd on a Macbook where it is on one network, falls asleep, then wakes up on another? Scenarios such as this and others such as detecting when an apache server gets compromised you can set a chain of commands to do things based on events.

Yes it is different and unix admins hate changes that require years worth of scripts to go obsolete.

But initd is from a different era where a typical server ran 3 or 4 daemons and maybe had a few dozen unix command line options if you were lucky. That is long gone today.

Such as ...?

FYI I am typing this on a Windows 7 system I have at home. I use more yes I use VMware workstation with my 16 gigs of ram to simulate domains and do testing and lab work to sharpen my IT skills. But I am not typical. So I am not a 50 year old who hates change at all and wanted to clear that up first.

Security wise excluded XP works for business except in niche cases I see and it is very very expensive to switch and gpos, app certification, and many other steps are needed for something that is not required does not make sense.

I do not know of any use a typical office worker could not do on a Windows 3.11 486? The only except is poorly written javascript ajax websites but that is considered off task on the job anyway.

XP works for 1/3 of the users on the internet. Windows hit the maturity point with XP and now there is no reason to ever change. As the years go by when 2019 hits and Windows 7 goes EOL anyone needing more than 16 gigs of ram and a non raid SSD will be even a much smaller niche. Again no need to change unless MS wants more money.

Yes you like technology and some newer graphical effects and kernel features are cool. But HR does not utilize 4 cpu cores to write a report, check email, and go to taleo to screen an applicant. This is a new age and yes post PC era. Phones need upgrading hell of a lot more than desktops as the benefits go down each new release.