|
2007/12/11-14 [Consumer/Camera] UID:48779 Activity:nil |
12/11 Is there some kind of photography major that's not photojournalism? Some friend's kid just started college (not Cal) with an undeclared major. He has an talent in shooting artistic pictures, but not the newspaper kind. Thanks for any info. \_ Sure, they have photography majors at art schools. However, what do you mean "not the newspaper kind"? \_ I guess what I means is pictures that just look good, but not related to a particular event (birthday party, protest, natural related to a particular event (wedding ceremony, protest, natural disaster, etc.) \_ Depends on the school. Did he go to a school with a heavy arts focus? \_ Seattle Pacific Univ. |
2007/12/11-14 [Uncategorized] UID:48780 Activity:nil |
12/11 Fed cuts fed funds target and discount rate by 0.25%. Policy statement negative. |
2007/12/11-14 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic] UID:48781 Activity:nil |
12/11 Russia expanding again. http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20071210/wl_csm/omerger |
2007/12/11-14 [Computer/SW/Editors] UID:48782 Activity:kinda low |
12/10 Let me ask again: How do I post on ValleyWag? -got juicy stuff to tell \_ Go to the valleywag website. Note the IM address of the editor, Owen. I think its 'imthevalleywag'. Introduce yourself. Start IM'ing him stupid shit. The end. \_ Ok I just wanted to confirm the protocol before I make a complete fool of myself. I'd like to rant on how a company that people used to die to work for has now become an unwieldy dinasaur filled with layers and layers of management and processes, is now very consensus driven, and is afraid to innovate from within. Does this sound familiar to anyone who has been in a SV company too long? -op \_ hello dans! \_ Um, hello. I'm not the pp. Slide is in SF, not SV, and we're still kicking ass. -dans \_ This sounds like the natural evolution of many organizations, not just in SV. \_ Or you could just sign up for an account and start posting to the "comments" section. |
2007/12/11-14 [Uncategorized] UID:48783 Activity:nil |
12/10 "You're going away with me all right. In a garbage bag." |
2007/12/11-14 [Transportation/Car, Transportation/Car/RoadHogs] UID:48784 Activity:high |
12/11 Are vehicle crash test results reliable? Looking at the crash test video at http://www.ConsumerReports.org/crashtest it looks like the dummies bounces around randomly. Is it reliable to conclude, based on one test run, that a certain vehicle is or is not safe during crashes? \_ I believe they do multiple test runs. Between the auto, legal, insurance and medical industries, car wrecks are a multi-billion dollar event every year. They can afford to wreck a few. Instead of looking at a single video clip and deciding for yourself based on dummies bouncing around, check out the final stats for each vehicle. Or just buy a large SUV if you just want to be sure. \_ Thanks. I already have an SUV. I'm trying to buy a small car to burn less gas. -- OP \_ If you want 'safe' you can't drive a small car. "Kept'n! I kanna break tha lawsuv physics!" \_ If mass was all there were to it, then pickup trucks would be the safest vehicles around, but they aren't. Nowadays, it is more important to have good braking sytems, full surround air bags, etc. Mass helps, but is not the only answer. Don't SUVs roll over alot and kill their occupants that way? http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/safety/articles/106748/article.html \_ There is this paragraph: "Clearly, larger cars tend to have fewer fatalities. But remember to put these figures into perspective. These figures are comparing the differences **per million registered vehicles**." What is it saying? I don't get it. What does it mean by putting the figures into perspective? I don't get it. \_ I think they mean that the most important piece of safety equipment is an alert, capable driver. The smallest car, driven by a skillful driver is safer than a huge SUV driven by an idiot. |
2007/12/11-14 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux, Computer/SW/WWW/Server] UID:48785 Activity:nil |
12/11 Apache/Linux question: I've got apache 2.0.52 on an idle redhat box (2.6.9-55 kernel). Every so often one to four apache procs will run the cpu at 100% for any where from 15 to 90 mins, then drop back to normal. USR and SYS time both increase to levels that the production boxes don't reach when serving traffic at noon. I've checked apache and linux kernel versions, several /etc files, httpd.conf vs. boxes that don't do this. Nothing interesting shows in the logs. This is supposed to be a clone of other boxes that don't do this. Reinstalling from scratch is not an option for various reasons. Any ideas? thanks. \_ strace them to see what the hell they are doing. \_ Perhaps you have been hacked? |
2007/12/11-14 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:48786 Activity:moderate |
12/11 Ladies and Gentleman, the next President of the United States! "I think we ought to be out there talking about ways to reduce energy consumption and waste. And we ought to declare that we will be free of energy consumption in this country within a decade, bold as that is." --Mike Huckabee on CBS Evening News \_ But can he clear brush and would I feel comfortable having a beer with him a bar? I agree this statement is an impressive qualification ... \_ I think that we should colonize alpha centauri within a decade, but it still has a 0% chance of happening. \_ Huckabee is Dan Quayle II. \_ Except DQ was a good person even if a little slow at times. \_ "Don't Mormons believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?" |
2007/12/11-14 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:48787 Activity:nil |
*/* Motd restored. Please don't overwrite a new motd with your version from 4 hours earlier. |