Wait wait, you're going to have a cow about things like "who are even clueless about if they own" and "In the long run." but not the four incomplete sentances after that?
Maybe you should do some more proofreading? Bone up a little bit? I certainly wouldn't want you proofreading one of my reports, if you miss such obvious things. Half the crap you mentioned isn't even in his post. Lets go back to the incomplete sentances though. For example:
"In the long run. Going after 9 year old girls. Going after people who are seriously handicapped and on a fixed income. Going after old people who are even clueless about if they own a computer. May not be the best way to win the PR war."
Five fragments in a row. However, all he has done is used periods (probably for dramatic effect) improperly. Replace all the periods but the last one with commas and lower the case of the words immediately following said commas, and it works just fine.
Not everybody bothers with spell-checking either; it's a news forum for nerds, not a master's thesis.
Perhaps if you payed more attention to the context and content your criticisms would be more useful?
Er, mine gave me about 5 commonly used options for Bases. Your article says that the word "bases" the WORST possible clash, and the maximum words to pick from is 11. Is an 11 word list too much to handle? I did have to scroll the first time, so I suppose that counts as about 8 keypresses, with no waiting. That's verses a keypress, pause long enough for two keypresses, and four keypresses, which is 5 actual keypresses but is about as slow as 8 keypresses. Also, if I have to type Bases again in the near future, it's going to be 6 keypresses because it's at the front of the list now.
So, are 2 extra keypresses for one word in a sentance worth 3-5 extra keypress PER WORD in each sentance? Ever tried a word like Literary in multi-tap mode? OMGWTFBBQ!! 8 keys in T9, 19 in multi-tap. Forget about a word like Mississippi, that would take forever on a multi-tap entery (that's one of those words you dread to type out on multi-tap, it can take a full minute to type), but T9 it takes -drumroll- 11 keypresses. That just happens to be how many letters there are in Mississippi! Holy cow, it's amazing! And it isn't just for big words, words like "the" take 2 fewer keypresses, and words like "Hi" need no pause.
Seriously, it's not that hard, but stick with what you know, and I'll still be faster and more efficient than you even with the occasional word I have to enter into the dictionary (once, never to be entered again;) ).
Seriously, the cases where multi-tap is faster than predictive text do certainly exist, but they are rare, and can be completely eliminated if you take a few extra seconds to customise your dictionary when you encounter such a word. After 6 months of use (or less) even cell phone users with full-keyboards should have trouble keeping up with a predictive text user.
Your article mentions iTap vs T9, T9 I prefer but the auto-completing of iTap isn't as bad as they make it out to be, because if you keep typing the auto-complete corrects itself, and it does make it quicker when it gets it right. My favorite system was whatever Kyocera uses. I found that to be very accurate, but it's a little different for everyone.:)
I don't know what you're typing, but T9 vs cycling the letters for me is a difference of 200-300% more button mashing, plus waiting for duplicate letters.
Perhaps if you stuck with real words and not made up ones it would be easier? I do find if I want to type a made-up word, I either have to add it to the T9 dictionary or switch over to abc input mode (the former takes longer, but I only ever have to do it once).
My only real trouble with the T9 on my LG is it uses the touchscreen only to choose between possible words, and I've got fat thumbs. Same problem with scrolling on the LG, there is generally no arrow option, you've got to slide it.
In any case, with T9 I can keep up pretty well with my friend who has a full qwerty keyboard on her phone, and she is very proficient with it. It's impossible to keep up with abc entry mode, on ANY phone I've used.
And, for the record, Kyocera's predictive typing is the best I've ever used, I wish my LG used Kyocera's entry method, cause the LG is otherwise the best phone I've ever used.
So, because you're a woman, and you've been hurt, it's ok to destroy an innocent man's life?
All men are pigs right?
I'm not making light of sexual assault, my best friend was raped and it didn't take her a week to recover, it took her years. About two before she was comfortable hugging close male friends, and another year after that before she could handle dating. Her first boyfriend after that had a tough time, because she had several panic attacks that would be triggered by seemingly benign events, but went back to the rape.
However, her reputation was not harmed in any way, and since she has healed she can live a normal, and very happy life. A man charged with rape, brought to trial, and then aquitted has no such hope if his name and crime are not protected before a conviction. His reputation is permanently ruined, there will be jobs he cannot get, relationships he cannot have, communities he cannot join, all because he was accused of something he did not do. This is multiplied ten-fold in high-profile cases or small town cases.
You seem to think the only person who can possibly be severly damaged is the female, apparently men's lives don't matter, innocent or no.
I work in an office where I use Remedy, and most of my co-workers use DW. Remedy has its quirks, but I won't touch DW. You spend 10 minutes working a ticket and an hour trying to close it in DW.
Remedy at least is useable. Of course, you can get a glimps of how retarded my company is just by the fact that we are using two different systems in the same office. And yes, Remedy tasks have to be converted to DW tickets, and then back again after they are finished. It's stupid.
Probably the easiest ticket tracking system I've used is TrackIt. Stupid simple, kept track of who's tickets were in, easy to view how many tickets were in the queue all at once, easy to sort, easy for a user to put in a ticket correctly, and it was easy to add comments to and the like. It is pretty much the opposite of Digital Workflow.
Pure democracy is, to put it simply, Tyranny of the Masses. A representative republic (which is what the US is) is NOT a pure democracy, it's not even "really close" to a democracy.
A representative republic is a system which attempts (and I think succeeds in) balancing the over-all will of the people with the needs of the minority. In a democracy, the needs of the minority are meaningless. In America, the needs of the minority actually get a significant voice, though if the will of the majority is opposed to the minority, the minority will still lose.
For example, my great state of Alaska. We have the second-lowest population of any state. We only have about 600,000 people, and so only get one congressman in the House of Representatives because of this. New York, however, has 19 million people, and so get quite a few congressman in the House, 29 in fact. That is the balance that gives majority more power over minority.
What gives smaller states more power, is the Senate. Each state gets 2 senators, regardless of population. Alaska gets 2, and New York gets 2. In the Senate, we are both exactly equal. Also, the Senate, with 100 members, has equal power as the House of Representatives, which has 500+ members. So even though Alaska has 1/600'th (ish) of the representatives, we actually get about 1/200'th (ish) of the power. Majority still holds most of the power, but Minority gets a great increase in power.
See how things balance?
And a state gets as many votes in the electoral college as they have representatives. So, if you're still with me, Alaska gets 3 votes, and New York gets 31. That makes New York only 10 times more powerful than Alaska, even though it has 40 times the people.
Now, the popular vote only matters WITHIN each state. It doesn't matter on the whole, nobody counts that, and you're ignorant of American Government, and really what a fair government should look like in general, if you think the overall popular vote should determine who is president.
So each state sends representatives to the electoral college, which forms every presidential election, according to how many representatives they have in congress. Alaska sends 3 according to their own system. In Alaska, one candidate or the other will "win" all three electoral votes in the popular vote. A candidate can win this with 90%, 51%, or, depending on the other candidates involved, 40% or even less. It doesn't matter if 60% of the population did not vote for that candidate, if he had the most he gets all 3 electoral votes.
MOST states do it this way, New York included. So, in New York, a guy can get 19 million votes, and only gets 31 electoral votes. 19 million is about 15% of the total population of the US. Are you starting to see how the popular vote can get skewed? That's why we don't use it.
The needs of the US as a whole is NOT determined by what 51% of the people want. That would degenerate into anarchy in 50 years or less. The needs of the US is determined by a weighted majority. Alaska gets more influence per citizen than New York does, but New York has more influence than Alaska as a whole.
See how it works? It's how we do major government here. It's fair, because it gives the majority enough power that, generally, things go the way the majority wants. That's a good thing. It also, however, prevents the majority from trampling the minority just because they can. That is also a good thing.:)
Actually, it would have still been wrong, a deficit is just a form of debt. Different from most debt, sure, but it's still a debt of a sort.
The question made a premise and then asked what amounts to a math question based on it. It's very common in SAT type tests to test your ability to solve problems.
The question was, in math form: IF taxes = government spending THEN? D. taxes/person = spending/person.
The question itself had nothing to do with debt or deficit or anything like that. A deficit (a type of debt) occurs when taxes/person are less than spending/person. In other words, when government spends more than it takes in via taxes, the government has a deficit, or debt.
All that said, you did a heck of a lot better than I did, I got an 81% and was pretty disappointed with myself for it.:/
I'm not exactly a history buff though, and that's where I made my mistakes. Oh well:P.
P.S.: The ruckus around the 2nd ammendment only happens when you try to change what the 2nd ammendment says. If you take it at face value (like we have for almost 200 years now) there's no confusion. If people don't like it they aught to push for a new ammendment to alter it (or "clarify" it, if you like), not try to make laws that infringe uppon it.
Uhhh... I believe there was a contractual agreement. I don't know how much you know about contract law, but even verbal agreements are contracts; they are simply more difficult to nail down if there is a problem than written contracts. That's why verbal agreements are usually just a few words and a handshake, something along the lines of "HP promises to use Vista, and Microsoft promises to not lower the requirements for the Vista Capable logo." shake hands, and done. It's completely binding, but chances are it was done in written form anyway.
From what I understand, the RIAA doesn't have a specific name they are sending to, they get it down to a room at best, with a "John Doe".
Then they send a form letter with a settlement, and try to get the individual to give up who they are and pay up. It's more like mail fraud on the RIAA's end, really.
So if the mail isn't addressed to anyone, who isn't getting their mail?
A switch plugged into a conference room network port for a few hours isn't going to destroy anything.
Actually, too many switches can very well bring down the network, even if they are only temporarily plugged in. Usually this only happens because the networking department is completely incompetant, but it can also happen when a company is growing faster than the IT department is prepared for, or if management is too tight and unwilling to pay for the proper infrastructure, and compromises end up being made to "make things work" for the users, despite the potential hazards to the network.
It took about four days to get seven hospitals back on-line.
It ended up being a massive Spanning-Tree loop that nobody saw coming. The root cause of spanning-tree loops? Basically, too many switches. In this case a researcher had dumped a bunch of data from a connection that was 10 hops from the nearest router.
The -exact- same thing can happen if your network is stretched to its limits and some numb-nuts of a user thinks he's smart and adds a switch to a conferance room and starts dumping - or pulling - a lot of data. If the connection from the conferance room is 9 hops from the nearest router, and you add that 10th, you very well may bring down the whole network. Chances are if your network is stretched like that, then management isn't forking out the cash for the nice switches that can detect an STP loop and mitigate it, but even if they do, your conferance room switch won't work once you cause an STP loop anyway, so why mess with it?
Why not, instead of thinking you know shit you don't, you let the guys who do this stuff for a living do their job, eh?
By the way, fixing that in 4 days cost something on the order of $100-200k in equipment, and probably that much or more in manpower, just to fix a problem caused by too many switches. The final overhaul on the IT network (which, granted, was absolutely necessary) was something on the order of $3mil.
So you might want to think twice the next time you think you're being clever and plugging crap into the network that you shouldn't be. You may very well shut down the entire corporate network by doing so.
Actually, if you say "Do you have a warrant?", and they say "NO" or "Yes but it isn't here", guess who has more power than 7 armed police officers? That's right, you do. You can tell them to shove it, and get off your property. If you rent, you have legal right to that space and get to say the same thing. Even if they come up on you in the street you get to tell them to shove it, and if they follow you around you get to file harassment charges against them.
Even if cops pull you over for speeding, they aren't permitted to search your car for anything that isn't sitting out in plain sight for all to see, unless you let them or unless they have a warrant.
If they try to force you to do something against your will that they have legal right to, they can get in a crapload of trouble, but ONLY IF YOU ASSERT YOUR RIGHTS!
Maybe this country would be a better place if so many men weren't raised to be sissies, and instead had a spine and stood up for themselves and what is right.
Don't blame the cops because you're a wuss man, seriously. If you hand over your rights, you shouldn't complain. You frickin handed it to them, you moron, the couldn't have looked for anything without your help. So if you want to blame the cops for letting you give up your rights, go ahead, but it seems pretty idiotic to me.
It is only now making it through the system, and apparently it's not the dock itself they are pattenting, but how the icons behave inside the dock, which I believe IS unique to the Mac version.
After that everyone was like "Oh cool, you can do that?" and spiffied theirs up too.
Really, it seems they have to be so specific that it likely won't affect anything other than allow Apple to license it off to windows or other OS's. Why those OS's wouldn't just come up with thier own version of the same thing is beyond me, but, meh.
Does your call just hop from phone to phone until it finds itself on the phone you're trying to call? Does every handset have infinite bandwidth?
Yeah, I mean, what's next? Computers that can talk to each other by hopping from one to the next until they reach their destination? Pfft, that's crazy talk. What, are the just supposed to "mesh" together on their own to access other devices accross the world?
My god man, you're insane!! Why, with technology like this even people in Africa could use cell phones!!
And for you people who don't get it, I am referring to, in order: The Internet, Mesh technology, and the OLPC. If you don't see how those can have anything to do with cell phone technology, grab a telecommunications handbook and brush up on what the technology is we are actually using right now. IP and telephony are simply two different methods of doing the same thing, and while the technologies are NOT -directly- transferrable from one to the other, what is possible in one is equally possible in the other, due to their similarities.
For those who STILL don't understand, it is absolutely feasable to use cellphones in a mesh technology, and bandwidth is NOT an issue, because the phone could be set up to only switch for the phones nearest to it. It's also not that hard to set a maximum number of connections for the phone. We do it in a number of ways already, just not necessarily with cell phones.
There are a number of ways of doing it, and all of them are well within our capability. It just makes Cell companies a lot more money to lock you in to their system. Plus, there aren't many alternatives right now, and so far as I know NO good alternatives.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK it is completely legal to download and burn a clean copy of XP/Vista if you own a valid license for it.
All major companies rely on this fact to deploy standard OS builds (often as an image) accross their domains. In fact, Microsoft has a handy-dandy tool, Sysprep, to help facilitate new machine ID's for cloned OS setups. That's actually all most OEM media is anyway.
So go ahead and burn a copy of the media, as long as you keep track of your licenses they BSA has nothing to come after you for.
Your measurements are correct if you look at the CPU and nothing else.
However, computers aren't made of just CPUs (at least not yet), so you must factor in the entire load of the computers, including the CPU, to get an accurate measure of power usage.
When you do that, guess which one wins? That's right, the VIA does, with about 3k fewer joules on an MP3 encode. AND it did it 30% faster.
Which would you choose? A slower machine that uses insignificantly more battery power? Or a faster machine that uses insignificantly less?
The time when the Atom will be a clear winner is when system power usage at idle drops to 25w or so. At that point the Atom, with its 4 extra watts, will only be using roughly 20% more power under full load, while the VIA, with its 17 extra watts, will be using around 80% more power. The tradeoff of 30% less power for 60-70% more battery life would be much easier to make than the current 30% less power for +-1% battery life.
So, while it's a step in the right direction, if it requires a power-hungry chipset then the advantage of the Atom completely disappears.
To Reiterate, there are (is?) a plethora of products out on the market that clearly state either on the packaging itself, or in the TOS, or in the purchase contract that there are specific terms that apply to resale.
It's "IS", there IS a plethora of products. You can test it by saying "There is a single plethora of products" or "There is a plethora out on the market."
As for the rest of your point, it's utter BS and you shouldn't talk contract law if you don't understand it. I've only taken a simple contract law class and even I know that's utter crap.
First, as many others have pointed out, the "not for individual sale/resale" is an FDA regulation, not resale doctrine. In the US, it IS legal to sell previosly owned goods. Once a company has sold (that's SOLD, not leased, there's a whole other can of worms with a lease) a good, ownership is transferred and the previous owner gets no say in whether or not it is re-sold. The government may have regulations on it though, depending on what the item is.
Even if they WERE to put a contract in, if that contract breaks current US law - and there are laws about sale of goods, like the first-sale doctrine - guess what? It's non-enforceable. It may be partially non-enforceable or fully non-enforceable, but in this case chances are it would be fully non-enforceable.
In America, companies deal with Un-authorised Re-Sellers in a special way. Know what that is? They don't sell to them!! OMG what a concept!! So if a UARS has a product for sale, they either purchased it second hand or on clearance from an ARS. In any case, they are all legally legitimate, however they UARS can get in big trouble if they are advertising with the X Brand name, because that is trademark infringement.
That's not the case in Fascist France it seems, where the government is apparently wholly owned by the corporations. As opposed to Semi-Fascist-Semi-Socialist America, where we still have some freedoms.
So let me get this straight: Individual citizens armed with handguns and rifles and shotguns are going to go up against government forces, who have artillery, cruise missiles, and attack helicopters? Actually, it would be individual citizens, armed with handguns and rifles and shotguns, along with their friends and family in the military who also believe the same, with what artillery, cruise missles, and attack helicopters they may control, going up against individual citizens and those of the military who believe the government is right.
Civil wars are never "the government vs the people". Tyranny is that way, and the people are generally not fighting back, but that isn't the case in a full blown civil war.
When it gets to that point, the military splits along similar lines that the people split on, and you get this massive, bloody, destructive war. But it is occasionally worth it.
Case in point: The American War For Independance. A lot of the fighting wasn't Americans VS British, a lot of it was Americans vs Americans. The British sent a lot of troops, and pretty much all of the commanders were British, but a large portion of their force was Americans who believed America should stay a colony.
The same thing happened in the American Civil War. It's the way of civil wars, they are incredibly ugly. But sometimes it is necessary.
If you RTFA carefully you would have noticed that that memo was an confidential memo from Bruce('s company) to the heads of "BigFirm" about "FUBAR Project" and specifically conversations with "ABC Company". So yes, Bruce's company was involved, but as an outside analyst to assess the truth about the status of the project. They were not the ABC company brought in to salvage the "Fubar Project".
Good try though. And really, this could apply to almost any large failed IT project. There are so many that you'd have a tough time figuring out exactly which one it was.
The fact that he has coined the (totally awesome) phrase "Thermalcline of Truth" to describe the problem is evidence of how pervasive it is.
Oh, the single BIGGEST source of Lead getting into the environment is automobile batteries -- and no they don't have lead free versions of those (well they do, but the cadmium is worse!). Ummmm... I believe he just did include recycling in that when he says "getting into the environment", that would be after the recycling has been accounted for, since recycled car batteries don't get into the environment (until later anyway).
Slashdot Mirror
Wait wait, you're going to have a cow about things like "who are even clueless about if they own" and "In the long run." but not the four incomplete sentances after that?
Maybe you should do some more proofreading? Bone up a little bit? I certainly wouldn't want you proofreading one of my reports, if you miss such obvious things. Half the crap you mentioned isn't even in his post. Lets go back to the incomplete sentances though. For example:
"In the long run. Going after 9 year old girls. Going after people who are seriously handicapped and on a fixed income. Going after old people who are even clueless about if they own a computer. May not be the best way to win the PR war."
Five fragments in a row. However, all he has done is used periods (probably for dramatic effect) improperly. Replace all the periods but the last one with commas and lower the case of the words immediately following said commas, and it works just fine.
Not everybody bothers with spell-checking either; it's a news forum for nerds, not a master's thesis.
Perhaps if you payed more attention to the context and content your criticisms would be more useful?
There are a couple of them, and they aren't all that popular. I don't remember what they were called, or I'd give you a link.
Seriously dude, I's so serious I used seriously to like, start two paragraphs in a row.
Seriously.
Er, mine gave me about 5 commonly used options for Bases. Your article says that the word "bases" the WORST possible clash, and the maximum words to pick from is 11. Is an 11 word list too much to handle? I did have to scroll the first time, so I suppose that counts as about 8 keypresses, with no waiting. That's verses a keypress, pause long enough for two keypresses, and four keypresses, which is 5 actual keypresses but is about as slow as 8 keypresses. Also, if I have to type Bases again in the near future, it's going to be 6 keypresses because it's at the front of the list now.
So, are 2 extra keypresses for one word in a sentance worth 3-5 extra keypress PER WORD in each sentance? Ever tried a word like Literary in multi-tap mode? OMGWTFBBQ!! 8 keys in T9, 19 in multi-tap. Forget about a word like Mississippi, that would take forever on a multi-tap entery (that's one of those words you dread to type out on multi-tap, it can take a full minute to type), but T9 it takes -drumroll- 11 keypresses. That just happens to be how many letters there are in Mississippi! Holy cow, it's amazing! And it isn't just for big words, words like "the" take 2 fewer keypresses, and words like "Hi" need no pause.
Seriously, it's not that hard, but stick with what you know, and I'll still be faster and more efficient than you even with the occasional word I have to enter into the dictionary (once, never to be entered again ;) ).
Seriously, the cases where multi-tap is faster than predictive text do certainly exist, but they are rare, and can be completely eliminated if you take a few extra seconds to customise your dictionary when you encounter such a word. After 6 months of use (or less) even cell phone users with full-keyboards should have trouble keeping up with a predictive text user.
Your article mentions iTap vs T9, T9 I prefer but the auto-completing of iTap isn't as bad as they make it out to be, because if you keep typing the auto-complete corrects itself, and it does make it quicker when it gets it right. My favorite system was whatever Kyocera uses. I found that to be very accurate, but it's a little different for everyone. :)
I don't know what you're typing, but T9 vs cycling the letters for me is a difference of 200-300% more button mashing, plus waiting for duplicate letters.
Perhaps if you stuck with real words and not made up ones it would be easier? I do find if I want to type a made-up word, I either have to add it to the T9 dictionary or switch over to abc input mode (the former takes longer, but I only ever have to do it once).
My only real trouble with the T9 on my LG is it uses the touchscreen only to choose between possible words, and I've got fat thumbs. Same problem with scrolling on the LG, there is generally no arrow option, you've got to slide it.
In any case, with T9 I can keep up pretty well with my friend who has a full qwerty keyboard on her phone, and she is very proficient with it. It's impossible to keep up with abc entry mode, on ANY phone I've used.
And, for the record, Kyocera's predictive typing is the best I've ever used, I wish my LG used Kyocera's entry method, cause the LG is otherwise the best phone I've ever used.
Can't have it all I guess, eh?
So, because you're a woman, and you've been hurt, it's ok to destroy an innocent man's life?
All men are pigs right?
I'm not making light of sexual assault, my best friend was raped and it didn't take her a week to recover, it took her years. About two before she was comfortable hugging close male friends, and another year after that before she could handle dating. Her first boyfriend after that had a tough time, because she had several panic attacks that would be triggered by seemingly benign events, but went back to the rape.
However, her reputation was not harmed in any way, and since she has healed she can live a normal, and very happy life. A man charged with rape, brought to trial, and then aquitted has no such hope if his name and crime are not protected before a conviction. His reputation is permanently ruined, there will be jobs he cannot get, relationships he cannot have, communities he cannot join, all because he was accused of something he did not do. This is multiplied ten-fold in high-profile cases or small town cases.
You seem to think the only person who can possibly be severly damaged is the female, apparently men's lives don't matter, innocent or no.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
Remedy is heaven compared to Digital Workflow.
I work in an office where I use Remedy, and most of my co-workers use DW. Remedy has its quirks, but I won't touch DW. You spend 10 minutes working a ticket and an hour trying to close it in DW.
Remedy at least is useable. Of course, you can get a glimps of how retarded my company is just by the fact that we are using two different systems in the same office. And yes, Remedy tasks have to be converted to DW tickets, and then back again after they are finished. It's stupid.
Probably the easiest ticket tracking system I've used is TrackIt. Stupid simple, kept track of who's tickets were in, easy to view how many tickets were in the queue all at once, easy to sort, easy for a user to put in a ticket correctly, and it was easy to add comments to and the like. It is pretty much the opposite of Digital Workflow.
Pure democracy is, to put it simply, Tyranny of the Masses. A representative republic (which is what the US is) is NOT a pure democracy, it's not even "really close" to a democracy.
A representative republic is a system which attempts (and I think succeeds in) balancing the over-all will of the people with the needs of the minority. In a democracy, the needs of the minority are meaningless. In America, the needs of the minority actually get a significant voice, though if the will of the majority is opposed to the minority, the minority will still lose.
For example, my great state of Alaska. We have the second-lowest population of any state. We only have about 600,000 people, and so only get one congressman in the House of Representatives because of this. New York, however, has 19 million people, and so get quite a few congressman in the House, 29 in fact. That is the balance that gives majority more power over minority.
What gives smaller states more power, is the Senate. Each state gets 2 senators, regardless of population. Alaska gets 2, and New York gets 2. In the Senate, we are both exactly equal. Also, the Senate, with 100 members, has equal power as the House of Representatives, which has 500+ members. So even though Alaska has 1/600'th (ish) of the representatives, we actually get about 1/200'th (ish) of the power. Majority still holds most of the power, but Minority gets a great increase in power.
See how things balance?
And a state gets as many votes in the electoral college as they have representatives. So, if you're still with me, Alaska gets 3 votes, and New York gets 31. That makes New York only 10 times more powerful than Alaska, even though it has 40 times the people.
Now, the popular vote only matters WITHIN each state. It doesn't matter on the whole, nobody counts that, and you're ignorant of American Government, and really what a fair government should look like in general, if you think the overall popular vote should determine who is president.
So each state sends representatives to the electoral college, which forms every presidential election, according to how many representatives they have in congress. Alaska sends 3 according to their own system. In Alaska, one candidate or the other will "win" all three electoral votes in the popular vote. A candidate can win this with 90%, 51%, or, depending on the other candidates involved, 40% or even less. It doesn't matter if 60% of the population did not vote for that candidate, if he had the most he gets all 3 electoral votes.
MOST states do it this way, New York included. So, in New York, a guy can get 19 million votes, and only gets 31 electoral votes. 19 million is about 15% of the total population of the US. Are you starting to see how the popular vote can get skewed? That's why we don't use it.
The needs of the US as a whole is NOT determined by what 51% of the people want. That would degenerate into anarchy in 50 years or less. The needs of the US is determined by a weighted majority. Alaska gets more influence per citizen than New York does, but New York has more influence than Alaska as a whole.
See how it works? It's how we do major government here. It's fair, because it gives the majority enough power that, generally, things go the way the majority wants. That's a good thing. It also, however, prevents the majority from trampling the minority just because they can. That is also a good thing. :)
Deficit would have been 100% correct, no question
Actually, it would have still been wrong, a deficit is just a form of debt. Different from most debt, sure, but it's still a debt of a sort.
The question made a premise and then asked what amounts to a math question based on it. It's very common in SAT type tests to test your ability to solve problems.
The question was, in math form: IF taxes = government spending THEN? D. taxes/person = spending/person.
The question itself had nothing to do with debt or deficit or anything like that. A deficit (a type of debt) occurs when taxes/person are less than spending/person. In other words, when government spends more than it takes in via taxes, the government has a deficit, or debt.
All that said, you did a heck of a lot better than I did, I got an 81% and was pretty disappointed with myself for it. :/
I'm not exactly a history buff though, and that's where I made my mistakes. Oh well :P.
P.S.: The ruckus around the 2nd ammendment only happens when you try to change what the 2nd ammendment says. If you take it at face value (like we have for almost 200 years now) there's no confusion. If people don't like it they aught to push for a new ammendment to alter it (or "clarify" it, if you like), not try to make laws that infringe uppon it.
Uhhh... I believe there was a contractual agreement. I don't know how much you know about contract law, but even verbal agreements are contracts; they are simply more difficult to nail down if there is a problem than written contracts. That's why verbal agreements are usually just a few words and a handshake, something along the lines of "HP promises to use Vista, and Microsoft promises to not lower the requirements for the Vista Capable logo." shake hands, and done. It's completely binding, but chances are it was done in written form anyway.
Hence the reason they are in friggin court dude.
From what I understand, the RIAA doesn't have a specific name they are sending to, they get it down to a room at best, with a "John Doe".
Then they send a form letter with a settlement, and try to get the individual to give up who they are and pay up. It's more like mail fraud on the RIAA's end, really.
So if the mail isn't addressed to anyone, who isn't getting their mail?
It's the other way around, it was a movie bastardization of a great novel.
The novel itself, is awesome, you should read it.
A switch plugged into a conference room network port for a few hours isn't going to destroy anything.
Actually, too many switches can very well bring down the network, even if they are only temporarily plugged in. Usually this only happens because the networking department is completely incompetant, but it can also happen when a company is growing faster than the IT department is prepared for, or if management is too tight and unwilling to pay for the proper infrastructure, and compromises end up being made to "make things work" for the users, despite the potential hazards to the network.
This happened to Beth-Israel hospital (http://www.cio.com/article/31701/Halamka_on_Beth_Israel_s_Health_Care_IT_Disaster?page=1) a few years ago, when they were aquiring and partnering with hospitals left and right. One day, the network crashed.
It took about four days to get seven hospitals back on-line.
It ended up being a massive Spanning-Tree loop that nobody saw coming. The root cause of spanning-tree loops? Basically, too many switches. In this case a researcher had dumped a bunch of data from a connection that was 10 hops from the nearest router.
The -exact- same thing can happen if your network is stretched to its limits and some numb-nuts of a user thinks he's smart and adds a switch to a conferance room and starts dumping - or pulling - a lot of data. If the connection from the conferance room is 9 hops from the nearest router, and you add that 10th, you very well may bring down the whole network. Chances are if your network is stretched like that, then management isn't forking out the cash for the nice switches that can detect an STP loop and mitigate it, but even if they do, your conferance room switch won't work once you cause an STP loop anyway, so why mess with it?
Why not, instead of thinking you know shit you don't, you let the guys who do this stuff for a living do their job, eh?
By the way, fixing that in 4 days cost something on the order of $100-200k in equipment, and probably that much or more in manpower, just to fix a problem caused by too many switches. The final overhaul on the IT network (which, granted, was absolutely necessary) was something on the order of $3mil.
So you might want to think twice the next time you think you're being clever and plugging crap into the network that you shouldn't be. You may very well shut down the entire corporate network by doing so.
Actually, if you say "Do you have a warrant?", and they say "NO" or "Yes but it isn't here", guess who has more power than 7 armed police officers? That's right, you do. You can tell them to shove it, and get off your property. If you rent, you have legal right to that space and get to say the same thing. Even if they come up on you in the street you get to tell them to shove it, and if they follow you around you get to file harassment charges against them.
Even if cops pull you over for speeding, they aren't permitted to search your car for anything that isn't sitting out in plain sight for all to see, unless you let them or unless they have a warrant.
If they try to force you to do something against your will that they have legal right to, they can get in a crapload of trouble, but ONLY IF YOU ASSERT YOUR RIGHTS!
Maybe this country would be a better place if so many men weren't raised to be sissies, and instead had a spine and stood up for themselves and what is right.
Don't blame the cops because you're a wuss man, seriously. If you hand over your rights, you shouldn't complain. You frickin handed it to them, you moron, the couldn't have looked for anything without your help. So if you want to blame the cops for letting you give up your rights, go ahead, but it seems pretty idiotic to me.
Cheers.
Because they filed it 9 years ago.
It is only now making it through the system, and apparently it's not the dock itself they are pattenting, but how the icons behave inside the dock, which I believe IS unique to the Mac version.
After that everyone was like "Oh cool, you can do that?" and spiffied theirs up too.
Really, it seems they have to be so specific that it likely won't affect anything other than allow Apple to license it off to windows or other OS's. Why those OS's wouldn't just come up with thier own version of the same thing is beyond me, but, meh.
Bridges to airports for all my friends!
There, fixed that for you.
Question my sanity all you want, but I think Shia LaBeouf's acting is damn fine!
Shia is the hot chick right? ...
The government does things like this because corporate lobbyists draft bills and get them passed.
Uhh, isn't that sortof, you know, too much government regulation? Sure sounds like it to me.
So yeah... Thanks for playing.
Does your call just hop from phone to phone until it finds itself on the phone you're trying to call? Does every handset have infinite bandwidth?
Yeah, I mean, what's next? Computers that can talk to each other by hopping from one to the next until they reach their destination? Pfft, that's crazy talk. What, are the just supposed to "mesh" together on their own to access other devices accross the world?
My god man, you're insane!! Why, with technology like this even people in Africa could use cell phones!!
And for you people who don't get it, I am referring to, in order: The Internet, Mesh technology, and the OLPC. If you don't see how those can have anything to do with cell phone technology, grab a telecommunications handbook and brush up on what the technology is we are actually using right now. IP and telephony are simply two different methods of doing the same thing, and while the technologies are NOT -directly- transferrable from one to the other, what is possible in one is equally possible in the other, due to their similarities.
For those who STILL don't understand, it is absolutely feasable to use cellphones in a mesh technology, and bandwidth is NOT an issue, because the phone could be set up to only switch for the phones nearest to it. It's also not that hard to set a maximum number of connections for the phone. We do it in a number of ways already, just not necessarily with cell phones.
There are a number of ways of doing it, and all of them are well within our capability. It just makes Cell companies a lot more money to lock you in to their system. Plus, there aren't many alternatives right now, and so far as I know NO good alternatives.
Cheers!
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK it is completely legal to download and burn a clean copy of XP/Vista if you own a valid license for it.
All major companies rely on this fact to deploy standard OS builds (often as an image) accross their domains. In fact, Microsoft has a handy-dandy tool, Sysprep, to help facilitate new machine ID's for cloned OS setups. That's actually all most OEM media is anyway.
So go ahead and burn a copy of the media, as long as you keep track of your licenses they BSA has nothing to come after you for.
Your measurements are correct if you look at the CPU and nothing else.
However, computers aren't made of just CPUs (at least not yet), so you must factor in the entire load of the computers, including the CPU, to get an accurate measure of power usage.
When you do that, guess which one wins? That's right, the VIA does, with about 3k fewer joules on an MP3 encode. AND it did it 30% faster.
Which would you choose? A slower machine that uses insignificantly more battery power? Or a faster machine that uses insignificantly less?
The time when the Atom will be a clear winner is when system power usage at idle drops to 25w or so. At that point the Atom, with its 4 extra watts, will only be using roughly 20% more power under full load, while the VIA, with its 17 extra watts, will be using around 80% more power. The tradeoff of 30% less power for 60-70% more battery life would be much easier to make than the current 30% less power for +-1% battery life.
So, while it's a step in the right direction, if it requires a power-hungry chipset then the advantage of the Atom completely disappears.
To Reiterate, there are (is?) a plethora of products out on the market that clearly state either on the packaging itself, or in the TOS, or in the purchase contract that there are specific terms that apply to resale.
It's "IS", there IS a plethora of products. You can test it by saying "There is a single plethora of products" or "There is a plethora out on the market."
As for the rest of your point, it's utter BS and you shouldn't talk contract law if you don't understand it. I've only taken a simple contract law class and even I know that's utter crap.
First, as many others have pointed out, the "not for individual sale/resale" is an FDA regulation, not resale doctrine. In the US, it IS legal to sell previosly owned goods. Once a company has sold (that's SOLD, not leased, there's a whole other can of worms with a lease) a good, ownership is transferred and the previous owner gets no say in whether or not it is re-sold. The government may have regulations on it though, depending on what the item is.
Even if they WERE to put a contract in, if that contract breaks current US law - and there are laws about sale of goods, like the first-sale doctrine - guess what? It's non-enforceable. It may be partially non-enforceable or fully non-enforceable, but in this case chances are it would be fully non-enforceable.
In America, companies deal with Un-authorised Re-Sellers in a special way. Know what that is? They don't sell to them!! OMG what a concept!! So if a UARS has a product for sale, they either purchased it second hand or on clearance from an ARS. In any case, they are all legally legitimate, however they UARS can get in big trouble if they are advertising with the X Brand name, because that is trademark infringement.
That's not the case in Fascist France it seems, where the government is apparently wholly owned by the corporations. As opposed to Semi-Fascist-Semi-Socialist America, where we still have some freedoms.
Civil wars are never "the government vs the people". Tyranny is that way, and the people are generally not fighting back, but that isn't the case in a full blown civil war.
When it gets to that point, the military splits along similar lines that the people split on, and you get this massive, bloody, destructive war. But it is occasionally worth it.
Case in point: The American War For Independance. A lot of the fighting wasn't Americans VS British, a lot of it was Americans vs Americans. The British sent a lot of troops, and pretty much all of the commanders were British, but a large portion of their force was Americans who believed America should stay a colony.
The same thing happened in the American Civil War. It's the way of civil wars, they are incredibly ugly. But sometimes it is necessary.
If you RTFA carefully you would have noticed that that memo was an confidential memo from Bruce('s company) to the heads of "BigFirm" about "FUBAR Project" and specifically conversations with "ABC Company". So yes, Bruce's company was involved, but as an outside analyst to assess the truth about the status of the project. They were not the ABC company brought in to salvage the "Fubar Project".
Good try though. And really, this could apply to almost any large failed IT project. There are so many that you'd have a tough time figuring out exactly which one it was.
The fact that he has coined the (totally awesome) phrase "Thermalcline of Truth" to describe the problem is evidence of how pervasive it is.
Cheers!