|
|
Near ten years as a software developer with no major medical bills (crossing fingers it continues). Don't remember the exact amount it saves me each paycheck but I think by this point I've covered the high deductible.
That depends on what you did with the money you saved.
Did you put it in the bank (or under your mattress) so that you'll be able to pay the deductible in the unfortunate event you would need it?
Or did you spend it?
Agreed. I pay for both every year!
And now suddenly free Flickr users get - what was it? - 100 terabytes free, removing much of the draw of Flickr Pro (which isn't even sold any more, though you can now buy an "Ad Free" level).
I had also paid for Flickr but this recent change is making me reconsider. (In particular, wondering how long Flickr will still be around.)
The real problem is that kids aren't given the suggestion to look at trades these days, they got the same spiel that we were getting in the 80's and 90's, that going into technology is the way to go. But everyone needs someone to lay and fit pipe, fix their car, and so on.
Unfortunately, to fix someone's car these days, you need to get into technology as well
It used to be that you could fix a car or a television set if you were a reasonable tech.
But now it's all electronic and you basically swap the entire component (logic board, control device, what have you) - and you essentially need the diagnostic equipment from the original manufacturer to plug into the on-board circuit to read out the fault codes.
I beg of you to please strip anything out of Firefox that is not part to the web browsing experience and put it back in as a plugin if you have to. Just focus on being a web browser and having the best plug in interface possible.
The funny thing is, wasn't that what Firefox (or Phoenix, back then) originally set out to do? Strip anything out of the Mozilla browser suite (now Seamonkey, I think?) that is not part of the web browsing experience and allow people to put it back in as a plugin if they want to?
Funny that it turns "f" into "tlh". I would have expected "f" to become "ng" instead and for "tlh" to arise from "x" (the "xifan hol" encoding). Ah well.
Fiat is by definition not real money and instead an abstract controlled (inflated) by the politicians
Can any money be "real"? Isn't money by definition an abstraction that we use because we don't want to keep swapping deer hides for horseshoes?
Another thing that bothers me (a lot) is from people who know absolutely nothing about my professional capability endorsing my professional capability...
I think that's because LinkedIn pushes suggested endorsements into your face when you visit the site, so lots of people probably just click on them "yes, yes, whatever" simply to make them go away.
This is precisely why I want scientists naming planets according to an accepted method of taxonomy. Koozebane? Seriously? Because muppets? I like the muppets as much as the next man but come on - a heavenly object stuck with a ridiculous name like that forever just because some guy thought it would be funny? Ugh no.
Then you had better not look at the names of asteroids... some of them are pretty whimsical. "19383 Rolling Stones" is just an example.
Not to ruin the joke or anything, but if the second cousins are twice removed then they're typically off by a couple generations. The age discrepancy would be awkward enough.
Not necessarily. I'm sure you've heard of uncles who are younger than their nephews (Mary has her son Bob at 16, Mary's parents get another son Charles 17 years after Mary was born, Charles is Bob's uncle despite being a year younger).
Once you're as far away as "second cousin", the "twice removed" need not imply "a lot younger" -- it all depends how long the generations tended to be in the two branches of the family.
Java makes an excellent* desktop application.
* Excellent is defined here as "slow, ugly and memory hungry."
Reminds me of this joke:
"Knock, knock"
"Who's there?"
...
...
...
...
"Java."
1. Start with machine translation - it's faster to correct than start from scratch and their equivalent of OCR.
Not always, in my experience - the bad translation may trap you into not changing it too much, with the result that you end up with sub-optimal results. Like with some code, it's often better to throw it away entirely and start from scratch rather than trying to polish a machine translation.
On the other hand, if the goal is merely to produce "something that's comprehensible", I suppose it will work.
I know you are trying to be funny, but searching for ``latex images'' on google the first page is all tutorials on how to insert an image into a Latex document. The third link was a link to a google image search wich did have the kind of thing you are implying. still 9/10 relevant results is not bad.
It was actually based on a true experience of mine; however, that was several years old and both the state of Google's index as well as its algorithms have surely changed a lot since then.
I'm glad to hear that results are better now.
(I wonder whether the "search bubble" is partly responsible -- people who tend to search for "knuth" and "programming" might get different results for "latex images" than those who tend to search for "bdsm" and "pvc".)
Also, if you're having problems embedding images in LaTeX, an Internet search for "latex images" will often not do what you are hoping for...
If things don't improve, the next generation of kids have no idea that the sky is supposed to be blue.
Here in northern Germany, the default colour of the sky is white. Not because of pollution (light or otherwise) but because of these things we call "clouds".
It's fairly rare that a day is not 100% overcast. (Or at least it seems like that to me.)
Withing the old Google labs was a search called Google Sets. It was rarely used, but when you needed that capability it was the only place on the net you could do it. Why it or "labs" had to go away I don't understand.
For the uninitiated, Sets allowed to you enter 2 or 3 things of some type and it would return a list (15) of other things of that type. The example they used was to enter the titles of a few Tom Cruise movies and it would return a bunch more. In real world usage you could use it to identify alternative makers of various products, or alternatives to any number of things (programming languages for example) or even things where you don't know how the terminology that describes how they are related.
The functionality of Google Sets is still there as a part of Google Drive spreadsheets: enter some terms underneath each other in a column, select the cells, then ctrl-click the little square in the bottom right-hand corner and drag it downwards to however many cells you want to fill with Sets suggestions.
All generalizations are false, including this one. -- Mark Twain