Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Not at all (Score 2) 191

by Zargg (#47743721) Attached to: Slashdot Asks: How Prepared Are You For an Earthquake?

In Japan we had earthquake drills of the housing community one time per year, and one time per year in the company.

Just curious, do companies in the US do this?
In Belgium we have a yearly firedrill, because that will be the most likely disaster. So do US companies in earthquake country have drills or do companies in "Tornado Alley train for that?

My company in Los Angeles seems woefully under-prepared for earthquakes. We have an annual fire drill, but when I asked about earthquake drills, the response was basically "get under the desk while it's shaking, then we'll wing it and someone will announce evacuation if needed."

I think the general attitude is that new building codes will handle most earthquakes, and if the big one hits then everyone is screwed anyway. For reference my office is only 4 stories though, curious what other companies do.

Comment: Re:How would you like it? (Score 1) 322

by Zargg (#46710915) Attached to: LA Police Officers Suspected of Tampering With Their Monitoring Systems

I could see the protection in having my "official interactions" recorded, and I can get behind that in theory too, but I'd still hesitate to give a complete thumbs up to the "you have to wear a wire continuously" level of intrusion. It really seems excessive. Perhaps if there were assurances that legal barriers existed on who/how the data could be accessed then it would be a lot more palatable.

If a cop has a uniform on (wired up) and is driving around in a cruiser interacting with the public, then every interaction is an "official interaction". My small talk at work can get me in trouble if I say the wrong things, why would an officers small talk while on the job be protected?

Comment: Re:Who'll spit on my burger?! (Score 4, Interesting) 870

by Zargg (#46580523) Attached to: Job Automation and the Minimum Wage Debate

As for self-checkout, most places I saw experiment with those in the past two years (grocery stores and Costco) has ripped them out and gone back to using human cashiers. The reasons? Fraud/theft and speed (trained cashiers are faster, who would have thought?). Walmart and big box home improvement stores are the outliers still offering self-checkout in my area.

That's not automation though. Self checkout is just making the customer do the cashiers job for free before realizing that customers suck at doing these things correctly because it's not their job.

Comment: Soundproofed my case! (Score 1) 371

by Zargg (#46117359) Attached to: How loud is your primary computer?

Surprised I haven't seen more of this here: http://www.xoxide.com/acoustip...

Between that stuff and the Noctua super quiet fans and humongous CPU heatsink, I don't think I ever hear my desktop even when gaming all day, but I can easily hear when the server drives spin up in the closet...makes the whole damn cabinet vibrate.

Comment: Re:It isn't any different elsewhere (Score 1) 299

by Zargg (#45149557) Attached to: Silicon Valley Stays Quiet As Washington Implodes

Your reply seems obtuse.

I am playing a little bit of devil's advocate so I am purposefully being a little obtuse hehe, but I do think that this is a perfect example of a process that doesn't need to be applied anymore, at least in it's current form. Winning elections without winning popular vote just doesn't make sense in my mind. I guess I am generally leaning more toward Democracy than Democratic Republic...

Right now the 'battleground' states contain a mix of both urban and rural concerns. This enfranchises a cross section of the American electorate, albeit arbitrarily.If the electoral college were eliminated, there would no longer be any rural 'battleground' areas since winning the densest population centers would be the only key to victory, effectively disenfranchising the interests of huge geographic areas across the country. An artificial cross section of American society is better than giving a voice solely based on population/density.

But that isn't why they are battleground states. They are just battleground states because half the state disagrees with the other half, it's not necessarily urban vs rural, so we are arbitrarily setting our electorate cross section to be roughly half democrat half republican, even though the general population is not. And yes, winning more votes from citizens should be the only key to victory, not winning states based on winner take all electoral college rules. I don't see why population, density, or who your neighbors vote for should affect your voting power.

This is something that the founders were mindful of, which is why we have a Senate. The electoral college performs a somewhat similar function.

I do see the need for this balance in the Senate for legislation and daily representation in D.C., but not for Presidential elections. Voting once every 4 years for the leader of your country should be required of every citizen by law IMO.

Until a better way can be found to mitigate the consequences of tipping this balance, it must necessarily be another can kicked down the road. As political cans go, it's a lot more harmless than the debt.

Yup, one of the many things to add to the list...how sad :(

Comment: Re:It isn't any different elsewhere (Score 1) 299

by Zargg (#45137407) Attached to: Silicon Valley Stays Quiet As Washington Implodes

I don't see the problem you are describing. Currently, people in hard blue or red states are disenfranchised and have no voice because candidates generally focus on campaigning in the battleground states, and their vote does nothing if their state is guaranteed to go to who they aren't voting for. If there were no electoral college and it was all done by popular vote, that would even out the voting power by taking it away from battleground states and putting it equally into the hands of all US citizens. Campaigning in dense metro areas would just be the most efficient way of connecting to voters, why is that a bad thing?

Comment: Re:Weasel words FTFY (Score 1) 526

by Zargg (#44714049) Attached to: Obama Admin Says It Won't Fight Looser Marijuana Laws, With Conditions

Wow...

Road Rage caused by others being under THC influence will increase.

Seriously? You've never been around a high person have you?

addictive behavior will cause the exact same number of families to suffer and to be torn apart

Most studies say it is about as addictive as caffeine...most of it is psychological even, not physical.

bankruptcies due to marijuana consumption will go up while bankruptcies due to alcohol consumption will go down by the same number.

I'm just going to LOL at this one!

Advertising is the rattling of a stick inside a swill bucket. -- George Orwell

Working...