metalslug

The irony is not lost on me. Possibly of equal irony is that some 16 years later we still have these identity documents, and issue more of them than ever before because now every legal citizen is entitled to have one. It protects many of our citizens from the thousands of illegal immigrants crossing the borders from other parts of Africa to compete for jobs and state resources. "Papers please" can still be useful when it starts to serve one's own interests. Evidently even our new government agrees. Arbitrary requests by authorities is unconstitutional here too. I never stated anything to the contrary.

Surely there are times when "Papers please" is appropriate or even necessary ? In my country (and probably several others) we've had national identity documents for as long as I've been alive. We use them for banking transactions at a teller, proof of age at certain locations and events, as a precursor to applications for other forms of identity (passport, driver's licence,...) and pretty much any kind of legal contract. In my opinion, they solve more problems than they create. We have never been required to carry them on our person for random inspection by any authority, despite having an illegal immigration problem that is arguably worse than the U.S. Of course, I'm not in the U.S, so you may say "apples and oranges", but I think its premature to assume this new idea will lead to any significant level of totalitarianism.

With respect to the genius of your system, I'm pretty sure your assembly line is programmed to identify a limited number of inventory parts corresponding to very exact dimensions and exclude or reject those it cannot identify. Could I drop a $10 bill, a broken key or even a valid inventory part scaled to half the correct size onto your assembly line and receive a voice or display telling me exactly what it is ? This was more my direction regarding the superiority of (adult) humans in object recognition. The military is already a socialist system. Unemployment doesn't seem to be a problem there. ...unless the military is already retrenching pilots? Are they? An exclusively automated pilot would surely be uncommon on any aircraft that carries personnel. The reasons for having human pilots are at least partly ethical too; value of human life vs. the reliability of A.I. and I have my doubts that will change anytime soon. Exactly right. I could swap the ketchup and mustard bottles, swap the onion tray and the cheese tray, replace the meat with wooden discs of similar dimensions. Our burger flipping droid would not independently resolve these dilemmas as easily as the human before it.

Enough technology ? Perhaps yes, but I think we're still a few decades away from "enough". One of the bigger shortcomings of robots and artificial intelligence is object recognition and, in some cases, cost. A human can almost instantly recognise a metal doorkey. If the key were cut in half to form 2 pieces, a human would not take long to identify the change. A computer would require complex measurement scanning to identify a whole key and would probably never correctly identify a broken one. This example makes humans superior for quite a while still in almost all the occupations that we see around us every day. "Burger flipping" is the classic menial job, and yet how long until we trust a robot to make us a burger with the correct garnish options such as "hold the onion"? How long until a robot like that costs less than minimum wage to produce and maintain? Aviation autopilot systems are very advanced, and yet human pilots still occupy the cockpit and collect a paycheck even if they never touch the controls for the entire flight. Automated systems can fail, power can be interrupted. Most will require backup and maintenance. The human factor will be necessary for quite a while still.

"We are the Borg. Negotiation is irrelevant..."

I can explain so much more than you can understand. It's obvious to everyone else here where the failure lies. Your comments in this forum are a disservice to the very groups and ideals that you claim to support.

Are you being deliberately obtuse ? ...or did you not understand my previous post ? Most candidates of color were inadequate compared to their claimed qualifications and experience, as submitted in their resumes. Half of these interviews were conducted by a black manager, a good colleague of mine, and yielded the same trend. I deliberately withheld that fact in my previous post just to see how long it would take you to jump to the conclusion that a "white vs black" interview is automatically biased.

Does it matter ? Would the questions sound any different when spoken by people of different ethnicity ? Is it a voice or accent attribute that concerns you ? Dude, your own brand of racism is showing.

Our (South African) company's experience of affirmative action, which is still a new and fashionable thing here, has seen the term "most qualified" take an interesting spin; When interviewing potential candidates for a skilled position, many black applicants submit outstanding resume's, in some cases better than their white counterparts. What is disappointing, however, is that the expected practical evidence of these credentials is seldom present during the interview. When candidates are asked random 'spot' questions regarding certifications, skills and knowledge as claimed in their resume's, they very often answer incorrectly or simply don't understand the questions. Our conclusions from this is that the candidate has either submitted a fraudulent resume, or obtained the qualifications illicitly, or has a poor memory of skills learned, neither of which make them the best candidate for the position, even if the paperwork presents itself as "most qualified".

Jack and Jill went up the hill They each had a penny and a quarter Jill came down with half a crown Do you think they went for water ? (Old english currency: 5 pennies = 1 crown)

I was curious about that too. How much snow does the Vancouver area get anyway? I have never been there before but I was told that being near a warm(ish) ocean current significantly reduces the annual snowfall there.

No, admittedly I have not. I avoided Vista due to poor reviews and user dissatisfaction, and so never really knew all its features. If this feature is good enough for everyday practical use, or has been improved in Windows 7, then that's great! As per my previous post I believe that this is an important direction for Microsoft to be taking.

As big as Microsoft is, they will always be spread too thinly to produce the absolute best in every area. As a simple example; SQL Server is a widely used Microsoft database product, but is inferior to Oracle in almost every way. IMO, this is because Oracle have dedicated their entire business focus on database software for years, whereas for MS it was just another product line of many. As mentioned in the article, MS Windows and Office still rule their markets. I believe Microsoft's competitors use this fact to focus on competing in other products that MS do not yet have a monopoly on, with the hope that this dedicated focus will produce superior products which will grab the market in a similar way that Oracle has done with databases. Microsoft said years ago that they wanted to bring the home computer to the masses. Unfortunately, "the masses" consist of many computer illiterate people; children, the elderly, the blind, the handicapped and the intellectually challenged. These are potential users who currently believe that computers and tablets are only for business execs and young yuppies because they are just too complicated to learn and use. I believe that Microsoft's angle in the market should be to "dumb down" their software even further to cater for this largely untapped market. Voice recognition software and text-to-speech should be perfected and expanded in Windows. My 95 year old grandmother is going blind and currently relies on me to send email to her friends and read the replies. What a treat it would be for us both for her to switch on a PC and "talk" to it: "Email .. Outbox... Dear Gwen, how u doing... Send" or "Email .. Inbox .. Read all new mail ..." etc.

...

Dude, were you sober when you typed this ? I just need to be sure that you intended this to be a serious thread ? ...

AWG ? again ? Dude....

I'm not in favor of whale hunting, but I do believe the Japanese version of this incident. The smaller boat positioned itself to be rammed, either deliberately or accidentally. AFAIK, groups like these have been 'stalking' whaling boats for years. Is it an effective tactic ? Has there been evidence to suggest that fewer whales were killed as a result of this type of 'sea stalking' ? Anyone perhaps know ?

Dexter the Pekingese...

I send an Allmark card...

Sex, as with most other parts of a relationship, should involve a little compromise, which means it might not always be about what you like. For guys to keep in mind is that many really good women are like Italian sports cars, there are some things that you just should not do when 'driving' them. Accept that, or drive something less exotic. It depends on what you're willing to compromise on, I guess. Partners can be 'bad' in bed for different reasons. The only dealbreakers for me (at the moment) are (1) less than once a week (2) unattractive/obese partner. I've been happy for many years with a partner who will not do many things, but that definitely does not mean that Rosy Palm is a better option. To me, she is smokin' hot and then some. That, for me, has made all the difference.

"Invest yourself" ? It's a date, it's not marriage. I think it's quite possible to like, and to get to know, two or more people at the same time, up until you decide which one you like the most. The early stages of dating is not that much different than social engagements with platonic friends. You're still learning about each other from each encounter until you know enough to mutually agree to take it to the next level, and only then would it become a conflict of interest. I think the question really depends on what level the relationships are at, at the time of dating.

Peanut butter typically does not support bacteria and/or mold growth because of its low moisture content (less than 1%) and high oil content. However, the oils can become rancid over time. When peanut butter become rancid, it develops an odd, oily flavor and odor. There are several factors that contribute to the time it takes for peanut butter to become rancid (i.e temperature, additives, oxygen availability). Basically, if it still tastes and smells okay, its probably still safe to consume, but most peanut butters start to turn rancid after 9 to 12 months under normal conditions. Refrigeration does help in slowing the rate of rancidity.

It's a tricky business if you're only getting into it now, because a lot is dependent on experience. My wife has been co-owner of an antique business for 15 years, which includes some artworks. Spotting an original as compared to a reproduction, estimating the age and fair value of an item, etc. is not something one can cover in a paragraph on a forum. A client's knowledge of art is often just as important as your knowledge of art. Many buyers will pay hundreds of dollars (or more) for something that they really want on their wall, regardless of the artist or the age of the work. Conversely, an art 'masterpiece' by a renowned artist can stand idle in a gallery for years, because clients do not recognise it's investment value or simply won't pay a fortune for something 'ugly' regardless of it's supposed market value. Attend a few art auctions and you will see this trend demonstrated over and over. Attending art auctions (but don't buy anything yet!) is probably the best way to get a feel for art retail; to see what sells and what doesn't, to get ideas on pricing, availability, origins, etc. It's also a place to meet both buyers and sellers of art, to establish contacts. Another option is to apprentice yourself to a successful dealer for a few months until you are confident. I must quickly add that my wife doesn't make even half as much money as most doctors do. It's an unpredictable business, there is no guaranteed supply and no guaranteed demand. Some months are good and some months are really bad. If you're serious about this career move then you should consult one of your colleagues regarding your mental health.

If that is the limit of the reasoning behind dress codes in U.S. schools, then I accept your argument and I will support this student's position. However, if a dress code is also an extension of a school's image, then that needs to be considered. If you look at the yearbooks of the more 'prestigious' schools and universities from around the world, you are unlikely to find crossdresser portraits. Some dress codes can be compared to etiquette. Poor etiquette is everyone's legal right, protected by the constitution, but it usually won't do well for the reputation of the institution that allows poor etiquette by individuals. It is therefore understandable that schools can feel uncomfortable regarding this student's wishes.

"You die first, get it? Your friends might get me in a rush, but not before I make your head into a canoe. You understand me?"