But marketing can turn a bunch of common rocks into precious diamonds.
Furthermore, it isn't hard to fail at marketing to the point where nobody wants your gold since they're convinced it's probably pyrite, or perhaps you coated the gold in shit so everyone assumes it's a solid lump of shit.
Small bookstores typically just don't have the selection, and American big bookstores seemed...standoffish? It can be really hard to describe just in what way it was less pleasant. Part of it is a structure that encourages you to read lengthy passages in the store back home that I haven't seen in a larger bookstore in the US. I fully admit I haven't travelled the length and breadth of either country; I'm just going with the places I've been.
I go to Amazon for something that I knew I wanted ahead of time, which is relatively rare but if I accidentally start reading an unfinished book series it will happen and Amazon tends to be clearly the best option. And with the stores I like closing down, I now go to Amazon also because it's the best available.
The "World's Biggest Bookstore" (that's a name, not a description) in Toronto, as seen on the movie Short Circuit 2, just recently closed and that is probably the thing that will shift me over to using Amazon near-exclusively.
Although interestingly a lot of the long tail books aren't directly available from Amazon itself, but are available on Amazon.com via its partner re-seller programs, some of which are also big warehouses but some seem like smaller businesses that are just supplementing their incomes. Usually these are out-of-print books with "used - like new" tags as I try to complete things that I read as a kid from the school library, which was incomplete either because they didn't buy the full series, or they did buy it and a kid wrecked one, or the series wasn't completed ~15 years ago when I would have read them.
What are you talking about? Deaths per Terawatt in Nuclear is the best by far. It's several times better than the next best option on that metric (wind energy)!
He's referring to sentient creatures. Sentient, I believe, should be understood to mean approximately human-like levels of intelligence and communication. It is reasonable to suppose such creatures will generate similar phenomena as humans -- abstract syntactic language, superstitions, science, etc.. Provided they don't go extinct first, anyway.
The story is about the odds of being murdered, and your first sentence was on topic.
The rest was deliriously offtopic. Hence the appropriate moderation, "offtopic". If you don't want to be modded offtopic, then your post should be substantially on topic.
To your on-topic point: I couldn't find a source to quantify your statistic in a short time, though I did find sources which explained that women are way less likely to murder non-family members than men are; and given that women are *way* more likely to have a male spouse than men are, it should not be unexpected that women murder more men than women.
I mean really, why would we expect it to be equal? Spousal murder is a thing, and gay relationships are rare disproportionate to statistically random pairings, therefore one might expect a greater number of cross-sex murders. Really the surprising fact is therefore that men kill more men than women (which I know I've heard elsewhere as well).
about half of the perpetrators and victims of homicide are young African American males, completely out of proportion to their prevalence population; that's what accounts for most of the difference between US and other Western murder rates.
That can't be true because looking at other "Western" nations (I looked at the Western Europe category, most of Northern Europe category, most of Southern Europe category, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) have about a quarter of the murder rates of the US fairly consistently over the 13 years indicated. In 2012, Canada, Finland, & Belgium are are closer to 1/3, but some are doing better than 1/5. And that was tied for the best year in the US. To be fair, that was a particularly good year for Finland and Belgium, but average for some of the other countries.
Meanwhile, black poulation is 13%, or slightly more than 1/8th the country, so the remaining one half the population of the US has to be attenuated by 7/8. So removing the black people entirely, the US still has ~225% the murder rate of these other countries.
I think you're asking the wrong question. Why wouldn't you use the Supreme Court? They're the body that's ultimately in charge of deciding whether it's constitutional or not. What's bizarre is choosing to use a third-party lawyer arbitrarily. Just so that you can say you didn't use the Supreme Court?
The US has determined the their constitution forbids federal courts from issuing advisory opinions. Some states do the same as Canada though with their state supreme courts.
These half-functional 'features' makes people believe that somehow it's acceptable to indent with spaces instead of tabs.
No, people already believed that.
I assert that tab, inasmuch as it is an ASCII character, was always a bad idea. In a word processor, indentation functionality should be achieved the same way as any other indenting. In a fixed format like source code, it's completely redundant with spaces. Yes, there are scenarios where you can use tabs, but that could also justify specialized control characters to represent underline, italics, bold, and text colouration, which could all also be interesting presentation elements in source code and other text-stream applications. Instead we parse out compounds like [b] etc. Or more generally, you could have control characters that natively held styles. Generally we instead let your text editor apply styling to your source code using some minimal knowledge of your language's syntax.
I feel similarly about RTL control characters and Ideographic Variation Sequences, but at least in those cases I understand and accept the backward-compatibility problems they were designed to solve. Fortunately, I've never heard somebody demand they be supported in source code, and they aren't in your typical ASCII set -- you have to go to Unicode. Tabs are a bad idea that people only think are a good idea because they are expressible in ASCII.
special interest groups screaming about oppression at every opportunity even when none exists.
None exists? Are you paying attention?
everyone has the same equal right to marry someone of the opposite sex.
I've been saying this a lot lately, but this is exactly like saying that women had the same right to vote 100 years ago as men: one vote per penis.
Im sorry if a small minority is affected by this but the sad truth is life isnt fair.
One person being affected -- Eich -- is an even smaller minority affected by this. Why should life be fairer for him than for the gay?
its not as if we are locking up the gays and killing them, everyone is free to live the life they want
Actually gays do face physical violence, but I agree Eich didn't do it. If Eich was doing it, we'd be arresting him and sentencing him to life imprisonment. Instead, there were demands that he step down. Why are you the only one who gets to blow things out of proportion?
If we really want to treat people equal we would do away with marriage as a government contract in its entirety
I agree. But the current state of affairs is worse. This is similar to the fact that I oppose laws that specifically exclude the mentally disabled from the death penalty, because I oppose the death penalty.
You've come up with a fair answer, but the flaw in your reasoning is that the RPS game is less independent of the coin toss game.
In particular, the coin toss game makes scissors an obvious loss. No solution that includes scissors can possibly be optimal, because scissors loses at minimum 50% of the time.
Redistribute your scissors over to rock and work it out on a calculator; you'll see an improvement in outcomes.
I think this is not quite correct, because scissors are a losing proposition. Throwing scissors cannot possibly, in and of itself, net a profit in the long run. At least 50% of the adversary's throws are rocks, which causes scissors to lose. It can only break even if the opponent chooses a 50% paper 50% rock solution. So if the goal is to do better than chance, then every scissors throw is suboptimal, regardless of the adversary's strategy.
I would redistribute your 1/6 scissors to rock and make it 2/3 paper and 1/3 rock. This should cause the adversary to react by decreasing the proportion of scissors in their own strategy (since it loses to your increased rock portfolio), which is good because our strategy is paper-dominant.
The adversary will counter with 1/2 rock, 1/3 paper, and 1/6 scissors.
With your strategy that still includes scissors, it would have been 1/6 paper and 1/3 scissors, which would be significantly worse.*
* Didn't actually do the math on this one like I did on the others; this is just instinct.
Your statement is more wrong. He has a minimum 50% chance of playing rock each round. He can play rock 100% of the time if that's the equilibrium strategy.
The summary is only wrong in the same sense that you are -- it seems to be setting an amount, rather than a lower bound of rock. It's not inaccurate to say that you're forced to play the rock 50% of the time when the 50% forcing function is a random variable rather than a strictly determined function. It just means that any finite section doesn't necessarily include at least 50% rock.
That's like saying that women always had the same right to vote as men: one vote per penis.
Another perspective is that Men are denied a right extended to women, the right to marry men. Women are denied a right extended to men, the right to marry women.
I don't think it is. Honestly that's semantic bickering. Nobody thinks Eich is beating people up on the streets. If we did we'd call for his arrest. However basically everybody agrees that, as far as we know, he has not done anything that deserves arrest.
We don't ask CEOs that beat people up on the streets or set fire to people's front laws to step down. They get fired without anybody asking, and they get arrested.
Keep in mind that this donation was made back in 2008. The world is a different place now than it was then.
Welcoming contributions regardless of religious views doesn't mean welcoming regardless of actions taken which are justified by religious views. Otherwise that's just carte blanche. Somebody who bombs abortion clinics, for instance, is not an acceptable employee.
Obviously Mr. Eich's actions were way less dramatic than bombing an abortion clinic. That's why people aren't calling for his arrest or anything like that.
I think gay people would rather Obama as US President than almost anybody else, to a much higher degree than they prefer Brandon Eich over anybody else as Mozilla CEO.
Even Richard Stallman allows the use of proprietary software where there is no OSS alternative. This guy is known for taking an extremely hard line on his unusual ethical stance. Another point:
However, if I am visiting somewhere and the machines available nearby happen to contain non-free software, through no doing of mine, I don't refuse to touch them. I will use them briefly for tasks such as browsing. This limited usage doesn't give my assent to the software's license, or make me responsible its being present in the computer, or make me the possessor of a copy of it, so I don't see an ethical obligation to refrain from this. Of course, I explain to the local people why they should migrate the machines to free software, but I don't push them hard, because annoying them is not the way to convince them.
The difference between javascript and Firefox is that Firefox has alternatives for OKCupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Deciding you just get to make up an answer because you don't understand it is the egotistic cop-out.
If there actually is a creator who does those things, I think you're the one who will look stupid, despite your lucky guess.
But marketing can turn a bunch of common rocks into precious diamonds.
Furthermore, it isn't hard to fail at marketing to the point where nobody wants your gold since they're convinced it's probably pyrite, or perhaps you coated the gold in shit so everyone assumes it's a solid lump of shit.
I preferred the large Canadian bookstores.
Small bookstores typically just don't have the selection, and American big bookstores seemed...standoffish? It can be really hard to describe just in what way it was less pleasant. Part of it is a structure that encourages you to read lengthy passages in the store back home that I haven't seen in a larger bookstore in the US. I fully admit I haven't travelled the length and breadth of either country; I'm just going with the places I've been.
I go to Amazon for something that I knew I wanted ahead of time, which is relatively rare but if I accidentally start reading an unfinished book series it will happen and Amazon tends to be clearly the best option. And with the stores I like closing down, I now go to Amazon also because it's the best available.
The "World's Biggest Bookstore" (that's a name, not a description) in Toronto, as seen on the movie Short Circuit 2, just recently closed and that is probably the thing that will shift me over to using Amazon near-exclusively.
Although interestingly a lot of the long tail books aren't directly available from Amazon itself, but are available on Amazon.com via its partner re-seller programs, some of which are also big warehouses but some seem like smaller businesses that are just supplementing their incomes. Usually these are out-of-print books with "used - like new" tags as I try to complete things that I read as a kid from the school library, which was incomplete either because they didn't buy the full series, or they did buy it and a kid wrecked one, or the series wasn't completed ~15 years ago when I would have read them.
What are you talking about? Deaths per Terawatt in Nuclear is the best by far. It's several times better than the next best option on that metric (wind energy)!
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/...
He's referring to sentient creatures. Sentient, I believe, should be understood to mean approximately human-like levels of intelligence and communication. It is reasonable to suppose such creatures will generate similar phenomena as humans -- abstract syntactic language, superstitions, science, etc.. Provided they don't go extinct first, anyway.
Many, many, MANY people have claimed that God wrote the Bible.
So it's unreasonable to boycott Mozilla for hiring Eich, but reasonable to to boycott it for letting Eich go? Isn't that an inconsistent position?
The story is about the odds of being murdered, and your first sentence was on topic.
The rest was deliriously offtopic. Hence the appropriate moderation, "offtopic". If you don't want to be modded offtopic, then your post should be substantially on topic.
To your on-topic point: I couldn't find a source to quantify your statistic in a short time, though I did find sources which explained that women are way less likely to murder non-family members than men are; and given that women are *way* more likely to have a male spouse than men are, it should not be unexpected that women murder more men than women.
I mean really, why would we expect it to be equal? Spousal murder is a thing, and gay relationships are rare disproportionate to statistically random pairings, therefore one might expect a greater number of cross-sex murders. Really the surprising fact is therefore that men kill more men than women (which I know I've heard elsewhere as well).
about half of the perpetrators and victims of homicide are young African American males, completely out of proportion to their prevalence population; that's what accounts for most of the difference between US and other Western murder rates.
That can't be true because looking at other "Western" nations (I looked at the Western Europe category, most of Northern Europe category, most of Southern Europe category, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) have about a quarter of the murder rates of the US fairly consistently over the 13 years indicated. In 2012, Canada, Finland, & Belgium are are closer to 1/3, but some are doing better than 1/5. And that was tied for the best year in the US. To be fair, that was a particularly good year for Finland and Belgium, but average for some of the other countries.
Meanwhile, black poulation is 13%, or slightly more than 1/8th the country, so the remaining one half the population of the US has to be attenuated by 7/8. So removing the black people entirely, the US still has ~225% the murder rate of these other countries.
Why is it that you apparently believe it's impossible to dislike Bowling For Columbine and Expelled at the same time?
I think you're asking the wrong question. Why wouldn't you use the Supreme Court? They're the body that's ultimately in charge of deciding whether it's constitutional or not. What's bizarre is choosing to use a third-party lawyer arbitrarily. Just so that you can say you didn't use the Supreme Court?
The US has determined the their constitution forbids federal courts from issuing advisory opinions. Some states do the same as Canada though with their state supreme courts.
These half-functional 'features' makes people believe that somehow it's acceptable to indent with spaces instead of tabs.
No, people already believed that.
I assert that tab, inasmuch as it is an ASCII character, was always a bad idea. In a word processor, indentation functionality should be achieved the same way as any other indenting. In a fixed format like source code, it's completely redundant with spaces. Yes, there are scenarios where you can use tabs, but that could also justify specialized control characters to represent underline, italics, bold, and text colouration, which could all also be interesting presentation elements in source code and other text-stream applications. Instead we parse out compounds like [b] etc. Or more generally, you could have control characters that natively held styles. Generally we instead let your text editor apply styling to your source code using some minimal knowledge of your language's syntax.
I feel similarly about RTL control characters and Ideographic Variation Sequences, but at least in those cases I understand and accept the backward-compatibility problems they were designed to solve. Fortunately, I've never heard somebody demand they be supported in source code, and they aren't in your typical ASCII set -- you have to go to Unicode. Tabs are a bad idea that people only think are a good idea because they are expressible in ASCII.
As far as I can gather, he wasn't opposed to abiogenesis so much as abiogenesis on Earth.
He figured the odds against abiogenesis on some other class of places which might be:
a) possibly more abiogenesis-friendly
b) far, far, far more numerous than the number of Earth-alikes
Multiplied by the odds of panspermia were much more pro-life. To the point where he figured space viruses could even account for modern epidemics.
Obama was seen as the best alternative of several options for LGBT rights.
Firefox vs. Chrome or IE (yes, IE) is basically a wash.
special interest groups screaming about oppression at every opportunity even when none exists.
None exists? Are you paying attention?
everyone has the same equal right to marry someone of the opposite sex.
I've been saying this a lot lately, but this is exactly like saying that women had the same right to vote 100 years ago as men: one vote per penis.
Im sorry if a small minority is affected by this but the sad truth is life isnt fair.
One person being affected -- Eich -- is an even smaller minority affected by this. Why should life be fairer for him than for the gay?
its not as if we are locking up the gays and killing them, everyone is free to live the life they want
Actually gays do face physical violence, but I agree Eich didn't do it. If Eich was doing it, we'd be arresting him and sentencing him to life imprisonment. Instead, there were demands that he step down. Why are you the only one who gets to blow things out of proportion?
If we really want to treat people equal we would do away with marriage as a government contract in its entirety
I agree. But the current state of affairs is worse. This is similar to the fact that I oppose laws that specifically exclude the mentally disabled from the death penalty, because I oppose the death penalty.
The idea that one guy at the top of a company is seen as representing the *whole* company and all its values is pretty dumb, and just not true.
It's literally the CEO's job to represent the whole company.
You've come up with a fair answer, but the flaw in your reasoning is that the RPS game is less independent of the coin toss game.
In particular, the coin toss game makes scissors an obvious loss. No solution that includes scissors can possibly be optimal, because scissors loses at minimum 50% of the time.
Redistribute your scissors over to rock and work it out on a calculator; you'll see an improvement in outcomes.
I think this is not quite correct, because scissors are a losing proposition. Throwing scissors cannot possibly, in and of itself, net a profit in the long run. At least 50% of the adversary's throws are rocks, which causes scissors to lose. It can only break even if the opponent chooses a 50% paper 50% rock solution. So if the goal is to do better than chance, then every scissors throw is suboptimal, regardless of the adversary's strategy.
I would redistribute your 1/6 scissors to rock and make it 2/3 paper and 1/3 rock. This should cause the adversary to react by decreasing the proportion of scissors in their own strategy (since it loses to your increased rock portfolio), which is good because our strategy is paper-dominant.
The adversary will counter with 1/2 rock, 1/3 paper, and 1/6 scissors.
With your strategy that still includes scissors, it would have been 1/6 paper and 1/3 scissors, which would be significantly worse.*
* Didn't actually do the math on this one like I did on the others; this is just instinct.
Your statement is more wrong. He has a minimum 50% chance of playing rock each round. He can play rock 100% of the time if that's the equilibrium strategy.
The summary is only wrong in the same sense that you are -- it seems to be setting an amount, rather than a lower bound of rock. It's not inaccurate to say that you're forced to play the rock 50% of the time when the 50% forcing function is a random variable rather than a strictly determined function. It just means that any finite section doesn't necessarily include at least 50% rock.
A law was passed making it illegal in that jurisdiction in the next day or so.
That's like saying that women always had the same right to vote as men: one vote per penis.
Another perspective is that Men are denied a right extended to women, the right to marry men. Women are denied a right extended to men, the right to marry women.
That is an important point.
I don't think it is. Honestly that's semantic bickering. Nobody thinks Eich is beating people up on the streets. If we did we'd call for his arrest. However basically everybody agrees that, as far as we know, he has not done anything that deserves arrest.
We don't ask CEOs that beat people up on the streets or set fire to people's front laws to step down. They get fired without anybody asking, and they get arrested.
Keep in mind that this donation was made back in 2008. The world is a different place now than it was then.
What? How different was 2008 from 2014?
Welcoming contributions regardless of religious views doesn't mean welcoming regardless of actions taken which are justified by religious views. Otherwise that's just carte blanche. Somebody who bombs abortion clinics, for instance, is not an acceptable employee.
Obviously Mr. Eich's actions were way less dramatic than bombing an abortion clinic. That's why people aren't calling for his arrest or anything like that.
I think gay people would rather Obama as US President than almost anybody else, to a much higher degree than they prefer Brandon Eich over anybody else as Mozilla CEO.
Even Richard Stallman allows the use of proprietary software where there is no OSS alternative. This guy is known for taking an extremely hard line on his unusual ethical stance. Another point:
However, if I am visiting somewhere and the machines available nearby happen to contain non-free software, through no doing of mine, I don't refuse to touch them. I will use them briefly for tasks such as browsing. This limited usage doesn't give my assent to the software's license, or make me responsible its being present in the computer, or make me the possessor of a copy of it, so I don't see an ethical obligation to refrain from this. Of course, I explain to the local people why they should migrate the machines to free software, but I don't push them hard, because annoying them is not the way to convince them.
The difference between javascript and Firefox is that Firefox has alternatives for OKCupid.