I think considerations such as power consumption are distinct from many other 'green' considerations. It's in the economic self-interest of the consumer to purchase low-consumption devices, and it can be independently verified.
But the more ethereal 'greenness' of a company is less relevant, because some of us don't care, and many of us who do care don't believe any of the PR put out. I mean, Apple building laptops out of recyclable components? I simply think it's an invention of the marketing department. The moment I hear 'offset carbon footprint' from a company, I know that they are simply bullshitting. And I certainly don't believe ratings put out by environmental organizations, since it's in their interests to exagerate.
Does your country have a more powerful, wealthy, influential woman? Probably not. Oprah is worth more than a lot of countries. Your lack of knowledge about her is perfectly fine, even reasonable, but that doesn't mean that her importance is being overstated.
That's neither here nor there, but I just want to get it out and documented early and publicly, so that I can point to it four years from now when everybody is denying they voted for him.
Maybe you could think of his post as stating a hypothesis, and we are about to see whether it is proven correct in practice? After all, if it does end up being correct, perhaps something may be learned.
I expect the over CO2 exchange is even better; The paper that is being manufactured is something like 30% carbon. Every sheet of paper is a few milligrams of CO2 permanently removed from the atmosphere (well, eventually it may reenter the atmosphere, but maybe not for hundreds of years).
Absolutely. Even if the Wii had absolutely no motion sensing abilities, its control scheme would still be a huge improvement. The ability to hold your arms apart should be incorporated into every controller from now on. I'd much rather play on (for instance) two nunchuck-type controllers than one dual-shock.
Interesting. I'd estimate: 10% hot (sure). 3% lesbian. 10% use computers. 0.1% use Linux. That would lead to 900 hot, lesbian, linux using women. That's probably closer to the truth, because I think the real answer is closer to TWO.
That's assuming those are independent variables, though. There might be a negative correlation between Hot/Linux or Lesbians/Computer use. (Or, sadly, between 'real lesbian' and 'hot'.)
No, simply that it's new isn't a problem. A few reasons:
1) It's big, ugly, and distracting, mixing a variety of font sizes, italics, etc. (That's my subjective opinion).
2) It is unpredictable, hence less useful. It used to bring up URLs that were previously typed in the field, that began with the letters typed. Now it searches other places and other fields, in a way that is not obvious, and can change unpredictably. My son was complaining about how the webcomic he reads keeps on turning up multiple times in the "awesomebar", because every strip has a different title.
3) It can pull up results that were never typed into the bar. That's non-intuitive; it should use the same 'type-ahead' system of selecting from previous entries that would work for other fields, such as html input fields. Don't make a crazy new interface for one field; make a interface that works sensibly for all fields.
4) It's marketing-driven. It was given a ridiculous name, and seemingly was at the top of a 'new 3.0 feature' bullet list that Mozilla wanted to 'push'... Then they removed options (which existed in the betas) to switch between the new and old configuration. That's skirting close to BIG BAD COMPANY behavior.
Doesn't it remind you of how the search feature in every MS OS has been getting worse and worse every version, despite the added features?
I'm not there yet, but it's headed that way. A year ago this would have seemed impossible, but with 3.0, it really seems that FF has changed course, and is headed in an unpleasant direction. They seem to be wanting their user to adapt to their changes, rather than continue to change for the user. Has Mozilla established a marketing group? That's what it seems (unpleasantly) like.
You are conflating prejudice based on race with prejudice based on culture. They're not the same thing, although there's a large amount of overlap. I think prejudice based on culture is slightly more reasonable, although still prone to much error. After all, culture affects behavior much more than race does.
Different cultures evidently produce terrorists at different rates. That seems factual. The unresolved question seems to be, to what extent is it reasonable and ethical to subject individuals from problematic cultures to greater scrutiny? Not at all? Is there a certain line that shouldn't be crossed? Is increased scrutiny ok, so long as rights aren't violated?
God, that was a really stupid exercise. Close your eyes and picture someone in silky lingerie running a hand up your chest; you can smell their delicious perfume, as their soft lips brush your neck...
You're picturing a woman, right? Wrong! It's a man! You are so sexist.
And, no, rich people DON'T pay a bigger percentage of taxes.
Yes they do, actually. That they don't is a myth, perpetrated by groups that want to further class warfare. There are a small number of rich people that pay less due to loopholes deliberately created by a congress that wants to encourage certain types of behavior and investment... but if you simply look at data from the IRS that lists per capita tax revenue from individuals broken out by income, you'll find that rich people in general pay a much higher percentage of taxes than poor and middle class people. This is easily verifiable.
Thank you, that makes a lot of sense. I may try that; right now I light rooms with a mix of CFL and incandescent... I don't like the light from CFLs, so I use incandescents to fill in the troughs of the spectra.
More games on the 360. Software sales in total are higher for the 360, but sales on a specific game may be higher for the PS3, because there's a smaller library.
If you're talking new games, I could easily say "no". I have probably thirty games for my PS2, and I don't think a single one has been purchased _new_. All were used copies. On the other hand, somebody obviously bought those games new at some point... I'm really not sure how that effects the economics of it all. It presumably lowers the attach rate some.
When attach rate figures are quoted, are those generally limited to newly purchased games?
As a side note, my (slight) interest in someday purchasing a PS3 evaporated when they cut backward compatibility.
Or maybe they've already cut back spending to the minimum point they can while still providing the services the citizens of Oregon demand?
In the specific case of Oregon, that is not the case. Not anywhere close. The governor is upset that the state government isn't growing at a fast enough pace.
However, we deny that species evolve into other species.
You're overly inclusive. Some Christians deny that. Other Christians don't. It's not a fundamental requirement of Christianity to disbelieve in evolution.
I haven't used 2007, but my son (Physics/Chem major, very computer literate) was telling me he used it for the first time at college, and had a difficult time figuring out how to print. It sounds like a design flaw, not the incompetence of the users.
Slashdot Mirror
I think considerations such as power consumption are distinct from many other 'green' considerations. It's in the economic self-interest of the consumer to purchase low-consumption devices, and it can be independently verified.
But the more ethereal 'greenness' of a company is less relevant, because some of us don't care, and many of us who do care don't believe any of the PR put out. I mean, Apple building laptops out of recyclable components? I simply think it's an invention of the marketing department. The moment I hear 'offset carbon footprint' from a company, I know that they are simply bullshitting. And I certainly don't believe ratings put out by environmental organizations, since it's in their interests to exagerate.
Does your country have a more powerful, wealthy, influential woman? Probably not. Oprah is worth more than a lot of countries. Your lack of knowledge about her is perfectly fine, even reasonable, but that doesn't mean that her importance is being overstated.
I didn't vote for Obama.
That's neither here nor there, but I just want to get it out and documented early and publicly, so that I can point to it four years from now when everybody is denying they voted for him.
Maybe you could think of his post as stating a hypothesis, and we are about to see whether it is proven correct in practice? After all, if it does end up being correct, perhaps something may be learned.
I expect the over CO2 exchange is even better; The paper that is being manufactured is something like 30% carbon. Every sheet of paper is a few milligrams of CO2 permanently removed from the atmosphere (well, eventually it may reenter the atmosphere, but maybe not for hundreds of years).
Absolutely. Even if the Wii had absolutely no motion sensing abilities, its control scheme would still be a huge improvement. The ability to hold your arms apart should be incorporated into every controller from now on. I'd much rather play on (for instance) two nunchuck-type controllers than one dual-shock.
Interesting. I'd estimate: 10% hot (sure). 3% lesbian. 10% use computers. 0.1% use Linux. That would lead to 900 hot, lesbian, linux using women. That's probably closer to the truth, because I think the real answer is closer to TWO.
That's assuming those are independent variables, though. There might be a negative correlation between Hot/Linux or Lesbians/Computer use. (Or, sadly, between 'real lesbian' and 'hot'.)
No, simply that it's new isn't a problem. A few reasons:
1) It's big, ugly, and distracting, mixing a variety of font sizes, italics, etc. (That's my subjective opinion).
2) It is unpredictable, hence less useful. It used to bring up URLs that were previously typed in the field, that began with the letters typed. Now it searches other places and other fields, in a way that is not obvious, and can change unpredictably. My son was complaining about how the webcomic he reads keeps on turning up multiple times in the "awesomebar", because every strip has a different title.
3) It can pull up results that were never typed into the bar. That's non-intuitive; it should use the same 'type-ahead' system of selecting from previous entries that would work for other fields, such as html input fields. Don't make a crazy new interface for one field; make a interface that works sensibly for all fields.
4) It's marketing-driven. It was given a ridiculous name, and seemingly was at the top of a 'new 3.0 feature' bullet list that Mozilla wanted to 'push'... Then they removed options (which existed in the betas) to switch between the new and old configuration. That's skirting close to BIG BAD COMPANY behavior.
Doesn't it remind you of how the search feature in every MS OS has been getting worse and worse every version, despite the added features?
I'm not there yet, but it's headed that way. A year ago this would have seemed impossible, but with 3.0, it really seems that FF has changed course, and is headed in an unpleasant direction. They seem to be wanting their user to adapt to their changes, rather than continue to change for the user. Has Mozilla established a marketing group? That's what it seems (unpleasantly) like.
I'll probably switch to Opera, though, before IE.
He attached his name, you didn't. That means he may be lying, and you probably are lying.
It's not pointless.
It does demonstrate bias; but also demonstrates that it can be a reasonable bias. You'd be foolish not to have many such biases.
(Or however you pluralize 'bias'.)
But this one is?
You are conflating prejudice based on race with prejudice based on culture. They're not the same thing, although there's a large amount of overlap. I think prejudice based on culture is slightly more reasonable, although still prone to much error. After all, culture affects behavior much more than race does.
Different cultures evidently produce terrorists at different rates. That seems factual. The unresolved question seems to be, to what extent is it reasonable and ethical to subject individuals from problematic cultures to greater scrutiny? Not at all? Is there a certain line that shouldn't be crossed? Is increased scrutiny ok, so long as rights aren't violated?
God, that was a really stupid exercise. Close your eyes and picture someone in silky lingerie running a hand up your chest; you can smell their delicious perfume, as their soft lips brush your neck...
You're picturing a woman, right? Wrong! It's a man! You are so sexist.
You know the identity of the anthrax terrorists?
And, no, rich people DON'T pay a bigger percentage of taxes.
Yes they do, actually. That they don't is a myth, perpetrated by groups that want to further class warfare. There are a small number of rich people that pay less due to loopholes deliberately created by a congress that wants to encourage certain types of behavior and investment... but if you simply look at data from the IRS that lists per capita tax revenue from individuals broken out by income, you'll find that rich people in general pay a much higher percentage of taxes than poor and middle class people. This is easily verifiable.
combine a couple of different temperature bulbs
Thank you, that makes a lot of sense. I may try that; right now I light rooms with a mix of CFL and incandescent... I don't like the light from CFLs, so I use incandescents to fill in the troughs of the spectra.
"Because the summary probably won't be fixed."
I think you probably wrote that, while you were logged in. If not, please take a moment and read it, let its incorrectness sink in.
More games on the 360. Software sales in total are higher for the 360, but sales on a specific game may be higher for the PS3, because there's a smaller library.
If you're talking new games, I could easily say "no". I have probably thirty games for my PS2, and I don't think a single one has been purchased _new_. All were used copies. On the other hand, somebody obviously bought those games new at some point... I'm really not sure how that effects the economics of it all. It presumably lowers the attach rate some.
When attach rate figures are quoted, are those generally limited to newly purchased games?
As a side note, my (slight) interest in someday purchasing a PS3 evaporated when they cut backward compatibility.
Or maybe they've already cut back spending to the minimum point they can while still providing the services the citizens of Oregon demand?
In the specific case of Oregon, that is not the case. Not anywhere close. The governor is upset that the state government isn't growing at a fast enough pace.
...I would like to let the rest of the country know that our governor is an idiot.
Thank you for your time. Please pass the word.
But my favorite was the built-in keyboard on the Atari 800 home computer. Feel, clickiness, weird symbols... it was really nice.
Small but very important point:
However, we deny that species evolve into other species.
You're overly inclusive. Some Christians deny that. Other Christians don't. It's not a fundamental requirement of Christianity to disbelieve in evolution.
I haven't used 2007, but my son (Physics/Chem major, very computer literate) was telling me he used it for the first time at college, and had a difficult time figuring out how to print. It sounds like a design flaw, not the incompetence of the users.