But people are watching the commercials, laughing at them, calling their spouses in to the living room saying, "Hey, there's a new one on"... that's advertising success.
No, that's entertainment success. Marketing success is only measured by sales numbers because that is the only purpose of marketing. At first glance, it seems like an entertaining comercial is a commercial that will generate sales, but that isn't alwasy the case.
You can still get a liscense without the chip, so I don't really see the point. Unless you just want to waste $30 to get an RFID chip that contains nothing but an ID number.
His point is that CEO's do not take the entire economy into account. Look at the investment firms and banks that have been decimated in the past month. One the decisions were made that led to the problem, the people in charge said to themselves "This is an acceptable risk to the company". They didn't say "This is an acceptable risk to the entire financial system as well as the economy and security of our nation."
It's like asking a panel of computer scientists about what relational database to use.
No, it's like asking a panel of computer scientists about what relational database to use versus asking a room full of business majors what relational database to use. Yeah, there will be disagreements, conflicting advice, and no clear consensus. But I'd still rather get an opinion from people who make thier living studying the subject than from random talking heads that the news corps shovel at us everyday.
who is really responsible for the current bank crisis (whether profit hungry execs, slimy people luring people into bad mortgages, people flipping houses and then wanting a bailout when burned, government policy...)?
Yes, Yes, Yes, and Yes. And probably a dozen other reasons as well.
Of course, a lot of the people flipping housing couldn't have done it without an easy to get loan. The people giving out bad loans wouldn't have done so without the support of profit hungry execs. The profit hungry execs never would have been able to allow the bad loans without the deregulation of the industry (something both right and left politicians have had a hand in at one time or another over the past 15 years). In theory, this could have been avoided at any point in the chain, in reality it was inevitable anyway.
Our housing market was unsustainable, the definition of a bubble economy. The value of homes was going up solely because people expected the value of homes to go up (i.e. 'this house is a bit more expensive than we can afford, but in a few years we can sell or refinance and everything will be fine'). To make matters worse, the construction industry in the US was way, way, way, overgrown. To the point that there would be more houses in the US than people by 2050 if the construction rate had stayed the same.
They claim they want to sell the patents so that the technology is available for American businesses? Wouldn't the best way to do that be to not patent them at all in the first place? Or at least liscense the patents cheaply to any and all interested American businesses?
We already paid for the research once, now we'll end up paying for it again when some company begins gouging prices because they hold the patent and no one else can compete.
I've got an idea, me and a buddy will make it look like I killed him. I will imagine doing the act myself a thousand times, until it is burned into my brain as if it actually happened. Of course, this assumes that such a thing is possible, but from what little I know of neorology it should be.
I get convicted based on my brain scan and the next day, my buddy jumps out a says "HA! Your technology sucks!" What happens then? Obviously, I get released from the murder charge (and both my buddy and I will probably be arrested for other reasons, but that's beside the point). Do they let everyone convicted based on this technology go?
Except that the source couldn't have been more than 11 billion light years away (No distortion from intergalactic hydrogen) and the particle horizon is 13.6-13.9 billion light years away. Plus the fact that it faded away after about 100 days would seem to indicate it was some kind of event, not just an object.
Alright, here's the thing. I don't think Blu-Ray's failure (and yeah, it really is failing) has anything to do with the technology. It has to do with movies. I have 8 blu-ray movies, 5 I got for free with my ps3. Every time I go shopping a go over to the blu ray section and look to see what's out and every time I look I come back empty handed. Why? Because there's nothing worth paying twice as much for. I'm sorry if I don't want 'liscense to wed' or 'Juno' in HD, it just seems pointless. There haven't been more than a handful of good action movies in the past few years, practically none that I wouldn't call cheesy comic book movies.
To be fair, it's a combination of an active metabolism and temperature inertia. Looking into it further after reading your response, it seems it isn't as cut and dry as I had thought. In fact, it isn't even agreed upon what exactly is meant by 'warm blooded'. Though dinosaurs' metabolism did produce heat and regulate body temperature, the shear size of many dinosaurs also helped maintain body temperature. Depending on what part of the fossil record you study, it appears possible to draw valid conclusions for everything from as warm blooded as mammals to barely any more active than reptiles.
And what, exactly, do modern reptiles have to do with ancient dinosaurs? Almost all modern theories of dinosaur evolution state that they are more related to modern birds than modern reptiles. Furthurmore, most modern research (3 decades or more) indicates that at least the majority of dinosaurs were warm blooded.
That's why you don't use water, you use something non-conductive. Mineral oil is a relatively cheap and widely available option (just go to your vet and ask for a few gallons of horse laxative) if you don't want to spend the money on commercial grade cooling fluid.
What if some smug lawyer wants to force you into obeying his threatening letter where he does not verbatim quote the law, but creates a derivative work by plagiarizing it (and thus subtly change its meaning)?
I'm pretty sure that's called fraud and it's already illegal.
While I disagree with the GP post, I can't really agree with you either.
If you spread your genes so far and wide that they are doomed to die or be at a disadvantage because they are lacking in support is that better than fewer more cared for who will almost certainly themselves go on to breed.
The answer, is yes if you can have both. If a man can have many anonomous affairs with little to no cost as well as raise a traditional and stable family, then they are genetically better off to do so. Of course, you can argue that there are risks involved in adultery, such as your wife leaving you and so on.
There are lots of good features in the new IE8, and since I'm stuck with IE at work I'm looking forward to the release immensly. However, IE will never, ever be my primary browser until they fix thier Find functionality. Fire Fox has it totally right with find as you type, I use it constantly to speed my web browsing. IE's find is painfully slow and ackward by comparison.
Not really, perhaps a.5% total change in power output. Sun spots are linked to the strength of the magnetic field of the sun though, which some people have tried (with limited success) to tie into global warming theory. The most prominent thoery states that a weakening of the sun's magnetic field causes more cosmic rays to strike the earth, the cosmic rays increase cloud formation, the clouds reflect sunlight, cooling the earth. The last I heard of that theory was years ago though, don't know if they were ever actually able to supply evidence.
Perhaps because Hillary Clinton has been active in politics for almost 20 years now and had a huge, huge following accross the nation whereas Palin is almost completely unheard of on the National Stage and has a grand total of 2 years of real political experience (Being mayor of a town of 5000 people just doesn't quite cut it).
And I don't understand why I can fuck the shit out of a 16 year old in any way she conscents to, legally.
Please note, this highly dependent upon where you live. In Wisconsin, for instance, having sex with a 16 year old is a felony. Having sex with a 17 year old is still a misdemeaner.
Of course, if I understand things correctly that is exactly where the contradiction comes from. The age of consent is a subject of law that is determined largely on a state by state basis where as child pornography is enforced at the federal level. The US government has decided that 18 is the age of consent, where as you state has decided 16 is.
Incedently, I would argue that having your picture taken and potentially spread around the internet would be much more damaging to a 16 year old than having conscentual sex with your partner. If the proper percausions are taken, having consentual sex has few long term repercussions. Having pictures or movies potentially distributed to your friends, family, future employer could be permanantly damaging.
Better than fining companies for security breaches, why not require a certain amount of security based on the type of data the business is collecting. Allow for periodic and random inspections and issue fines if the company isn't up to the required level. If theft occurs, a more detailed inspection is conducted until the cause of the theft is identified and fines can be issued if the theft should have been avoided by following the required security measures.
This is essetially what would happen if you allowed fines and class action lawsuits with the current system. The difference is, the 'fines' would be replaced by insurance premiums. It workers or departments would have insurance the same way doctors and investment advisors have malpractice insurance. The end result is the same, premuims would go down if you improved security or held less data. They would go up if your security was found lacking or you begin tracking unnecissary information.
Easy, make the peanalty dependent upon the companies handling of the situation. If the company comes clean the penalty is X dollars per victim. If the company attempts to hide the situation the penalty is 100 * X dollars per victem.
There is zero reason why a computer based system couldn't be made to work. Think about how many billions of dollars get transfered over the credit card and ATM networks everyday. The error rate of the software is virtually 0, I worked in retail for years in high school and I know of only one case that the sytem failed (If the same credit card was used to make the exact same purchase within seconds of each other, the CC company thought it was a dupe; ussually done by husband and wife trying to cheat on coupons with limits).
The differences between voting machines and ATM/CC machines?
a) Paper trail: You will always be offered a reciept for your purchase.
b) Accountability: The company the wrote the software will be sued out of existance if there are problems
c) Time: ATM/CC machines are used every day, all over the world. Voting machines are used once a year and have only been in developement for 5-10 years.
d) Cost: ATM machines in particular cost much, much more than you would think. I've heard that the machine itself is often worth more than the money it contains. If voting machines cost as much, no state would be able to afford them. When you pay less, you get less; in this case, less security and less reliability.
I can easily believe a motivation for some terror attacks could be women.
That's exactly the point. However, in a polygamous society there are much, much fewer women to go around, which means that the standards for men go up, which makes more men more desperate to find a way to attract women.
Slashdot Mirror
But people are watching the commercials, laughing at them, calling their spouses in to the living room saying, "Hey, there's a new one on"... that's advertising success.
No, that's entertainment success. Marketing success is only measured by sales numbers because that is the only purpose of marketing. At first glance, it seems like an entertaining comercial is a commercial that will generate sales, but that isn't alwasy the case.
You can still get a liscense without the chip, so I don't really see the point. Unless you just want to waste $30 to get an RFID chip that contains nothing but an ID number.
His point is that CEO's do not take the entire economy into account. Look at the investment firms and banks that have been decimated in the past month. One the decisions were made that led to the problem, the people in charge said to themselves "This is an acceptable risk to the company". They didn't say "This is an acceptable risk to the entire financial system as well as the economy and security of our nation."
It's like asking a panel of computer scientists about what relational database to use.
No, it's like asking a panel of computer scientists about what relational database to use versus asking a room full of business majors what relational database to use. Yeah, there will be disagreements, conflicting advice, and no clear consensus. But I'd still rather get an opinion from people who make thier living studying the subject than from random talking heads that the news corps shovel at us everyday.
who is really responsible for the current bank crisis (whether profit hungry execs, slimy people luring people into bad mortgages, people flipping houses and then wanting a bailout when burned, government policy...)?
Yes, Yes, Yes, and Yes. And probably a dozen other reasons as well.
Of course, a lot of the people flipping housing couldn't have done it without an easy to get loan. The people giving out bad loans wouldn't have done so without the support of profit hungry execs. The profit hungry execs never would have been able to allow the bad loans without the deregulation of the industry (something both right and left politicians have had a hand in at one time or another over the past 15 years). In theory, this could have been avoided at any point in the chain, in reality it was inevitable anyway.
Our housing market was unsustainable, the definition of a bubble economy. The value of homes was going up solely because people expected the value of homes to go up (i.e. 'this house is a bit more expensive than we can afford, but in a few years we can sell or refinance and everything will be fine'). To make matters worse, the construction industry in the US was way, way, way, overgrown. To the point that there would be more houses in the US than people by 2050 if the construction rate had stayed the same.
They claim they want to sell the patents so that the technology is available for American businesses? Wouldn't the best way to do that be to not patent them at all in the first place? Or at least liscense the patents cheaply to any and all interested American businesses?
We already paid for the research once, now we'll end up paying for it again when some company begins gouging prices because they hold the patent and no one else can compete.
I've got an idea, me and a buddy will make it look like I killed him. I will imagine doing the act myself a thousand times, until it is burned into my brain as if it actually happened. Of course, this assumes that such a thing is possible, but from what little I know of neorology it should be.
I get convicted based on my brain scan and the next day, my buddy jumps out a says "HA! Your technology sucks!" What happens then? Obviously, I get released from the murder charge (and both my buddy and I will probably be arrested for other reasons, but that's beside the point). Do they let everyone convicted based on this technology go?
Except that the source couldn't have been more than 11 billion light years away (No distortion from intergalactic hydrogen) and the particle horizon is 13.6-13.9 billion light years away. Plus the fact that it faded away after about 100 days would seem to indicate it was some kind of event, not just an object.
Alright, here's the thing. I don't think Blu-Ray's failure (and yeah, it really is failing) has anything to do with the technology. It has to do with movies. I have 8 blu-ray movies, 5 I got for free with my ps3. Every time I go shopping a go over to the blu ray section and look to see what's out and every time I look I come back empty handed. Why? Because there's nothing worth paying twice as much for. I'm sorry if I don't want 'liscense to wed' or 'Juno' in HD, it just seems pointless. There haven't been more than a handful of good action movies in the past few years, practically none that I wouldn't call cheesy comic book movies.
To be fair, it's a combination of an active metabolism and temperature inertia. Looking into it further after reading your response, it seems it isn't as cut and dry as I had thought. In fact, it isn't even agreed upon what exactly is meant by 'warm blooded'. Though dinosaurs' metabolism did produce heat and regulate body temperature, the shear size of many dinosaurs also helped maintain body temperature. Depending on what part of the fossil record you study, it appears possible to draw valid conclusions for everything from as warm blooded as mammals to barely any more active than reptiles.
And what, exactly, do modern reptiles have to do with ancient dinosaurs? Almost all modern theories of dinosaur evolution state that they are more related to modern birds than modern reptiles. Furthurmore, most modern research (3 decades or more) indicates that at least the majority of dinosaurs were warm blooded.
Now what would be the fun in that?
That's why you don't use water, you use something non-conductive. Mineral oil is a relatively cheap and widely available option (just go to your vet and ask for a few gallons of horse laxative) if you don't want to spend the money on commercial grade cooling fluid.
What if some smug lawyer wants to force you into obeying his threatening letter where he does not verbatim quote the law, but creates a derivative work by plagiarizing it (and thus subtly change its meaning)?
I'm pretty sure that's called fraud and it's already illegal.
While I disagree with the GP post, I can't really agree with you either.
If you spread your genes so far and wide that they are doomed to die or be at a disadvantage because they are lacking in support is that better than fewer more cared for who will almost certainly themselves go on to breed.
The answer, is yes if you can have both. If a man can have many anonomous affairs with little to no cost as well as raise a traditional and stable family, then they are genetically better off to do so. Of course, you can argue that there are risks involved in adultery, such as your wife leaving you and so on.
There are lots of good features in the new IE8, and since I'm stuck with IE at work I'm looking forward to the release immensly. However, IE will never, ever be my primary browser until they fix thier Find functionality. Fire Fox has it totally right with find as you type, I use it constantly to speed my web browsing. IE's find is painfully slow and ackward by comparison.
Not really, perhaps a .5% total change in power output. Sun spots are linked to the strength of the magnetic field of the sun though, which some people have tried (with limited success) to tie into global warming theory. The most prominent thoery states that a weakening of the sun's magnetic field causes more cosmic rays to strike the earth, the cosmic rays increase cloud formation, the clouds reflect sunlight, cooling the earth. The last I heard of that theory was years ago though, don't know if they were ever actually able to supply evidence.
Perhaps because Hillary Clinton has been active in politics for almost 20 years now and had a huge, huge following accross the nation whereas Palin is almost completely unheard of on the National Stage and has a grand total of 2 years of real political experience (Being mayor of a town of 5000 people just doesn't quite cut it).
And I don't understand why I can fuck the shit out of a 16 year old in any way she conscents to, legally.
Please note, this highly dependent upon where you live. In Wisconsin, for instance, having sex with a 16 year old is a felony. Having sex with a 17 year old is still a misdemeaner.
Of course, if I understand things correctly that is exactly where the contradiction comes from. The age of consent is a subject of law that is determined largely on a state by state basis where as child pornography is enforced at the federal level. The US government has decided that 18 is the age of consent, where as you state has decided 16 is.
Incedently, I would argue that having your picture taken and potentially spread around the internet would be much more damaging to a 16 year old than having conscentual sex with your partner. If the proper percausions are taken, having consentual sex has few long term repercussions. Having pictures or movies potentially distributed to your friends, family, future employer could be permanantly damaging.
clearly the iphone lock function is only a slight deterrent
Exactly, I think everyone at Slashdot knows that if someone has physical access to your hardware, you've already lost the security game.
Ok then make the fine for a coverup 1000 * X, or 1000000 * X. Eventually the risk outweighs the rewards.
Better than fining companies for security breaches, why not require a certain amount of security based on the type of data the business is collecting. Allow for periodic and random inspections and issue fines if the company isn't up to the required level. If theft occurs, a more detailed inspection is conducted until the cause of the theft is identified and fines can be issued if the theft should have been avoided by following the required security measures.
This is essetially what would happen if you allowed fines and class action lawsuits with the current system. The difference is, the 'fines' would be replaced by insurance premiums. It workers or departments would have insurance the same way doctors and investment advisors have malpractice insurance. The end result is the same, premuims would go down if you improved security or held less data. They would go up if your security was found lacking or you begin tracking unnecissary information.
Easy, make the peanalty dependent upon the companies handling of the situation. If the company comes clean the penalty is X dollars per victim. If the company attempts to hide the situation the penalty is 100 * X dollars per victem.
There is zero reason why a computer based system couldn't be made to work. Think about how many billions of dollars get transfered over the credit card and ATM networks everyday. The error rate of the software is virtually 0, I worked in retail for years in high school and I know of only one case that the sytem failed (If the same credit card was used to make the exact same purchase within seconds of each other, the CC company thought it was a dupe; ussually done by husband and wife trying to cheat on coupons with limits).
The differences between voting machines and ATM/CC machines?
a) Paper trail: You will always be offered a reciept for your purchase.
b) Accountability: The company the wrote the software will be sued out of existance if there are problems
c) Time: ATM/CC machines are used every day, all over the world. Voting machines are used once a year and have only been in developement for 5-10 years.
d) Cost: ATM machines in particular cost much, much more than you would think. I've heard that the machine itself is often worth more than the money it contains. If voting machines cost as much, no state would be able to afford them. When you pay less, you get less; in this case, less security and less reliability.
I can easily believe a motivation for some terror attacks could be women.
That's exactly the point. However, in a polygamous society there are much, much fewer women to go around, which means that the standards for men go up, which makes more men more desperate to find a way to attract women.