Exactly. Buying 1.6% does not mean they think the company has a future. But it probably makes it less likely that Google or Yahoo will take over the company, right?
Well, any combustion reaction requires oxygen, right? Apparently, the constraint on altitude comes from the need to maintain a certain pressure within the cabin, not the availability of oxygen.
Would've never guessed that fuel efficiency was prized more by military than civilian customers. Or is there some subsidy for "green" fuels in some Defense appropriations bill?
what life without Microsoft "at all" would be like?
It's hard to answer, but it's possible that the market has room for a cheap, low security alternative, and a more expensive, high security alternative - because regular users just aren't aware of how unsafe their personal data is, and how valuable it is. So we would see something similar to MS Windows taking its place.
Or, we could see less people with computers. Or whatever, my point is without the article it's hard to know what the appropriate counterfactual is, but it shouldn't be taking everything else as it is today... Surely without MS in the picture, Apple/Mac would be different?
Well, if you knew you were going to fall victim to some condition, then it wouldn't be "insurance", would it?
Part of the problem is that genetics is forcing us to reconsider what exactly it is that we are "insuring" against. We don't see a problem with people in California paying more for earthquake insurance than people in Illinois. Now we are seeing that we are not all, in fact, the same when it comes to health risks - and there is little we can do about that. Lifestyle choices may only go so far.
So the problem boils down to: we're stuck with our genes, and we have no way of changing them. What is society's obligation towards those born with "bad" genes? If we accept there is an obligation to help them out, do we, as a society, have the right to limit who may reproduce? I'm sure these questions will arise in the not so distant future.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. Buying 1.6% does not mean they think the company has a future. But it probably makes it less likely that Google or Yahoo will take over the company, right?
Well, any combustion reaction requires oxygen, right? Apparently, the constraint on altitude comes from the need to maintain a certain pressure within the cabin, not the availability of oxygen.
Would've never guessed that fuel efficiency was prized more by military than civilian customers. Or is there some subsidy for "green" fuels in some Defense appropriations bill?
Feet, and Paris Hilton pictures...
what life without Microsoft "at all" would be like?
It's hard to answer, but it's possible that the market has room for a cheap, low security alternative, and a more expensive, high security alternative - because regular users just aren't aware of how unsafe their personal data is, and how valuable it is. So we would see something similar to MS Windows taking its place.
Or, we could see less people with computers. Or whatever, my point is without the article it's hard to know what the appropriate counterfactual is, but it shouldn't be taking everything else as it is today... Surely without MS in the picture, Apple/Mac would be different?
Well, if you knew you were going to fall victim to some condition, then it wouldn't be "insurance", would it? Part of the problem is that genetics is forcing us to reconsider what exactly it is that we are "insuring" against. We don't see a problem with people in California paying more for earthquake insurance than people in Illinois. Now we are seeing that we are not all, in fact, the same when it comes to health risks - and there is little we can do about that. Lifestyle choices may only go so far. So the problem boils down to: we're stuck with our genes, and we have no way of changing them. What is society's obligation towards those born with "bad" genes? If we accept there is an obligation to help them out, do we, as a society, have the right to limit who may reproduce? I'm sure these questions will arise in the not so distant future.