Do note that this new requirement will only affect non-degree programs at public and non-profit schools, as well as all programs at for-profit schools. I don't think that's a bad idea. It prevents "Joe Bob's school of Hi-Tek" from offering a "certificate" that is completely worthless for $50k, while it doesn't touch any legitimate liberal arts degrees.
They opposed it because they oppose everything that Obama does.
Whatever he does, they support the opposite. No one cared about Common Core originally, and it was implemented in 43 states. But as soon as Obama said it was a good idea, everyone on the started freaking out and saying it was the worst EVAH.
When he suggested bombing Syria they said no way.
When he was reluctant to bomb Russia/Ukraine they said we needed to.
If he said cyanide was toxic they would stand on the Capitol Steps and chug it just to spite him.
If he cured cancer they'd complain he was putting doctors out of work.
Yes, and here's a video reference of exactly this happening: http://www.cc.com/video-clips/...
Don't forget the clogging and drying up if you don't use the printer for a while, requiring buying new ink cartridges, or a whole new printer.
Yep, it's insane. Reagan and Nixon are considered "left-wing" nowadays, or at least their policies are.
I'll grant you that this specific article was way too simplistic, but:
All of the people who rely solely on NPR for their news are misinformed.
You're way off with that one. Source: http://www.poynter.org/latest-...
Thanks for your insightful post. It makes sense and I agree, except that I understand from first hand accounts that sometimes protests and demonstrations attract people that are there expressly to get into fights with the police, so it's not always only AFTER the melee starts that they act. Sometimes these elements actively incite the conflicts. However, that doesn't take away from your point that the police showing up in riot gear is starting with an escalation.
NPR had an article a few weeks back about exactly the kind of alternative style of policing that you describe. It's a worthy read (or listen) if you or others reading this are interested: http://www.npr.org/2014/09/25/...
Very insightful post, and I think it approaches at least some of the mechanisms of how this shift happened. My local NPR station finally played this story this morning, so I came back here to comment. It actually included an anecdote of a girl who started in an intro CS class in the 80s who felt (and this was reinforced by the professor) she was way behind her peers and presumably out of place because they had been programming on their PCs (specific example given was a TRS-80) for a long time already, and she had not.
So yes, this disparity in early PC ownership definitely seems to have been a factor. However, then the question becomes why did boys get PCs and not girls? The theory that the article presents is that this was influenced by the advertising of the time. Their example talked about computer ads with all guys programming and using the computer, while the one woman appears in a bikini jumping into a pool. I can see where this may have had some significant influence as well, but it probably doesn't explain everything.
The thing is we only have small tidbits of data, and it would take some serious studies to confirm why in fact women are less prone to obsessing over computers. I think a lot of the arguments on both sides, including the story (it was the ads!) and the majority of the slashdot comments (women naturally don't like computers like men do) have oversimplified everything.
It's possible that boys are naturally more attracted to computers, like I believe has been confirmed that they are more attracted to cars (supposedly even male chimps are as well). However, we won't know for sure without the studies.
Just for reference, here's an interesting bit of news from a few years ago that never seemed to get much notice, but which I think may have something to do with FIOS seemingly grinding to a halt: https://gigaom.com/2011/12/02/...
Basically, it seems to basically boil down to a secret non-compete agreement between the established wireless and wired internet providers to not invade each others markets with new competition.
I understand the reason for your earlier post better now, thanks. I can see it too. Saying that any group is better suited to something than any other group in this day and age is opening yourself up for political battles.
Yours may be the first post on Slashdot that I've seen arguing for political correctness over discussion of engineering realities getting an early +5 rating. Very interesting to see the replies to your post so far. If it had been the other way around (men more suitable than women for mars mission) and someone had complained about sexism, it would have been downmodded to oblivion and received a flood of "screw political correctness, accept the facts" replies.
As to the information related by the summary, if we extrapolate a little bit and think about colonization ideas while having to deal with similar engineering constraints, women would possibly win again. They would be able to taken frozen sperm with them to impregnate with after arrival, as opposed to having to transport couples.
Yeah, about that. Sorry, but there was no good or even half-bad reason for a ground invasion of Iraq; only fully bad to terrible reasons, involving intelligence errors and exaggerations (about chemical weapons) and outright lies (about nuclear weapons). Many many people paid the price, and are still paying the price (we all are, actually). So yes, "Bush lied people died" is still completely applicable, and his administration is still completely deserving of the hate and vitriol that it receives and will continue to receive, probably forever.
In my experience, gmail is fairly good (the best?) about catching actual spam, but I still get both false positives and false negatives (a lot more of the former). That makes me believe that this is actually a very difficult problem to serve. The post above from someone who was a gmail engineer reinforces this impression.
However, how much spam you receive is largely under your control. I receive very little spam even in my spam folder - usually less than 5 a day. It basically boils down to keeping tight control over who gets your actual main personal email address. That should be reserved only for friends and family, and even then, I've thought about asking them to not enter my email address on any websites if I decide to change my main address some day.
Here's how I control the commercial emails (and consequently, spam):
1. You will need a domain name to use for receiving commercial emails (i.e. any website where you enter your email address), and domain hosting or at least an email forwarding service.
2. Configure the email forwarding/filtering to forward all emails or emails following a certain pattern for that domain to your real email address. I configured the option on my webhost to forward all email (a catch all, if you will), however, I've since learned that this is not the best way, because if your domain starts getting flooded with spam your domain could get blacklisted. Supposedly the best way is to configure a filter that has a "key" string. Let's say you use your initials:
3. Register with a unique address at each website, each store, any commercial use of your email. Ex: use spammer.com.jb@mydomain.com when you register at spammer.com. Same thing if you give your email address to any entity who is not a family member or personal friend. Now all the commercial emails will get forwarded to your real mailbox because they have the
4. ???
5. Profit. I.E. as soon as you start seeing real spam (not the stuff that a lot of people incorrectly mark as spam), you will know what address they're sending to and can block them at your webhost or email forwarding service. Here are some examples of entities that I had to block because they were breached or sold my email address to spammers:
adobe.com (breach)
dropbox.com (breach)
planusa.org (unknown)
cinegearexpo.com (unknown)
equifax.com (unknown)
zappos.com (breach)
whois (open database - I use a proper domain registrar that hides my info by default now)
Bonus: another major advantage of doing this is that it makes it much much easier for you to change your main email address. You can reroute all your commercial email with one reconfiguration of your forwarder instead of having to go to each individual website to change your address.
Extra bonus: makes it super easy to setup a filter at your client or webmail to send all commercial email to a separate folder. Just filter for mydomain.com in the "to:" line.
Doing this for a few years now has really opened my eyes to how many companies and other organizations either don't give a shit about your private contact info, have shitty security, or actually sell you out for money. I was frankly surprised at some of the organizations that I had to block. Unfortunately early on in my spam-fighting days I did use my main email address on websites, and sometimes also used google's floating period or + functionality to try to individualize email addresses so I get some spam where I don't know where they obtained my address. But those are few and far between, and I've been slowly untangling myself from it to the extent that I can.
You're being a bit overly negative. This camera is nowhere near a RED competitor. This camera is going to be closer to a Blackmagic Production Camera competitor (which currently retails for $3k), at least in terms of hardware. In fact, their costs will likely be even lower than Blackmagic's, because they are concentrating on core features and openness, and will not include things like a video display, internal recording, etc.
While I agree with you that the goal of 100k Euro was a bit low (they actually ended up getting 175k Euro = 221k Dollars right now), the 350 Euro was just deposit/voucher that would allow you to buy a camera from the early batches for half the retail price. That means, you had to shell out another 2600 Euro to get the actual camera when they become available. Retail buyers will have to pay in the 5000-6000 Euro to get it.
I'm guessing that the money from this campaign will pay to build the prototype and get it ready for manufacturing, then they will probably finance the actual manufacturing run with the number of deposits/vouchers as an indicator of how much money they will actually get for selling the first batches of cameras. 175000/350 means something close to 500 deposits. 2600*500 means they're should expect to eventually get somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.3 million Euro, or about 1.65 million Dollars.
But yeah, I feel like that's a bit over-simplified and over-optimistic, especially given the delays and other issues experienced by both Digital Bolex and Blackmagic Design. They will have to demonstrate that they have things under control and are making good progress to get people to go through with the final orders. Still, I want them to succeed, and donated what small amount I could afford to help make it happen.
I don't know if my VPN uses compression, but that's a good tip. I will check that out, thanks!
BLISS is ignorance.
