I must concede your point. If your married and your spouse happens to like these shiny toys and you get them one, it just might get you get you laid after all.
It has a 16x9 ratio. It has 4Glte. Apple invented these things things, do you hear me!!!!!!!
Um, it's a phone okay? It's a little better than what came before it. It's not going to change your life, get you laid or anything else. It's just a phone with a proprietary connector and a proprietary app store. Some people like how it's made, they will buy it. Some people don't, they will buy something else. It's really not a big deal
I have a droid tablet, a Nexus 7. I love the thing and use it constantly. However I don't produce much content on it. The transformer from Asus could well be the exception as it has a keyboard available. Same basic problem with the droid.
Ipad's are for/consuming/ content, not making content. It's the one brilliant thing Microsoft got dead on right with the Surface tablet that is coming out.
The ipad is ultimately a toy, I work at a place that a/very/ large quantity of the things. I can assure you that they only productive thing they ever do is take notes during meetings.
I'll be curious to see if this carries over for the Surface when it comes out with it's native keyboard and USB support.
I'm starting to think the leading job requirement for designing a cell phone is soon going to be the patent attorney. Once upon a time products were designed by engineers, not attorneys.
There was an infamous cows shot from a hell level of diablo2 from years ago that my character surrounded by hundreds of cows. Wonder if that if that was watermarked?
I am not making the position that the Amazon rain forest deforestation was because of organic food growth methods. My point is that deforestation has taken place primarily because of the need for food growth at all. I was trying to make the point of - imagine how bad things would have been if it had been for organic instead. They have the same problems with food needs in Brazil (one of the major food bread baskets in the world) that we do here.
My point that organic food growth is not sustainable on a commercial scale stands. Organic food growth on a commercial scale is green-washing.
Actually the farming were using today is far less intensive than the farming from decades ago. By way of point the drought the US had this year was actually worse than the one we had in the great depression / dustbowl of the 1930's. The reason that we aren't looking like the grapes of wrath 2 is because farmers have learned and the techniques are far less intensive than they used to be.
I have two arguments on fertilizer run off on lawns. First on a personal level, grow organic and don't use fertilizer. My own gardens (5 raised beds and a fruit bed) are all organic) because on a personal level I feel it is better not contribute pesticides into the environment. I also incidentally didn't water my lawn during the last great drought we had and have a very sad looking almost dead lawn as a result. I feel it would be a waste of resources under the circumstances. For individuals at the small level they should grown organic and they should avoid fertilizer use, as it all adds up downstream.
My second argument is that it does not scale to the commercial level for yields. The science is there, the USDA has proven that. If you read my original post you will see that just converting the US alone to organic farming techniques would require another chunk of land that would equal 90% of the size of Texas. I'm sorry if this offends you, but organic foods grown at scale are green-washing, far more than ethanol or any other thing I have ever heard. The science on this is sound, even if it happens to go against your personal world view.
You can't get that land without taking land from wildlife. This problem is already well demonstrated in places like the Amazon rain forest and other parts of the world. The loss of biodiversity and the loss of habitat for wildlife far outweigh the negative affects of pesticides.
Thanks for the tips, I actually started composted a few years before I started my garden. I've got a corner of my yard set aside that I mix with layers of leaves, garden waste and food waste. I'm told it takes several years before you can gain useful compost from it.
I made four raised garden beds from an old kids wooden play set that was no longer safe to use. I then wanted to fill them with dirt from the city compost center again this year when I raised them up a level. My city used to have a free compost site where you could get free compost if you dug it out yourself, but this year only allowed you to do so if you brought your own full ton pick up. I had to buy my dirt instead of getting it, grrr.
I will check out companion planting, I think that sounds fairly logical. The square food gardening book looks pretty good, I think I'm going to order that one. I don't like use fertilizers in my garden or yard on a personal level and would rather use organic techniques at that scale. Thanks
I know very little about farming and organic food. I only recently started researching the matter more when I ran across the article while researching why my own 'organic' gardens (I just started last year). I actually originally submitted the same story a week ago where it sat in the queue for a week in limbo not quite making it before being rejected.
I accept correction on conventional farming, it's not something I know much about. My concerns are more ecological with green-washing. People spend a lot of money - $30 billion a year in the US alone on organic food for no health benefit. The perceived environmental benefits on a commercial scale are far outweighed by the environmental harms.
I would argue your point on the farming revolution, I think it actually had a lot to do a guy by the name of Norman Borlaug. He is the person who really turned breeding of plants into a science and researched how to make plants survive in different kinds of harsh environments. His research ideas led to the development of pretty much all modern farming breeds and even GMO foods. The nobel prize he earned for his accomplishments cites him as A central figure in the "green revolution".
I agree with your point on population, we have too many people. However since we have no politically correct way to adjust the population, we have to figure out ways to feed the ones we have or were back to politically incorrect ways that make the news again. That means getting real about things like crop yields and so on.
GMO has nothing to do with the bee die offs at all, and you won't find anything to substantiate that. FUD from the far left is no better than FUD from the far right.
If you actually care to research the matter you'll find the University of Minnesota has done a lot of research on the matter.
So what your saying is that organic farming is unsustainable outside of a medieval / communist style peasant class and can't scale without a massive shift back to an agrarian economy?
Last I checked there wasn't a society on this planet that had not rejected that economy and lifestyle as a way of life. Even the former communist countries have that once embraced that kind of economy have found there citizens have rejected it en mass and you will in places like China that inter district migration is/very/ heavily restricted.
It's also worse for the environment because it takes a/lot/ more land for the same yield.
Organic yields are substantially lower than conventional yields and the only way to obtain additional farmland it to take wildlands. According to Dr. Steve Savage who did the first comprehensive study of organic farming for the USDA in 2008 simply converting the United States alone to organic standards would require substantial additional cropland.
a switch to organic agriculture would require a 43 percent increase over current U.S. cropland, according to Savage. As he puts it, "On a land-area basis, this additional area would be 97% the physical size of Spain or 71% the size of Texas
Taking additional farmland (not necessarily explicitly for organic but the principal applies) is the leading cause of the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. I don't think I need to cite the significant loss in biodiversity and carbon offsets from the loss of wildlands for conversion to croplands. The trade off in pesticide use is more than offset by other ecological costs.
The first comprehensive studies of organic farming came back saying that the health benefits are anecdotal and the loss of yield substantial. I'm inclined to say organic farming should be help in contempt and exposed as simple green washing. I think in years to come it will be looked at no differently than ethanol from corn.
That is absurd,/nobody/ owes wikipedia a god damn thing. That a source would bother to correct a story in person is something that wikipedia should be grateful for. Who the hell are you, the anonymous coward, to question, the source, on anything? Seriously?
Who the hell is anyone to judge the source of a inspiration for a creative work? Unless there is/proof/ of fraud or plagiarism it absurd to doubt what someone else claims as inspiration. I'll give you a good example to make my point, the guy who ripped off an AP photo for an Obama poster and then fabricated evidence to the court.
They actually found evidence on his hard drive that/proved/ his claimed inspirational source wasn't what he used and was fabricated. He was criminally convicted of perjury for lying. Got it, that's what it takes to reasonably say that someone claim of inspiration for a creative work isn't what they claim. Just because some self righteous anonymous coward in his mothers basement decides that Fahrenheit 451 really was about censorship doesn't make it so.
Dead on arrival, I'm sorry, but no amount of technical wizardy, integration, cloud storage or other such thing can get past thing single issue. This is a deal breaker that simply can't be overcome. Sorry Amazon, I like you for so many other things.
With a headline like that I feel like I'm back in 80's when the government was busy telling everyone that driving over 55 would result in catastrophic death across the nation. This was of course the most widely disregarded law in the country and simply led to people questioning the government on other thing safety claims that it made. Figures such as those above have largely been debunked time and time again (do your own damn Google research - I'm busy).
There is nothing inherently dangerous about speed, Germany has proven that for decades. The thing that is most dangerous of all is variance in speed. That being said, I'll be the first to step up and say that Germany also has tougher standards for their drivers tests. Sounds like a fair deal to me, higher speed limits and higher standards to get a drivers license? What's not to love?
What's wrong with actual footage? Seriously, is that so hard to do? Truck companies figured that one out a while back, show a picture of a truck doing something really notable and than in the fine print in the bottom you put "actual demonstration". Makes it all the more impressive.
Certainly dollars are used for all of those things, no question of that. The point is that dollars are typically used for things that aren't those things, like grocery shopping.
Let's say your sitting on lots of bit coins from one of the recent exchange robberies. How you do you liquidate those since people actually trying to sell bitcoins in any kind of quantity tend to lower the lower the market value of bitcoins pretty quickly?
Scam! Small scale break in at an office building and you solve your problem. Cash out for a fair chunk of a million dollars when you unload your bitcoins because/someone/ will buy 1 million dollars in bitcoins (FBI sting operation, well meaning rich Mormon, whoever) without losing market value.
It's brilliant because you know the FBI hasn't got a million dollars in bitcoins just sitting around that they can use in a sting operation and you can get away.
/proving once more that bitcoins are the currency of thieves, drug dealers, pedophiles and gun runners. Their just begging for governments to declare open war on bitcoins....
Get real, you are obviously know nothing of the hardware side of the business.
Apple is trying to cut out the third party manufacturers who will all happily under cut apples overpriced adapters and they are getting called out on it. These manufacturing require lead time for development, shipments to warehouses and distributions to stores.
These manufacturers are the ones you hear about paying top dollar for smuggled factory prototypes. They consider this necessary so that they can be ready to market with their products, ideally on the very day that Apple releases there shiny new toys. Since Apple is threatening legal action if anyone doesn't let Apple have the accessory market all to itself for a period of time it arbitrarily decided all on it's own, the story has made the news. This is a simple story of Apple being a bully in the market, much like the Microsoft of old.
Public reveals are for consumers and marketing departments. Are you going to claim to be the one person on earth to be surprised when the iphone 5 is announced on Sept 12th?
This all a bunch of nonsense! This was probably just a list from a given vendor. Track this down by doing the following:
Look for the ID's and find the most recent date one that you can. That gives you the date range that this is relevant for. Look at the ID's and match them to locations? Are they all from the US? That might give credence to FBI angle (which I think is bullocks). Look at the ID's and start matching users. Look for commonality between said users, this far too large of a list of users to simply be a list of OWS protestors (sorry, if OWS was ever that large on just apple users alone OWS would have succeeded instead of being a punch line). Your doing this just to exclude conspiracy theories like a national we spy on people with shiny toys conspiracy theory.
Once you've concluded that there isn't anything in common between most of these people you can't start the real work: Start matching the common thing or applications between those users. You will probably discover something really benign like they they all have AT&T accounts that belong to the western part of the US or they all have the Twitter application or something really boring.
///sorry to ruin your conspiracy theories, have but have fun reverse engineering this
////yes I posted this earlier today but no one has bothered to solve this yet and it's still getting airtime.....
This all a bunch of nonsense! This was probably just a list from a given vendor. Track this down by doing the following:
Look for the ID's and find the most recent date one that you can. That gives you the date range that this is relevant for. Look at the ID's and match them to locations? Are they all from the US? That might give credence to FBI angle (which I think is bullocks). Look at the ID's and start matching users. Look for commonality between said users, this far too large of a list of users to simply be a list of OWS protestors (sorry, if OWS was ever that large on just apple users alone OWS would have succeeded instead of being a punch line). Your doing this just to exclude conspiracy theories like a national we spy on people with shiny toys conspiracy theory.
Once you've concluded that there isn't anything in common between most of these people you can't start the real work: Start matching the common thing or applications between those users. You will probably discover something really benign like they they all have AT&T accounts that belong to the western part of the US or they all have the Twitter application or something really boring.
///sorry to ruin your conspiracy theories, have but have fun reverse engineering this
Slashdot Mirror
I must concede your point. If your married and your spouse happens to like these shiny toys and you get them one, it just might get you get you laid after all.
Something shiny! It has an apple logo.
It has a 16x9 ratio. It has 4Glte. Apple invented these things things, do you hear me!!!!!!!
Um, it's a phone okay? It's a little better than what came before it. It's not going to change your life, get you laid or anything else. It's just a phone with a proprietary connector and a proprietary app store. Some people like how it's made, they will buy it. Some people don't, they will buy something else. It's really not a big deal
I have a droid tablet, a Nexus 7. I love the thing and use it constantly. However I don't produce much content on it. The transformer from Asus could well be the exception as it has a keyboard available. Same basic problem with the droid.
Ipad's are for /consuming/ content, not making content. It's the one brilliant thing Microsoft got dead on right with the Surface tablet that is coming out.
The ipad is ultimately a toy, I work at a place that a /very/ large quantity of the things. I can assure you that they only productive thing they ever do is take notes during meetings.
I'll be curious to see if this carries over for the Surface when it comes out with it's native keyboard and USB support.
I'm starting to think the leading job requirement for designing a cell phone is soon going to be the patent attorney. Once upon a time products were designed by engineers, not attorneys.
There was an infamous cows shot from a hell level of diablo2 from years ago that my character surrounded by hundreds of cows. Wonder if that if that was watermarked?
This actually looks like a pretty reasonable way to handle micro payments.
You missed my point.
I am not making the position that the Amazon rain forest deforestation was because of organic food growth methods. My point is that deforestation has taken place primarily because of the need for food growth at all. I was trying to make the point of - imagine how bad things would have been if it had been for organic instead. They have the same problems with food needs in Brazil (one of the major food bread baskets in the world) that we do here.
My point that organic food growth is not sustainable on a commercial scale stands. Organic food growth on a commercial scale is green-washing.
Actually the farming were using today is far less intensive than the farming from decades ago. By way of point the drought the US had this year was actually worse than the one we had in the great depression / dustbowl of the 1930's. The reason that we aren't looking like the grapes of wrath 2 is because farmers have learned and the techniques are far less intensive than they used to be.
I have two arguments on fertilizer run off on lawns. First on a personal level, grow organic and don't use fertilizer. My own gardens (5 raised beds and a fruit bed) are all organic) because on a personal level I feel it is better not contribute pesticides into the environment. I also incidentally didn't water my lawn during the last great drought we had and have a very sad looking almost dead lawn as a result. I feel it would be a waste of resources under the circumstances. For individuals at the small level they should grown organic and they should avoid fertilizer use, as it all adds up downstream.
My second argument is that it does not scale to the commercial level for yields. The science is there, the USDA has proven that. If you read my original post you will see that just converting the US alone to organic farming techniques would require another chunk of land that would equal 90% of the size of Texas. I'm sorry if this offends you, but organic foods grown at scale are green-washing, far more than ethanol or any other thing I have ever heard. The science on this is sound, even if it happens to go against your personal world view.
You can't get that land without taking land from wildlife. This problem is already well demonstrated in places like the Amazon rain forest and other parts of the world. The loss of biodiversity and the loss of habitat for wildlife far outweigh the negative affects of pesticides.
Thanks for the tips, I actually started composted a few years before I started my garden. I've got a corner of my yard set aside that I mix with layers of leaves, garden waste and food waste. I'm told it takes several years before you can gain useful compost from it.
I made four raised garden beds from an old kids wooden play set that was no longer safe to use. I then wanted to fill them with dirt from the city compost center again this year when I raised them up a level. My city used to have a free compost site where you could get free compost if you dug it out yourself, but this year only allowed you to do so if you brought your own full ton pick up. I had to buy my dirt instead of getting it, grrr.
I will check out companion planting, I think that sounds fairly logical. The square food gardening book looks pretty good, I think I'm going to order that one. I don't like use fertilizers in my garden or yard on a personal level and would rather use organic techniques at that scale. Thanks
Meat farming typically uses farmland that isn't suitable for crops. Your argument is an apples and oranges comparison.
I know very little about farming and organic food. I only recently started researching the matter more when I ran across the article while researching why my own 'organic' gardens (I just started last year). I actually originally submitted the same story a week ago where it sat in the queue for a week in limbo not quite making it before being rejected.
I accept correction on conventional farming, it's not something I know much about. My concerns are more ecological with green-washing. People spend a lot of money - $30 billion a year in the US alone on organic food for no health benefit. The perceived environmental benefits on a commercial scale are far outweighed by the environmental harms.
I would argue your point on the farming revolution, I think it actually had a lot to do a guy by the name of Norman Borlaug. He is the person who really turned breeding of plants into a science and researched how to make plants survive in different kinds of harsh environments. His research ideas led to the development of pretty much all modern farming breeds and even GMO foods. The nobel prize he earned for his accomplishments cites him as A central figure in the "green revolution".
I agree with your point on population, we have too many people. However since we have no politically correct way to adjust the population, we have to figure out ways to feed the ones we have or were back to politically incorrect ways that make the news again. That means getting real about things like crop yields and so on.
GMO has nothing to do with the bee die offs at all, and you won't find anything to substantiate that. FUD from the far left is no better than FUD from the far right.
If you actually care to research the matter you'll find the University of Minnesota has done a lot of research on the matter.
So what your saying is that organic farming is unsustainable outside of a medieval / communist style peasant class and can't scale without a massive shift back to an agrarian economy?
Last I checked there wasn't a society on this planet that had not rejected that economy and lifestyle as a way of life. Even the former communist countries have that once embraced that kind of economy have found there citizens have rejected it en mass and you will in places like China that inter district migration is /very/ heavily restricted.
It's also worse for the environment because it takes a /lot/ more land for the same yield.
Organic yields are substantially lower than conventional yields and the only way to obtain additional farmland it to take wildlands. According to Dr. Steve Savage who did the first comprehensive study of organic farming for the USDA in 2008 simply converting the United States alone to organic standards would require substantial additional cropland.
a switch to organic agriculture would require a 43 percent increase over current U.S. cropland, according to Savage. As he puts it, "On a land-area basis, this additional area would be 97% the physical size of Spain or 71% the size of Texas
Taking additional farmland (not necessarily explicitly for organic but the principal applies) is the leading cause of the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. I don't think I need to cite the significant loss in biodiversity and carbon offsets from the loss of wildlands for conversion to croplands. The trade off in pesticide use is more than offset by other ecological costs.
The first comprehensive studies of organic farming came back saying that the health benefits are anecdotal and the loss of yield substantial. I'm inclined to say organic farming should be help in contempt and exposed as simple green washing. I think in years to come it will be looked at no differently than ethanol from corn.
That is absurd, /nobody/ owes wikipedia a god damn thing. That a source would bother to correct a story in person is something that wikipedia should be grateful for. Who the hell are you, the anonymous coward, to question, the source, on anything? Seriously?
Who the hell is anyone to judge the source of a inspiration for a creative work? Unless there is /proof/ of fraud or plagiarism it absurd to doubt what someone else claims as inspiration. I'll give you a good example to make my point, the guy who ripped off an AP photo for an Obama poster and then fabricated evidence to the court.
They actually found evidence on his hard drive that /proved/ his claimed inspirational source wasn't what he used and was fabricated. He was criminally convicted of perjury for lying. Got it, that's what it takes to reasonably say that someone claim of inspiration for a creative work isn't what they claim. Just because some self righteous anonymous coward in his mothers basement decides that Fahrenheit 451 really was about censorship doesn't make it so.
Dead on arrival, I'm sorry, but no amount of technical wizardy, integration, cloud storage or other such thing can get past thing single issue. This is a deal breaker that simply can't be overcome. Sorry Amazon, I like you for so many other things.
With a headline like that I feel like I'm back in 80's when the government was busy telling everyone that driving over 55 would result in catastrophic death across the nation. This was of course the most widely disregarded law in the country and simply led to people questioning the government on other thing safety claims that it made. Figures such as those above have largely been debunked time and time again (do your own damn Google research - I'm busy).
There is nothing inherently dangerous about speed, Germany has proven that for decades. The thing that is most dangerous of all is variance in speed. That being said, I'll be the first to step up and say that Germany also has tougher standards for their drivers tests. Sounds like a fair deal to me, higher speed limits and higher standards to get a drivers license? What's not to love?
Sweet, it's nice knowing even the boffins at NASA understand that sometimes in life you just need more grunt and a bigger hammer...
What's wrong with actual footage? Seriously, is that so hard to do? Truck companies figured that one out a while back, show a picture of a truck doing something really notable and than in the fine print in the bottom you put "actual demonstration". Makes it all the more impressive.
Certainly dollars are used for all of those things, no question of that. The point is that dollars are typically used for things that aren't those things, like grocery shopping.
Let's say your sitting on lots of bit coins from one of the recent exchange robberies. How you do you liquidate those since people actually trying to sell bitcoins in any kind of quantity tend to lower the lower the market value of bitcoins pretty quickly?
Scam! Small scale break in at an office building and you solve your problem. Cash out for a fair chunk of a million dollars when you unload your bitcoins because /someone/ will buy 1 million dollars in bitcoins (FBI sting operation, well meaning rich Mormon, whoever) without losing market value.
It's brilliant because you know the FBI hasn't got a million dollars in bitcoins just sitting around that they can use in a sting operation and you can get away.
Get real, you are obviously know nothing of the hardware side of the business.
Apple is trying to cut out the third party manufacturers who will all happily under cut apples overpriced adapters and they are getting called out on it. These manufacturing require lead time for development, shipments to warehouses and distributions to stores.
These manufacturers are the ones you hear about paying top dollar for smuggled factory prototypes. They consider this necessary so that they can be ready to market with their products, ideally on the very day that Apple releases there shiny new toys. Since Apple is threatening legal action if anyone doesn't let Apple have the accessory market all to itself for a period of time it arbitrarily decided all on it's own, the story has made the news. This is a simple story of Apple being a bully in the market, much like the Microsoft of old.
Public reveals are for consumers and marketing departments. Are you going to claim to be the one person on earth to be surprised when the iphone 5 is announced on Sept 12th?
This all a bunch of nonsense! This was probably just a list from a given vendor. Track this down by doing the following:
Look for the ID's and find the most recent date one that you can. That gives you the date range that this is relevant for.
Look at the ID's and match them to locations? Are they all from the US? That might give credence to FBI angle (which I think is bullocks).
Look at the ID's and start matching users.
Look for commonality between said users, this far too large of a list of users to simply be a list of OWS protestors (sorry, if OWS was ever that large on just apple users alone OWS would have succeeded instead of being a punch line). Your doing this just to exclude conspiracy theories like a national we spy on people with shiny toys conspiracy theory.
Once you've concluded that there isn't anything in common between most of these people you can't start the real work:
Start matching the common thing or applications between those users. You will probably discover something really benign like they they all have AT&T accounts that belong to the western part of the US or they all have the Twitter application or something really boring.
This all a bunch of nonsense! This was probably just a list from a given vendor. Track this down by doing the following:
Look for the ID's and find the most recent date one that you can. That gives you the date range that this is relevant for.
Look at the ID's and match them to locations? Are they all from the US? That might give credence to FBI angle (which I think is bullocks).
Look at the ID's and start matching users.
Look for commonality between said users, this far too large of a list of users to simply be a list of OWS protestors (sorry, if OWS was ever that large on just apple users alone OWS would have succeeded instead of being a punch line). Your doing this just to exclude conspiracy theories like a national we spy on people with shiny toys conspiracy theory.
Once you've concluded that there isn't anything in common between most of these people you can't start the real work:
Start matching the common thing or applications between those users. You will probably discover something really benign like they they all have AT&T accounts that belong to the western part of the US or they all have the Twitter application or something really boring.