Not to mention the fastest Internet service he can get is probably satellite-based with a low usage cap.
Did I not mention that I was 10 minutes from a major city? There are at least 3 providers. Cable, DSL, and long range wifi as well as the mobile carriers 4G networks like verizon, att, tmobile, etc...
I don't get it... Why are they calling 300 square feet "microunits"? Sounds like a relatively normal size to me... Of course, I live in midtown Manhattan, so for $2,200 a month my wife and I get a 350 square foot place in a building with 20 of them (though I think unit 1D, by the stairwell might be smaller). We have a nice kitchen...
I also pay about $2200/month for me and my 3 kids but I live in a 6000 sqft house with a 4 car garage on 4 acres with a private stocked 4 acre lake in the backyard. Oh, I'm also only about 10 minutes away from 2 major hospitals, an airport, and several excellent colleges including a top college football team.
Yeah, I'm confused about this one. Selling drugs or sex isn't legal either but that doesn't mean that a website that does it is fake. Just because it is illegal to facilitate an exchange doesn't mean that someone isn't going to create a website that tries. Sure, it might get taken down or they might open themself up to lawsuits but that doesn't change whether or not it can exists.
On another note, how exactly is a mutual fight illegal? There are plenty of places where boxing, cage fighting, etc... happens.
It's not an unlimited resource as every user is absolutely capped to his maximum data rate.
And how is this cap any better? Honestly, with my usage, I would much prefer them to get rid of the data rate cap and charge me for data usage instead. I would prefer the higher speed.
Currently Comcast is offering 75MBps (down at least) a lot of places that is enough for multiple full HD streams. What economic advantage is there to having more?
Great post. The only thing I would add is that data caps actually allow companies to INCREASE their speed offerings. 75MBps is about 200 terabytes per month if maxed out. If there are reasonable data caps in place then it's easy to increase speeds to 1GBps because you don't have to worry about someone using up the full 1GB pipe 24 hours a day 7 days a week (about 2500 terabytes of data). The only thing I hope companies do is have an "uncapped" period during non-peak time because the non-peak time isn't what costs them money and they should encourage people to download large files during the less busy times.
A better comparison is that the ISP is a company that manages the piping for you to get water. You pay a arbitrarily high price dependent on the size of that pipe. Now, this company doesn't create or manage the water (as much as they might want to), they just manage the infrastructure for getting it to you.They then decide to also start charging you for the amount of water that flows through that pipe.
Yes, this is a very good comparison but do you really think that the pipe coming into your neighborhood is capable of handling everybody turning their water on at the same time? Those water companies "oversell" their pipes as well but if everyone in the neighborhood started watering their lawns at the exact same time that other people are trying to take a shower then the water companies must go thru the very expensive process of upgrading their pipes.
There is a big difference between consuming a large amount of an 'unlimited' or 'free' finite resource and consuming a large amount of data on your internet connection. It costs ISPs pennies per GB to get you that data and guess what?
It really depends on the time of the day. That's one of the reasons that I don't like flat data caps. Being a responsible downloader and downloading huge files at night costs an ISP practically nothing. On the other hand, every additional person that is using 1M/sec (a T1) during peak time requires the ISP to increase max capacity. Internet pipes are very similar to water pipes. If a water main can handle a hundred 1 inch pipes turned on at the same time and more than that turn on then performance starts to suffer. The only solution is to increase the size of the pipe which is expensive.
We have had great luck with the zotac zbox ci320 boxes which are also vesa mounted and fanless and look great mounted to the back of monitors. Zotac also offers several higher end versions but for our needs the ci320 is plenty. We have ubuntu running on them and they work well. The only real drawback is that at least the ci320 only has hdmi out so you'll either need a monitor with hdmi in or need some type of adapter.
A genuine massage therapist is not going to build a portfolio from offering "free massages", bro.
I've been to many festivals where massage therapists and even chiropractors give a free 5 minute massage. I've also seen deals like buy the first massage, get the 2nd massage free. My cousin is now the most expensive photographer in her town but in order to create a portfolio, she did her first settings free and her first weddings at greatly reduced prices. She was selective, she didn't just give everyone that walked in the door a free wedding session but if it was a big wedding she was willing to do it at a discount to "advance" her portfolio. I have a sister who is a wedding planner and a good friend who is a real estate agent and they are the same way. It helps to have "bigger" clients on your portfolio. You will even find commercial software venders who do the same thing. It's advantageous for them to land a well known company at a reduced price so they can "our software is used by company X". I don't personally know any lawyers but I've heard they are the same way as well where getting a "big" case can help improve your reputation and allow you to take bigger and bigger cases. It makes perfect sense that someone would like the opportunity to write software for the federal government. This is completely different that doing a $1 job for a no name company on some rentacoder type site.
When the old antibiotics become public domain there will be a strong incentive for the big rich pharma companies to invest in developing the new ones.
Many older antibiotics are already out of patent and have generics. If anything lengthening patent protect on new drugs would help more than shortening it (not that I'm recommending it but just that it makes more sense). The actual problem is a problem with numbers. The half dozen antibiotics in some combination cure 99.9% of all cases. People either cycle thru them and get better or they die before they get a chance to get thru all of them. Now, add in the fact that you only take antibiotics for a week or two at a time. So you're trying to sell a drug in a crowded market where people and insurance companies will only pay your premium for.1% of cases which last less than 2 weeks. It's much more profitable to go after chronic or life threatening illnesses where there is no other option and people will pay you thousands of dollars each and every year.
I think if someone invents such a contraption, they stand to make WAY more than a $250k prize by patenting and manufacturing the thing themselves and selling it to farmers. Really. Who would be stupid enough to give away such an invention for a mere $250k?
It doesn't matter. The farmers still win. The $250k is to get people interested in looking into the problem. By getting published on slashdot, they are already halfway to their goal as their primary goal is publicity. If someone solves the problem and wants to sell them the machine, the farmers can keep their $250k and still come out ahead as they still accomplished the goal of getting someone to create the machine for them.
Throw out that one bizarre requirement, and all the rest of this crap becomes a moot point. So when travelling from A to B, instead of asking/figuring how you have to adjust the clock, you are asking how much you have to adjust *yourself*?
What does it mean that we have a meeting at 0:35 ?
0:35 UTC is alot more descriptive that what we use now. You already have to adjust yourself when you travel. There are plenty of difference in business hours besides the timezone. With this new system, instead of having to fix your clock too, you just need to figure out when sunrise is. No more daylight savings time, no more weird towns that cross timezones. If you want a relative time, it would be easy enough to tell someone that you want to meet at 4 hours after sunrise but honestly in today's world 0:35 UTC is much easier to deal with and there is no second guessing when the meeting is suppose to take place.
HFT may help make the market more fluid, but it's also not the primary reason that stocks exist. Just block all trades 5 seconds before and after the leap second. It's fair to everyone, and 10 seconds of not being able to trade should not be a big deal.
Very few if any markets are open during the time period that the leap second is typically added.
So you'd prefer computers crashing possibly 1 million times a year, rather than once?
These programs crash because they weren't written to deal with a non-continuous time system. Making it LESS continuous would make them less stable.
I disagree. One of the reasons that a leap second causes problems is because it's so infrequent and therefore people don't code for it. If it's happening every day then anyone who depends on a super accurate clock will be required to account for it. It's the difference between accounting for the leap year which happens every 4 years and 2 digit year changes(Y2K) that happen every 100 years. Most programs can handle the leap year and daylight savings time because they happen frequently. Many programs didn't account for Y2K or the missing leap year on the year 2000 because it's an infrequent event.
I challenge you to find a single obese person that didn't get that way by eating a huge amount of refined sugar. There are plenty of cultures that eat a ton of potatoes, rice, etc... but don't have the obesity problem of the USA. Likewise with bacon, sausage, etc... If you tried REALLY hard, you might be able to gain weight without eating sugar but in the real world, those people don't exist. If you're worried about getting fat, just stop eating sugar.
Watch the dairy, meat, grains, nuts, etc and other than that you're golden.
I agreed with you up until this point. Meat is fairly low calorie. You don't get fat eating meat. Likewise with nuts and dairy. You can drink as much milk and eat as much cheese as you want. If the average person did nothing but cut out their processed sugar they would never gain weight and if they want to lose weight then cut out the carbs (corn/wheat/rice/potatoes). That's it, that's all you need to do. I guarantee that if you eliminate sugar (and similiar things like honey) that you will be healthier than 90% of the USA population and if you also eliminate corn/wheat/rice/potatoes from your diet then you will be healthier than 99% of the USA population.
Ahh, the old "My side proven guilty and corrupt well beyond any reasonable doubt so I counter with both sides are equally bad" added with a hint of "actually your side is still worse despite no evidence" to top it off.
Leftists are so funny these days with the contortions they have to do to still support candidates that are as corrupt as the average DNC member in DC is.
Funny how you jump to conclusions about me. I'm definitely NOT a leftist and I do think both sides are corrupt. You also flipped my conclusion. My conclusion was that the democrats are "more corrupt" because they supported something they probably wouldn't have naturally supported in the first place. I in no way was trying to defend the democrats. I think like most people, you are seeing what you are wanting to see instead of actually looking at what I said. The average DNC member and the average RNC are both crooks. Luckily people are starting to realize it and that's why people like Sanders, Trump, and Carson are leading in the polls. Whether they will be less corrupt remains to be seen but people are at least making an attempt to vote for people who they perceive as outsiders.
PS - Just to tweak the/. crowd, guess which party they've bought?
I'm not sure what that proves. If you pay off the democrats to vote for your issue because the republicans are going to support it anyways (or vice versa), it still makes both parties culpable. Sometimes the money is spent on the side that already supports their views and sometimes the money is spent to get them to support your views. To me the later is a lot worse as instead of just helping support the group that you agree with, you are actively bribing the opposing group. You have to look at the bigger picture and connect a lot of dots to figure out which one it is though.
The functionality I'd really like to see is this sort of thing done as an iPhone / iPod Touch sized unit ---- Apple could take their laptop, make the trackpad a removable unit which was exactly the size of an iPhone/iPod Touch
The iphone already has a large "trackpad". The only thing really needed is a vga/hdmi out on the iphone and when you connect the monitor, the entire phone becomes your trackpad. This solves the "mouse" issue. Now, all you need is a keyboard and monitor where ever you want to use it. I believe microsoft recently came out with such a device. Not sure what it was called. A cellphone with a video out would probably be adequate for many people. The main problem I see is that most desktop apps I want to use are windows/linux while most portable apps are iphone/android. It's not the form factor, the speed, or the technology that would be the problem for me but the split ecosystem.
And? None of those change the fact that he bought a cheap car just as they don't change the fact that other people with money will still buy cheap tablets.
I would say that people with money are almost more likely to buy a cheap tablet. Someone cash strapped might buy a $200 tablet as their primary computer device and share it among the family where a family with a little more money will still buy the $200 tablet but will also buy each kid their own personal $50 tablet.
It's remarkably easy for the have in the US to assert that no one goes without in our "great" country, when the fact of the matter is that unless you spend time to access so called giveaways, you have no clue as to how marginal these things can be. Spend a month trying to work through your day on free wi-fi, then brag about the wonders of American life.
I work from home. I have internet at home but I get bored sitting at home all day, so I venture out to the coffee shops, etc... for a change of scenery. I've worked for 8 straight hours in probably every coffee shop in town and 4 hour chunks in many of the restaurants in town and I can tell you that the free wifi (at least in my town) is more than adequate to do anything you have to do. There are a few quirky places that limit you to 2 hours during lunch rush, etc... or that you have to send keep alives on your ssh/vpn connections if you don't want them to idle out. There are also places that print the wifi password on your receipt at an attempt to make you buy something to use it but plenty of places like mcdonalds, they couldn't care less if you bought something or not. The point is, I have a great internet at home, and I have spent many months working from free wifi and it works just fine. I've actually considered cancelling my internet at home and I probably would except that my employer pays for it so it doesn't cost me anything anyways but my home internet is mostly used for watching movies, most of my actually day to day work is done via free wifi. So, yes, I'm one of the haves, but I've done the using free wifi and it's more than adequate for day to day stuff. OS upgrades and other large downloads might possibly be problematic but that's not their use case. My suggestion for that is try to go during a time that they are not busy and try to find a mom-and-pop place that hopefully doesn't put bandwidth caps.
It'll be climate if the number of hurricanes keeps increasing,
Well... sort of. It's climate if any statistical property of hurricanes undergoes any statistical shift. Climate is the signal. Weather is the noise. It's like, say, driving home from work. Let's say it normally takes you an average of 20 minutes to drive home from work. Your numbers may go 17, 21, 14, 29, 19, 16, 26, 18, etc depending on local conditions... but the average is 20. But when a statistically significant sampling of drives starts averaging out higher - say, 27, 20, 21, 34, 20, 26, 31, etc... the underlying baseline has changed. The noise still exists, but it's on top of a different signal.
That said, again, hurricanes are very complicated systems to model and predict, so it's hard to make predictions on this front with too much confidence.
I think the point is if we start having several outliers in a row then we can be pretty certain it's climate. To use your driving record example, if next week your times go 33,37,32,47 then we know something has changed. Likewise, if over the next 5 years we see 3 huricanes with greater than 200 mile winds make landfall then we know that something significant has changed. We obviously can make conclusions with less dramatic data but multiple record breaking hurricanes is probably what it will take to get anyone to do anything about climate change.
My guess is they tried this case because pin-trips sounds an awful lot like pin-terest (pin-trist). My guess is that they thought they had a good chance of winning the first and were hoping that they could get a more general ruling that gave them full control of the word "pin". Basically, they lost because they got greedy. If they just went after pintrips because it was one letter sound away from their trademark pintrist -> pintrips they probably would have won.
There is a simple solution. We can just kill all the wildflowers. A good dose of roundup or gasoline 50ft around the perimeter of the field should do the trick
This is modded as a -1 for flamebait but I have to ask. Why is this a bad idea? You want to continue your research and you thought of an ingenious way to bring in some much needed money. Kudos to you. The article says that the winning bidder gets to work with the scientist on naming so it sounds like he is retaining some amount of veto power. The only thing I might change is give him the option of not necessarily picking the highest bidder if the 2nd or 3rd highest bidder had a more reasonable name.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention the fastest Internet service he can get is probably satellite-based with a low usage cap.
Did I not mention that I was 10 minutes from a major city? There are at least 3 providers. Cable, DSL, and long range wifi as well as the mobile carriers 4G networks like verizon, att, tmobile, etc...
I don't get it... Why are they calling 300 square feet "microunits"? Sounds like a relatively normal size to me... Of course, I live in midtown Manhattan, so for $2,200 a month my wife and I get a 350 square foot place in a building with 20 of them (though I think unit 1D, by the stairwell might be smaller). We have a nice kitchen...
I also pay about $2200/month for me and my 3 kids but I live in a 6000 sqft house with a 4 car garage on 4 acres with a private stocked 4 acre lake in the backyard.
Oh, I'm also only about 10 minutes away from 2 major hospitals, an airport, and several excellent colleges including a top college football team.
Yeah, I'm confused about this one. Selling drugs or sex isn't legal either but that doesn't mean that a website that does it is fake.
Just because it is illegal to facilitate an exchange doesn't mean that someone isn't going to create a website that tries.
Sure, it might get taken down or they might open themself up to lawsuits but that doesn't change whether or not it can exists.
On another note, how exactly is a mutual fight illegal? There are plenty of places where boxing, cage fighting, etc... happens.
It's not an unlimited resource as every user is absolutely capped to his maximum data rate.
And how is this cap any better? Honestly, with my usage, I would much prefer them to get rid of the data rate cap and charge me for data usage instead. I would prefer the higher speed.
Currently Comcast is offering 75MBps (down at least) a lot of places that is enough for multiple full HD streams. What economic advantage is there to having more?
Great post. The only thing I would add is that data caps actually allow companies to INCREASE their speed offerings. 75MBps is about 200 terabytes per month if maxed out. If there are reasonable data caps in place then it's easy to increase speeds to 1GBps because you don't have to worry about someone using up the full 1GB pipe 24 hours a day 7 days a week (about 2500 terabytes of data). The only thing I hope companies do is have an "uncapped" period during non-peak time because the non-peak time isn't what costs them money and they should encourage people to download large files during the less busy times.
A better comparison is that the ISP is a company that manages the piping for you to get water. You pay a arbitrarily high price dependent on the size of that pipe. Now, this company doesn't create or manage the water (as much as they might want to), they just manage the infrastructure for getting it to you.They then decide to also start charging you for the amount of water that flows through that pipe.
Yes, this is a very good comparison but do you really think that the pipe coming into your neighborhood is capable of handling everybody turning their water on at the same time? Those water companies "oversell" their pipes as well but if everyone in the neighborhood started watering their lawns at the exact same time that other people are trying to take a shower then the water companies must go thru the very expensive process of upgrading their pipes.
There is a big difference between consuming a large amount of an 'unlimited' or 'free' finite resource and consuming a large amount of data on your internet connection. It costs ISPs pennies per GB to get you that data and guess what?
It really depends on the time of the day. That's one of the reasons that I don't like flat data caps. Being a responsible downloader and downloading huge files at night costs an ISP practically nothing. On the other hand, every additional person that is using 1M/sec (a T1) during peak time requires the ISP to increase max capacity. Internet pipes are very similar to water pipes. If a water main can handle a hundred 1 inch pipes turned on at the same time and more than that turn on then performance starts to suffer. The only solution is to increase the size of the pipe which is expensive.
We have had great luck with the zotac zbox ci320 boxes which are also vesa mounted and fanless and look great mounted to the back of monitors. Zotac also offers several higher end versions but for our needs the ci320 is plenty. We have ubuntu running on them and they work well. The only real drawback is that at least the ci320 only has hdmi out so you'll either need a monitor with hdmi in or need some type of adapter.
A genuine massage therapist is not going to build a portfolio from offering "free massages", bro.
I've been to many festivals where massage therapists and even chiropractors give a free 5 minute massage. I've also seen deals like buy the first massage, get the 2nd massage free. My cousin is now the most expensive photographer in her town but in order to create a portfolio, she did her first settings free and her first weddings at greatly reduced prices. She was selective, she didn't just give everyone that walked in the door a free wedding session but if it was a big wedding she was willing to do it at a discount to "advance" her portfolio. I have a sister who is a wedding planner and a good friend who is a real estate agent and they are the same way. It helps to have "bigger" clients on your portfolio. You will even find commercial software venders who do the same thing. It's advantageous for them to land a well known company at a reduced price so they can "our software is used by company X". I don't personally know any lawyers but I've heard they are the same way as well where getting a "big" case can help improve your reputation and allow you to take bigger and bigger cases. It makes perfect sense that someone would like the opportunity to write software for the federal government. This is completely different that doing a $1 job for a no name company on some rentacoder type site.
When the old antibiotics become public domain there will be a strong incentive for the big rich pharma companies to invest in developing the new ones.
Many older antibiotics are already out of patent and have generics. If anything lengthening patent protect on new drugs would help more than shortening it (not that I'm recommending it but just that it makes more sense). The actual problem is a problem with numbers. The half dozen antibiotics in some combination cure 99.9% of all cases. People either cycle thru them and get better or they die before they get a chance to get thru all of them. Now, add in the fact that you only take antibiotics for a week or two at a time. So you're trying to sell a drug in a crowded market where people and insurance companies will only pay your premium for .1% of cases which last less than 2 weeks. It's much more profitable to go after chronic or life threatening illnesses where there is no other option and people will pay you thousands of dollars each and every year.
I think if someone invents such a contraption, they stand to make WAY more than a $250k prize by patenting and manufacturing the thing themselves and selling it to farmers. Really. Who would be stupid enough to give away such an invention for a mere $250k?
It doesn't matter. The farmers still win. The $250k is to get people interested in looking into the problem. By getting published on slashdot, they are already halfway to their goal as their primary goal is publicity. If someone solves the problem and wants to sell them the machine, the farmers can keep their $250k and still come out ahead as they still accomplished the goal of getting someone to create the machine for them.
Throw out that one bizarre requirement, and all the rest of this crap becomes a moot point.
So when travelling from A to B, instead of asking/figuring how you have to adjust the clock, you are asking how much you have to adjust *yourself*?
What does it mean that we have a meeting at 0:35 ?
0:35 UTC is alot more descriptive that what we use now.
You already have to adjust yourself when you travel. There are plenty of difference in business hours besides the timezone. With this new system, instead of having to fix your clock too, you just need to figure out when sunrise is. No more daylight savings time, no more weird towns that cross timezones. If you want a relative time, it would be easy enough to tell someone that you want to meet at 4 hours after sunrise but honestly in today's world 0:35 UTC is much easier to deal with and there is no second guessing when the meeting is suppose to take place.
HFT may help make the market more fluid, but it's also not the primary reason that stocks exist. Just block all trades 5 seconds before and after the leap second. It's fair to everyone, and 10 seconds of not being able to trade should not be a big deal.
Very few if any markets are open during the time period that the leap second is typically added.
So you'd prefer computers crashing possibly 1 million times a year, rather than once?
These programs crash because they weren't written to deal with a non-continuous time system. Making it LESS continuous would make them less stable.
I disagree. One of the reasons that a leap second causes problems is because it's so infrequent and therefore people don't code for it.
If it's happening every day then anyone who depends on a super accurate clock will be required to account for it.
It's the difference between accounting for the leap year which happens every 4 years and 2 digit year changes(Y2K) that happen every 100 years.
Most programs can handle the leap year and daylight savings time because they happen frequently.
Many programs didn't account for Y2K or the missing leap year on the year 2000 because it's an infrequent event.
I challenge you to find a single obese person that didn't get that way by eating a huge amount of refined sugar. There are plenty of cultures that eat a ton of potatoes, rice, etc... but don't have the obesity problem of the USA. Likewise with bacon, sausage, etc... If you tried REALLY hard, you might be able to gain weight without eating sugar but in the real world, those people don't exist. If you're worried about getting fat, just stop eating sugar.
Watch the dairy, meat, grains, nuts, etc and other than that you're golden.
I agreed with you up until this point. Meat is fairly low calorie. You don't get fat eating meat. Likewise with nuts and dairy. You can drink as much milk and eat as much cheese as you want. If the average person did nothing but cut out their processed sugar they would never gain weight and if they want to lose weight then cut out the carbs (corn/wheat/rice/potatoes). That's it, that's all you need to do. I guarantee that if you eliminate sugar (and similiar things like honey) that you will be healthier than 90% of the USA population and if you also eliminate corn/wheat/rice/potatoes from your diet then you will be healthier than 99% of the USA population.
Ahh, the old "My side proven guilty and corrupt well beyond any reasonable doubt so I counter with both sides are equally bad" added with a hint of "actually your side is still worse despite no evidence" to top it off.
Leftists are so funny these days with the contortions they have to do to still support candidates that are as corrupt as the average DNC member in DC is.
Funny how you jump to conclusions about me. I'm definitely NOT a leftist and I do think both sides are corrupt. You also flipped my conclusion. My conclusion was that the democrats are "more corrupt" because they supported something they probably wouldn't have naturally supported in the first place. I in no way was trying to defend the democrats. I think like most people, you are seeing what you are wanting to see instead of actually looking at what I said. The average DNC member and the average RNC are both crooks. Luckily people are starting to realize it and that's why people like Sanders, Trump, and Carson are leading in the polls. Whether they will be less corrupt remains to be seen but people are at least making an attempt to vote for people who they perceive as outsiders.
PS - Just to tweak the /. crowd, guess which party they've bought?
I'm not sure what that proves. If you pay off the democrats to vote for your issue because the republicans are going to support it anyways (or vice versa), it still makes both parties culpable. Sometimes the money is spent on the side that already supports their views and sometimes the money is spent to get them to support your views. To me the later is a lot worse as instead of just helping support the group that you agree with, you are actively bribing the opposing group. You have to look at the bigger picture and connect a lot of dots to figure out which one it is though.
The functionality I'd really like to see is this sort of thing done as an iPhone / iPod Touch sized unit ---- Apple could take their laptop, make the trackpad a removable unit which was exactly the size of an iPhone/iPod Touch
The iphone already has a large "trackpad". The only thing really needed is a vga/hdmi out on the iphone and when you connect the monitor, the entire phone becomes your trackpad. This solves the "mouse" issue. Now, all you need is a keyboard and monitor where ever you want to use it.
I believe microsoft recently came out with such a device. Not sure what it was called. A cellphone with a video out would probably be adequate for many people. The main problem I see is that most desktop apps I want to use are windows/linux while most portable apps are iphone/android. It's not the form factor, the speed, or the technology that would be the problem for me but the split ecosystem.
And? None of those change the fact that he bought a cheap car just as they don't change the fact that other people with money will still buy cheap tablets.
I would say that people with money are almost more likely to buy a cheap tablet. Someone cash strapped might buy a $200 tablet as their primary computer device and share it among the family where a family with a little more money will still buy the $200 tablet but will also buy each kid their own personal $50 tablet.
It's remarkably easy for the have in the US to assert that no one goes without in our "great" country, when the fact of the matter is that unless you spend time to access so called giveaways, you have no clue as to how marginal these things can be. Spend a month trying to work through your day on free wi-fi, then brag about the wonders of American life.
I work from home. I have internet at home but I get bored sitting at home all day, so I venture out to the coffee shops, etc... for a change of scenery. I've worked for 8 straight hours in probably every coffee shop in town and 4 hour chunks in many of the restaurants in town and I can tell you that the free wifi (at least in my town) is more than adequate to do anything you have to do. There are a few quirky places that limit you to 2 hours during lunch rush, etc... or that you have to send keep alives on your ssh/vpn connections if you don't want them to idle out. There are also places that print the wifi password on your receipt at an attempt to make you buy something to use it but plenty of places like mcdonalds, they couldn't care less if you bought something or not. The point is, I have a great internet at home, and I have spent many months working from free wifi and it works just fine. I've actually considered cancelling my internet at home and I probably would except that my employer pays for it so it doesn't cost me anything anyways but my home internet is mostly used for watching movies, most of my actually day to day work is done via free wifi. So, yes, I'm one of the haves, but I've done the using free wifi and it's more than adequate for day to day stuff. OS upgrades and other large downloads might possibly be problematic but that's not their use case. My suggestion for that is try to go during a time that they are not busy and try to find a mom-and-pop place that hopefully doesn't put bandwidth caps.
Well... sort of. It's climate if any statistical property of hurricanes undergoes any statistical shift. Climate is the signal. Weather is the noise. It's like, say, driving home from work. Let's say it normally takes you an average of 20 minutes to drive home from work. Your numbers may go 17, 21, 14, 29, 19, 16, 26, 18, etc depending on local conditions... but the average is 20. But when a statistically significant sampling of drives starts averaging out higher - say, 27, 20, 21, 34, 20, 26, 31, etc... the underlying baseline has changed. The noise still exists, but it's on top of a different signal.
That said, again, hurricanes are very complicated systems to model and predict, so it's hard to make predictions on this front with too much confidence.
I think the point is if we start having several outliers in a row then we can be pretty certain it's climate. To use your driving record example, if next week your times go 33,37,32,47 then we know something has changed. Likewise, if over the next 5 years we see 3 huricanes with greater than 200 mile winds make landfall then we know that something significant has changed. We obviously can make conclusions with less dramatic data but multiple record breaking hurricanes is probably what it will take to get anyone to do anything about climate change.
Not sure why Pinterest even tried with this case.
My guess is they tried this case because pin-trips sounds an awful lot like pin-terest (pin-trist). My guess is that they thought they had a good chance of winning the first and were hoping that they could get a more general ruling that gave them full control of the word "pin". Basically, they lost because they got greedy. If they just went after pintrips because it was one letter sound away from their trademark pintrist -> pintrips they probably would have won.
There is a simple solution. We can just kill all the wildflowers. A good dose of roundup or gasoline 50ft around the perimeter of the field should do the trick
This is what they do.
This is modded as a -1 for flamebait but I have to ask. Why is this a bad idea? You want to continue your research and you thought of an ingenious way to bring in some much needed money. Kudos to you. The article says that the winning bidder gets to work with the scientist on naming so it sounds like he is retaining some amount of veto power. The only thing I might change is give him the option of not necessarily picking the highest bidder if the 2nd or 3rd highest bidder had a more reasonable name.