Accountability? I paid my $200 even after I knew it crashed. Fortunately is crashes infrequently enough that I can get some games played in between reboots.
If you want to hold them accountable, don't give them another $200. And don't scream monopoly, because its the game publishers choosing to release only to windows. Hold them accountable, and don't buy their games either.
Of course they are keeping this on file. And if he goes on to shoot someone next year, people will sue the city for not doing something when they had such clear evidence of mischief right in front of them.
Lots of programming and design is trivial, but companies outsource for these ideas all the time. Even when it can be reproduced easily enough in house, a lot of companies will go out of their way to obtain the "expert" in the field.
It could also be argued they are purchasing the goodwill of "one click shopping" which I believe Amazon has tried to trademark as well.
I'm not sure satellite changes would make much difference to planes since those numbers would be so obviiously wrong when compared to on board equipment, and equipment on the ground.
Now shipping could be seriously endangered. Imagine reaching land a couple miles early..perhaps before you are even looking for navigation lights.
While everything you say rings true enough, I think the purpose of the original question sent in would have been better served if they had created a different scenario that is a bit more realistic.
Imagine if the company or government decided to spend enough money on a fresh development program where they buy and island, drop scientists off there, and deliver an unlimited supply of raw materials. The scientists would also be provided with whatever manufacturing capability they could design. They would still have access to theoretical knowledge, but no blueprints.
The major difference here is that he is legally required to attend school. Failure to go to school (in some states) can actually send his parents to jail. Just because he is legally required to attend school doesn't give that same school the right to judge his behviour outside of school hours.
Your argument about the page being downloadable is also wrong. Unless he downloaded it to the school, he hasn't done anything wrong. If the mere fact that is *could* be downloaded to the school is reason enough to take action against him, then you need to go arrest all those people whose websites with porn and violence could be downloaded by a student.
His parody was quite clearly speech, outside the hours and property of school.
Apple has grasped perfectly the concept with which "open source" is promoted, which is "show users the source and they will help you fix bugs". What Apple has not grasped--or has dismissed--is the spirit of free software, which is that we form a community to cooperate on the commons of software.
I don't know about everyone else, but when comparing the differences between free and proprietary software I've become fairly pragmatic. I'm definitely don't feel like belonging to a community. I buy the tools that can't be taken away (free software) and pay the price of complying with the respective licenses. The price of some licenses makes certain company's software too expensive.
Speaking of tools that can never be taken away, does anyone have a copy of cycle-buffer.el by Vladmir somebody? I've been looking for months...
they're comprised of people too stupid to avoid jury detail.
My normal tactic is to ignore the card sent to me. Unless its sent registered mail, I don't have to admit seeing it. But last September, my wife sent it in. This caused me to miss 3 days of work (of course I was compensated $18.) We had a discussion about how someone working on deadline doesn't really enjoy days of not going to work.
Red light will tend to make skin look smoother. I assume this is because the redness of skin is uneven. This can be seen put to good use at your nearest, uh, gentleman's club. Try it out.
I just had a house built in Dallas, Tx and couldn't get a builder not to put in a fireplace. They were quite concerned about being able to sell the house if I should back out of the deal. Add to that the fact they all want to put the fireplace in the living room right where any sane person would put the tv. I kept saying to myself, "We're in Texas, who uses a fireplace?"
Six months later I managed to get a fireplace in the corner out of the way of the tv, but that was the best I could do (without paying extra).
The numbers I most often see go something along these lines: If a company sells $10million a day, and it gets knocked offline for 6 hours they will say they lost $2.5million. Of course this doesn't take into account shifting revenue to that time beyond the actual outage. This is more applicable to a DDOS attack, but companies seem like to latch onto big numbers using simple math.
The real cost for a single instance of a virus is dealt with mostly costs in overtime for personnel while things are restored, inspected, and placed back into service.
The real cost overall is having to buy the software to protect against virii, and hiring the people that do nothing but guard the network. These costs don't contribute to the bottom, they merely protect it. This is the real cost of a good virus, it just usually isn't paid until someone catches something (when it should have been paid all along).
Football is much less strategic, and much more tactical. The play is reset and begun anew after every down. You have no such luxury in chess.
Also, both sides are equal athletically in chess, and there is no room for "luck". In football you have to choose your offense and defense at the same time, guessing what the other is doing. In chess you can make the move knowing fully the opponents position at the end of your move.
While begging the question is certainly a commonly used phrase regarding debate and logic, the words literally mean what these people mean them to mean (if you know what I mean).
Something that provokes curiousity entreats (begs) inquiry (a question). It is completely appropriate in the literal sense of every word in the phrase. It also conveys the exact intention of the sentence to those that read it, so it is successful in that respect as well. Even those that think it can only be used as a phrase know what is meant by it.
Insurance companies aren't for when you have a 100% chance of getting something. At that point you consult directly with a doctor and you pay full price. The point of insurance is that if 100 people have a 1% chance of an ailment, they all pay 1% toward that. 99 of 100 of them will be wasting their money, but one guy won't have his life devastated by his disease.
As for genetic screening, I think the thing that cheeses me off is that these guys find out stuff about us (ie potential risks) and don't bother to tell us. But they do tell all the other insurers.
Upon reading the article (which is apparently incorrect anyway), I am unsure about just who made it onto the "shit list".
I really think that putting someone's name onto a dead-or-alive list, when they aren't in the game crosses the line. If it doesn't, then Bin Laden can give up on that encryption, and just claim its all a game. They could post the rules that nobody is to be hurt, and if someone goes overboard, its just a game.
Making up a dead-or-alive list, then posting it where others not in your game can read it could be construed as assault.
I believe his rant intended was that some facts are necessary as a basis for further learning.
There are many places for memorization that are good as a basis for learning. Some I can think of are multiplication tables, and states/countries and their capitols.
It is something like language. There has to be a certain vocabulary that is memorized so that the rest can derived from context. Multiplication tables are generally viewed as part of the vocabulary of math and a calculator is a poor substitute for the knowledge gained form learning them.
Perhaps a better example comes from the study of politics. Before assesing the merits of a candidate, a person must know the hard facts about the office, the government, and the constitution (or local equivalent) before he can properly mull over the "soft" facts presented by the candidate, his party, and his PAC.
And as I, and other threads have mentioned, material isn't the basis for evaluating a position on the chess board.
To reiterate: Improving your position will weaken your opponents position by the exact same amount. This certainly qualifies as being zero sum.
Also, since the discussion was originally about it being a zero sum game, and not a game consisting of zero sum moves, chess still qualifies. The result of a chess match is 1-0,.5-.5, or 0-1. The only way to improve your score is to take that much away from someone else.
I remember that game being horrible. It was supposed to be a pressure filled standoff between superpowers, but fell far short.
Basically you could put money into a country to influence its beliefs. This would also influence bordering countries to lesser extents. But if you were caught tinkering with, say, East Germany, the Soviets would get highly pissed and demand you remove yourself from there and possibly make a concession somewhere else. At some point you would have to draw the line or nukes would fly. This basically comes down to guessing what random number the computer has picked, since there was little feedback on hostility to guide you. So your only way of learning what would provoke a nuclear was by trial and error. Not much of a game in my opinion.
Oh, and Global Thermonuclear Warfare is not zero sum.
At the material level it obviously is not because pieces leave the board.
However, the game starts off drawn, both sides exactly equal. But, the only way to have a better position on the board is for the other player to have a correspondingly inferior position.
To say its not a zero sum game would mean that if two players exchange pawns to an even (drawn) position, both would be worse off than before.
The game is not judged by absolute strength of the pieces, but by the relative positions of those pieces board.
If its not zero sum, then I challenge you to show me a move where either: 1. Player A is better off and Player B is better or the same, or 2. player A is worse off and player B is worse or the same.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to hold them accountable, don't give them another $200. And don't scream monopoly, because its the game publishers choosing to release only to windows. Hold them accountable, and don't buy their games either.
Just because you change your own systems doesn't mean you ahve to tell everyone about it.
So their opinion doesn't count?
Rock Police Hard Place
Its about an inch across...hehe.
It could also be argued they are purchasing the goodwill of "one click shopping" which I believe Amazon has tried to trademark as well.
Have Apple do the pricing.
Now shipping could be seriously endangered. Imagine reaching land a couple miles early..perhaps before you are even looking for navigation lights.
Imagine if the company or government decided to spend enough money on a fresh development program where they buy and island, drop scientists off there, and deliver an unlimited supply of raw materials. The scientists would also be provided with whatever manufacturing capability they could design. They would still have access to theoretical knowledge, but no blueprints.
What might result from that?
Your argument about the page being downloadable is also wrong. Unless he downloaded it to the school, he hasn't done anything wrong. If the mere fact that is *could* be downloaded to the school is reason enough to take action against him, then you need to go arrest all those people whose websites with porn and violence could be downloaded by a student.
His parody was quite clearly speech, outside the hours and property of school.
I don't know about everyone else, but when comparing the differences between free and proprietary software I've become fairly pragmatic. I'm definitely don't feel like belonging to a community. I buy the tools that can't be taken away (free software) and pay the price of complying with the respective licenses. The price of some licenses makes certain company's software too expensive.
Speaking of tools that can never be taken away, does anyone have a copy of cycle-buffer.el by Vladmir somebody? I've been looking for months...
My normal tactic is to ignore the card sent to me. Unless its sent registered mail, I don't have to admit seeing it. But last September, my wife sent it in. This caused me to miss 3 days of work (of course I was compensated $18.) We had a discussion about how someone working on deadline doesn't really enjoy days of not going to work.
Red light will tend to make skin look smoother. I assume this is because the redness of skin is uneven. This can be seen put to good use at your nearest, uh, gentleman's club. Try it out.
Six months later I managed to get a fireplace in the corner out of the way of the tv, but that was the best I could do (without paying extra).
The real cost for a single instance of a virus is dealt with mostly costs in overtime for personnel while things are restored, inspected, and placed back into service.
The real cost overall is having to buy the software to protect against virii, and hiring the people that do nothing but guard the network. These costs don't contribute to the bottom, they merely protect it. This is the real cost of a good virus, it just usually isn't paid until someone catches something (when it should have been paid all along).
Also, both sides are equal athletically in chess, and there is no room for "luck". In football you have to choose your offense and defense at the same time, guessing what the other is doing. In chess you can make the move knowing fully the opponents position at the end of your move.
Something that provokes curiousity entreats (begs) inquiry (a question). It is completely appropriate in the literal sense of every word in the phrase. It also conveys the exact intention of the sentence to those that read it, so it is successful in that respect as well. Even those that think it can only be used as a phrase know what is meant by it.
As for genetic screening, I think the thing that cheeses me off is that these guys find out stuff about us (ie potential risks) and don't bother to tell us. But they do tell all the other insurers.
I really think that putting someone's name onto a dead-or-alive list, when they aren't in the game crosses the line. If it doesn't, then Bin Laden can give up on that encryption, and just claim its all a game. They could post the rules that nobody is to be hurt, and if someone goes overboard, its just a game.
Making up a dead-or-alive list, then posting it where others not in your game can read it could be construed as assault.
There are many places for memorization that are good as a basis for learning. Some I can think of are multiplication tables, and states/countries and their capitols.
It is something like language. There has to be a certain vocabulary that is memorized so that the rest can derived from context. Multiplication tables are generally viewed as part of the vocabulary of math and a calculator is a poor substitute for the knowledge gained form learning them.
Perhaps a better example comes from the study of politics. Before assesing the merits of a candidate, a person must know the hard facts about the office, the government, and the constitution (or local equivalent) before he can properly mull over the "soft" facts presented by the candidate, his party, and his PAC.
Are you suggesting both players now have a better than 50% chance of winning?
To reiterate: Improving your position will weaken your opponents position by the exact same amount. This certainly qualifies as being zero sum.
Also, since the discussion was originally about it being a zero sum game, and not a game consisting of zero sum moves, chess still qualifies. The result of a chess match is 1-0, .5-.5, or 0-1. The only way to improve your score is to take that much away from someone else.
Basically you could put money into a country to influence its beliefs. This would also influence bordering countries to lesser extents. But if you were caught tinkering with, say, East Germany, the Soviets would get highly pissed and demand you remove yourself from there and possibly make a concession somewhere else. At some point you would have to draw the line or nukes would fly. This basically comes down to guessing what random number the computer has picked, since there was little feedback on hostility to guide you. So your only way of learning what would provoke a nuclear was by trial and error. Not much of a game in my opinion.
Oh, and Global Thermonuclear Warfare is not zero sum.
It is not the capitalist, but the despot that views life as a zero-sum game.
At the material level it obviously is not because pieces leave the board.
However, the game starts off drawn, both sides exactly equal. But, the only way to have a better position on the board is for the other player to have a correspondingly inferior position.
To say its not a zero sum game would mean that if two players exchange pawns to an even (drawn) position, both would be worse off than before.
The game is not judged by absolute strength of the pieces, but by the relative positions of those pieces board.
If its not zero sum, then I challenge you to show me a move where either: 1. Player A is better off and Player B is better or the same, or 2. player A is worse off and player B is worse or the same.