Yeah I was expecting some kind of halfway-to-quantum paradigm. As impressive as the speed claims are, it seems to be just logic as usual.
Psst, dude. Wanna buy some sterno ovens, dehydrated meat, and some canned mashed potato? We deliver right to your doomsday bunker!
5GHz WiFi should *never* have been called 5G by anyone
But it was, and not because of marketing, just because it was convenient.
The people writing mobile wifi standards should never have used "G" in the first place. It's a bullshit marketing name no matter which camp uses it.
It stands for "Generation" without even telling you what its a generation of. It's a particularly retarded form of devolutionary e-bonics.
5G for mobile phone data connections will win this naming war.
That we can agree on. They like to spend lots of money on advertisements, and it will work, because nobody cares that much about defending it for 5GHz. Not even me, really.
It was one obvious example.
Other examples are the people who payed FICA all their life and are now collecting. The people who payed UI and are collecting. These people are counted in that 70% figure, even though they are just withdrawing from a (mandatory to participate) insurance program that they were formerly funding.
Lots of claims in this thread as to "plenty of statistics" about how many freeloaders there are. No actual statistics provided. Tell you something?
Politicians and their buds just want to steal the cash retirees put into the system.
God forbid you Google it
God forbid you google "5G wireless" and not know the difference between the cellular definition of 5G and WiFi 5GHz, often referred to as 5G.
Saw that namespace collision coming a mile away. It's going to be one of those things that causes confusion with PHBs for the next decade. They should have added another letter or something e.g. 5GX.
Nobody needs to write malware when you're accepting any cert from any server. You can do it all server side.
True, leaving the device powered off permanently in its shrinkwrap on a store shelf does make it rather secure.
If you come off a diet then it's not really the diet's fault, is it?
Depends on the physiological affects of the diet on your mental/CNS health, and consequent psychological conditions.
Blame is generally an unproductive endeavor when messing with anything that alters metabolism.
processing often removes roughage which helps the digestive tract.
Or hurts it, if you're one of the one in ten people with irritable bowel syndrome.
Yeah, on 1200 you'd be bedridden in no time. 1900/male is actually a bit low, too... to retain current body weight at the BMR one would have to rest all day and couldn't do anything. Just to sit in a chair and browse facebook you need quite more than that.
Especially since it's actually one of the only things that makes PHP (barely) readable.
It's almost a guarantee that some things that have been stamped "safe" by scientific studies are in fact not safe for a small subpopulation which expresses an unusual gene or two, or share some other factor in common. Ferreting out correlations like that will take a lot more research than we are doing, and there will always be subpopulations too small for tests to ever be economical. In the meantime if careful explanation by a guy in a convincingly white coat has the opposite effect than desired, just imagine how effective people flaming the anti-vax-fence-sitters on internet forums must be
Rote memorization isn't all bad. There are times I'm glad I know what 6 x 7 is without having to sidetrack into a mental heuristic.
Been saying it for a while: many, many people have lost any and all trust in establishmentarianism, even when some of them simultaneously cling to strange authoritative belief systems, and as the "Information Age" progresses this is extending to a fundamental mistrust of well presented information. Mainly because liars are some of the best presenters out there.
Every single ethics violation by established corporations, professionals, professional organizations, media, and other would-be pillars of the community has long lasting and far reaching effects, damaging our aggregate level of trust in those who actually deserve to be trusted. The damage is probably partially offset by trusting even fewer of those who don't deserve it, but overall my instinct is it is corrosive since trust plays such an important role in all things economic and communal.
We had two people drop CS at our school because it was hard and get into a nearby school's engineering program.
That school must have had a pretty weak definition of the word "engineering."
Someone might as well say "While engineers can be said to have enough intelligence to make things after they've been taught enough theory, cleary only theoreticians are truly intelligent - otherwise the engineers wouldn't need them..."
Someone might, but while my statement recognizes that there are qualitative vectors to "intelligence" this one seems not to.