Cowicide

>I remember just taking the inevitability of nuclear war almost as a given.

It was damn closer than most people realize. That nutball Reagan nearly killed all of us:

http://www.alternet.org/story/149821/how_reagan_brought_the_...

And, we're not out of the woods yet.

If we end up with another madman Republican perhaps like McCain, we'll probably get sent over the edge with Russia since we already know that Putin is also a nut.

Not to mention Russia was perhaps (arguably) on its way to launching nukes on a false alarm if it wasn't for one guy who didn't follow orders:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov#The_incident

Maybe if he hadn't disobeyed orders someone else would've stopped the launch, maybe not. But, considering the incredible stakes, I think it was all just a bit too close for comfort either way.

Moral of the story? Live every day like it's your last day on Earth, because someday it'll be true.

Oh, geez, I love VICE as well but hadn't seen that kid video before and now I really wish I hadn't. I hope VICE takes it down. Incredibly cringe worthy and not worthy of VICE. Or, at least, I wouldn't have thought it was worthy of VICE before... :(

Ah, such a shame there nothing for Mac right now, I'm always looking for a faster remote that'll work with challenging bandwidth on the road.

For those of you in this thread that are dismayed that some of us don't enjoy being tracked, I highly recommend a short, entertaining documentary that's currently available on Netflix, iTunes, etc. called:

Terms and Conditions May Apply

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/terms_and_conditions_may_app...

http://tacma.net/

Actually, I think even some privacy-conscious folks might learn a thing or two from it as well. I know I did. :)

I wonder if these plastic containers contribute to the cancer epidemic we have?

Apparently cancer currently strikes 1 in 2 men and 1 in 3 women.

There's no other energy choice aside from coal and nuclear? Bummer. Edit: Then again, if this is a sim of an 80's game or something, I guess it makes sense.

Thanks!

Thank you, I'll check it out!

Would like to see this for coffee shops.

This really irks me, where's the best place for us to complain to Mozilla about this?

According to the info at MacUpdate, it's OS X 10.7 or later.

http://www.macupdate.com/app/mac/41147/spectacle

64 bit

No worries, it wasn't a complaint as much as a PSA for the fairly large percentage that still uses Snow Leopard.

> That is like complaining that something doesn't run on Windows 2000.

Ha,I wouldn't go that far. Macs running Snow Leopard still account for around a whopping 25 percent of active Macs.

http://blogs.computerworld.com/mac-os-x/23622/why-mac-users-...

All my Macs are capable of running Mavericks, but one of my MacBook Pros that I use most often still runs Snow Leopard (most of the time) because its version of Exposé is superior to Mission Control and Quick Look (aside from URLS) has vastly superior compatibility with nearly all video codecs I throw at it with Perian running in the background. Apple killed that for newer OS versions and no one has made a workaround yet.

I've also found that Apple decided to degrade things like Safari in the Mavericks update as well. For example, Safari lost it's separate window download manager which is I use very often to monitor download speeds, drag and drop files, urls to, etc. that doesn't work at all or isn't practical with Apple's downgrade. And, Safari 5.1.10 and Snow Leopard is very fast. I see very little difference and even some advantages to 10.6.8 in speed here and there to this day compared to Mavs 10.9.3.

Apple also got downgraded the Activity Window in the versions of Safari that run on Mavericks as well which I use all the time to easily root out video downloads and snag them for offline usage that many of the video download extensions and apps miss.

But the overall main thing I can't stand is the horrible downgrade of Quick Look. I use Quick Look as much as I breathe and for Apple to eliminate its compatibility with so many codecs in one broad swoop makes the advantages of Mavericks not worth it for me. If someone can get Maverick's Quick Look fixed to work with Quick Look extensions and have it be on par with Snow Leopard, I'm more apt to move away from SL.

Theres other things I can do in Snow Leopard that others simply cannot do in Mavericks as well, but I covered some of the main points. And, yes, I take extra steps to secure my machine since there are security issues using older versions of apps and OS.

I'm really getting tired of writers who keep casually equating those who value their own privacy to those who are suffering from paranoia. It implies that people are mentally unstable just for wanting privacy.

Even in jest, it's insulting and increasingly out of touch in our post-Snowden world to keep calling privacy-minded people paranoid and I wish people would knock it off.

FYI, crashes without fully opening on Mac 10.6.8 Snow Leopard.

The privacy policy says that personal information, such as my name or e-mail address, is private and confidential. I assume that personal information would include the contents of my emails. However, with email privacy policies I'd rather not rely on assumptions and see it spelled out more specifically.

Weird, the old MacBook Pro with Snow Leopard I'm using with old Safari 5.1.x didn't even rev up the fans or anything. Which OS version and browser are you using?

Thank you for the head's up, reneherse!

As most everyone here knows...

With a enough downvotes at HN, one's posts can be invisible to some depending upon their settings. Also, without enough upvotes one cannot downvote others. So, if one has enough sock accounts with upvotes, one can use those powerful accounts to downvote others they don't agree with into oblivion. People who don't use sockpuppets are at the mercy of those who do.

This situation creates a lot of incentive to create accounts where one censors their opinions, attaches to the "groupthink" in threads with sockpuppet accounts and troll for upvotes so one can can acquire many empowered accounts with the power to exact revenge and censorship on others.

Instead of working to censor for rudeness, it works to get others to align with groupthink in hopes that one can get into a positive upvote territory and eventually be able to downvote others and defend themselves from attacks by upvoting themselves with socks.

I wonder how many sockpuppet accounts are commenting and competing here on HN to simply be able to acquire power against one another? How many comments are simply disengenous trolling for upvotes?

It would be really enlightening if HN decided to stop making downvotes and upvotes anonymous where we could all see the patterns and make the connections between grassroots downvotes/upvotes and systematic downvotes/upvotes from multiple sockpuppets.

I'd love to see that.

Thank you for your post here, jal. I hope many take heed, I know I am.

There's also this as well:

Call FCC - *please be courteous

1. Dial 888-225-5322

2. push 1, 4, 0

3. a person will answer.

4. they will ask for your name and address. you can just give them a zip code if you want.

5. "I'm calling to ask the FCC to reclassify Internet Service Providers as Title Two Common Carriers."

6. They'll ask if there is anything else you would like to add.

7. "No, Thank you for your time."

8. hang up.

Agreed, plus those that say that fish oil is completely useless should take a hard look at what the prestigious Mayo Clinic has to say about it:

http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/omega-3-fatty-ac...

I've been downvoted into oblivion in this thread, so the forum system might hide this post from you. But, I was just going to chime in that I agree with you.

Also, I think more people need to look at what the prestigious Mayo clinic has to say about the positive benefits of fish oil as well:

http://www.mayoclinic.org/drugs-supplements/omega-3-fatty-ac...

Ok, but how does that diminish my point?

Are the newer studies factoring in perhaps that their diets may have changed since the older studies? Do they eat less fish, etc. nowadays and eat more junk food? Consume more alcohol? Other drugs? More sedentary? If that's the case, the new study is deeply flawed.

Ironically, his futuristic work will be incredibly influential far into the future. Terrible news.

RIP H.R. Giger

https://imgur.com/gallery/SsFg0Hu/

Eating less and exercising more has worked pretty well for me, but that's not for everyone. I've also learned to see which foods give me more, sustained energy over time and which ones don't or even drain me. But, once again, I doubt that will work for everyone.

I'm also very skeptical of a lot of studies that discount things that are clearly working for me. For example, a lot of studies that discount fish oil tend to not take an enteric coating and proper absorption into account. Actually, after many years, I'm still waiting for those studies. In the meantime, I've seen the positive effects myself and will continue to use enteric coated fish oil as a supplement.

I've also watched countless friends, family and acquaintances try the Atkins diet only to yo-yo and see later problems develop. So, I'm not going to consume buckets of lard to lose weight. But, if the Atkins thing works for you, more power to you!

My conclusion is what works for me may or may not work for anyone else and vice versa. But, that said, I still look at some studies over time and try to glean some slight insight into what works and doesn't work for others and experiment here and there.

I guess this gets to the crux of the problem with these sort of things where people make websites based on templates and WYSIWYG tools without much (or any) coding knowledge.

If these codeless "devs" get hired by someone to make their website and the customer wants certain things to work, the non-coding "developer" will be at the whim of the capabilities of the WYSIWYG tool they use, not their own coding capabilities.

I suppose as long as the codeless "dev" is upfront with their clients that they don't know code and are upfront that they have a limited offering, it's ethical. As long as the client knows that certain customizations may or may not be available to them and it also reflects the cost of the "development".

Don't get me wrong, I think WYSIWYG apps are great in principle, but in practice I think it's pretty limited on where they should be applied.

That was some nice ass kissing. Megalomaniacs love it when people do that.

Feinstein... Yet another corporatist appeasing political hack that has as much self-awareness as she does ethics.

Megalomaniacs are also sociopaths. Who knew?