1) It sounds like a problem for South Korea and Japan, not the USA or the rest of the world. IF Japan, South Korea, or any other Country i nthe region wants to take out N. Korea's nuclear program, go ahead.
2) What do you mean by "take out North Korea"? Kill every citizen? That's a lot more then 100,000K. An Invasion/war? They have ~ 1 million strong army. Going to be a few more then ~100,000K deaths there. And then what do you do once you've "liberated" them? Sure, they are less of a pile of issues then Iraq. However, you are going to have a power gap and a struggle to fill it. Over throwing a country is costly business that is going to have a high failure rate unless it is done through it's own people from within.
That Three Mile Island and Chernobyl were completely different nuclear plants was not the point: The point was that Chernobyl exploded and caused many casualties and a highly contaminated environment, while Three Mile Island had luck.
The differences in the plants seems to make a big difference. It seems one was designed to reduce what would happen if something went wrong, and the other not so much. Seems misleading to overlook that, wouldn't you agree?
So all of this is moot as the population in developed countries drops and the population in under developed countries, where often women don't have equal rights, sky rockets.
Analogies are bad because then you start debate the analogy and not the meaning. As I understand it, the point you are attempting to make is that sometimes people outside of a field have more insight then someone in the field; that can certinaly be true. I believe my Mother had some wonderful sayings and insights into the human condition and different political situations over the last 30 years. However, I would not qoute her directly. Because "-Mom" at the of an arguement does not lend extra authority to what was being argued. Just as adding "-Expert in unlreated field" does not add and extra authority to what is being argued.
/BTW, removing Karma bonus as to not draw to much attention to the off-topic thread going on here.
Hmm, guess I should look things liek that up before talking about them. Somehow I just assumed he was with being old and what not in the 70's. Ohh well, the point still stands.
I would not say that his thoughts are meaningless, as I'd try to not say anyones thoughts are meaningless. I would certainly lend more to his musings on random topics then that of the average persons. However, his options and thoughts on subjects outside of his field carry less weight then those of someone who was/is within that field.
The point is, MS makes software that Hardware Vendors install on their hardware and sell to consumers. Apple sells both the Hardware & the Software. People pay these companies & MS too much? Look at a personal PC. I can get one that does everything a college student needs for $400. Can you get that cheaper from Apple? No. So, how is Apple cheaper? Then moving to etnerprise software & hardware, I fail to see how Apple would make any of that cheaper then MS.
Companies that make PCs, like HP, Compaq, Asus, Dell and many others would be out of business if Apple and Microsoft reversed market share (Or at least out of that section of their business which may be small or large depending o nthe company).
I didn't start the nit picking. Someone mentioned that they beleive that Bill Gates should get the title and then others said he is not eligable. The original framework of the statement did not elude to whether or not they are including both current and former, or just current. People choose to read it as inclusive or exclusive based off their own personality.
At the end of the day, it does not matter what some yahoo writing an article thinks/says or the others that reply in the thread about it. It's jsut a way for me to waste time at work:-)
So, if someone asked the question "Who is the most famous baseball player", you believe it would be incorrect to name someone who is not currently playing the sport?
In regards to your sig: You know, just because someone is an expert in one field, does not mean their opinion is more valid then another's in an unrelated field. When discussing science, a quote of Albert Einstein is a great thing to bring up. When discussing politics and war, most nearly as valid.
Who's the most famous baseball player? Is there anything in that sentence that restricts me from answering Babe Ruth? Did Babe Ruth become and invalid answer when he stopped playing?
More Companies make money because of Microsoft then Apple. If Apple had Microsofts market share with their current business model, how many other companies would not exsist?
Why is he removed from consideration? He was a CEO. Lee Iacocca is still remembered as a great CEO, even thought he's dead now. The phrase, "most famous tech CEO" does not limit itself to current CEO's. If you were to have a lsit of most Famous X's, you'd expect to see some retired/dead people on that list, no?
Does a baseball player stop being refered to as a baseball player after they retire? If I asked you "what baseball player has the best batting average?", would that exclude anyone who had previously retired? no, of course not. I'd have to ask "What current baseball player".
I certainly feel you. Prior to a friend showing me craps, I never liked gambling. I had the same "throwing money away" feeling about it. Games like Black jack still feel like throwing money away to me, just because there is a gambling excitment, but certainly not the same crowd excitement as craps. Guess the energy level isn't high enough on Black Jack for the price tag to play for me.
With digital you get someone who will take 100+ shots and with Film you get someoen who takes 10. If they both hsave the same skill, you have a much better chance of getting a good photo from the ditigal guy. Most of us are old enough to remembre the pre-digital days when you went ot a place liek Owen-Mills to get photos and you have ~5-10 to choose from and most of them were snapped when someone was not ready and you had to choose the best of the worst. Now, that is not the case as much. you get to choose from ~50 shots were people still were not ready.
They are socially unpopular because yo uare betting against everyone. Craps, unlike poker, you are all on the same if. If one win, you al lwin type situation. You all want the roller to keep rolling and winning. When someone comes and bets the rolelr will lose, he is at odds with the interests of everyone else at the table.
That beign said, I love craps. It's a lot of fun. Do I play to win money? No, but it is nice when it happens. I play for the entertainment value. The excitement of when the dice hit my number, the cheering and yelling. What other game at the casino can I stand around with complete strangers (and friends) and yell and scream and generally make an ass of myself? Sure, you get the occational noise from a winnign group at another game, but if you spend any time in a casino you will soon find out that all the noise is coming from the craps table.
Also, if you bet wise and dont get carried away its pretty easy to play for a long while and break even. But its hard not to get swept up in the game and start betting all crazy. Dont win big if you dont bet big.
And as for "throwing money into a hole", most entertainment is just that. You spend money on thigns that are enjoyable: A meal, a concert, camping, hookers coke and craps. At the end of each you've lost your money and gained entertment (and possibly a rash)
Some activities that are considered wrong in some cultures are perfectly fine in others. What's wrong is for huge powerful cultures to pressure everyone else to adopt their moral code.
That activity is not considered wrong in my culture.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I have a couple things to say about this:
1) It sounds like a problem for South Korea and Japan, not the USA or the rest of the world. IF Japan, South Korea, or any other Country i nthe region wants to take out N. Korea's nuclear program, go ahead.
2) What do you mean by "take out North Korea"? Kill every citizen? That's a lot more then 100,000K. An Invasion/war? They have ~ 1 million strong army. Going to be a few more then ~100,000K deaths there. And then what do you do once you've "liberated" them? Sure, they are less of a pile of issues then Iraq. However, you are going to have a power gap and a struggle to fill it. Over throwing a country is costly business that is going to have a high failure rate unless it is done through it's own people from within.
The differences in the plants seems to make a big difference. It seems one was designed to reduce what would happen if something went wrong, and the other not so much. Seems misleading to overlook that, wouldn't you agree?
So all of this is moot as the population in developed countries drops and the population in under developed countries, where often women don't have equal rights, sky rockets.
Thanks, I didn't see it when the other people posted the same information earlier today.
:-)
Analogies are bad because then you start debate the analogy and not the meaning. As I understand it, the point you are attempting to make is that sometimes people outside of a field have more insight then someone in the field; that can certinaly be true. I believe my Mother had some wonderful sayings and insights into the human condition and different political situations over the last 30 years. However, I would not qoute her directly. Because "-Mom" at the of an arguement does not lend extra authority to what was being argued. Just as adding "-Expert in unlreated field" does not add and extra authority to what is being argued.
/BTW, removing Karma bonus as to not draw to much attention to the off-topic thread going on here.
Hmm, guess I should look things liek that up before talking about them. Somehow I just assumed he was with being old and what not in the 70's. Ohh well, the point still stands.
I would not say that his thoughts are meaningless, as I'd try to not say anyones thoughts are meaningless. I would certainly lend more to his musings on random topics then that of the average persons. However, his options and thoughts on subjects outside of his field carry less weight then those of someone who was/is within that field.
The point is, MS makes software that Hardware Vendors install on their hardware and sell to consumers. Apple sells both the Hardware & the Software. People pay these companies & MS too much? Look at a personal PC. I can get one that does everything a college student needs for $400. Can you get that cheaper from Apple? No. So, how is Apple cheaper? Then moving to etnerprise software & hardware, I fail to see how Apple would make any of that cheaper then MS.
Companies that make PCs, like HP, Compaq, Asus, Dell and many others would be out of business if Apple and Microsoft reversed market share (Or at least out of that section of their business which may be small or large depending o nthe company).
I didn't start the nit picking. Someone mentioned that they beleive that Bill Gates should get the title and then others said he is not eligable. The original framework of the statement did not elude to whether or not they are including both current and former, or just current. People choose to read it as inclusive or exclusive based off their own personality.
:-)
At the end of the day, it does not matter what some yahoo writing an article thinks/says or the others that reply in the thread about it. It's jsut a way for me to waste time at work
So, if someone asked the question "Who is the most famous baseball player", you believe it would be incorrect to name someone who is not currently playing the sport?
The movie Hi Fidelity is a great example of this. That was a great movie, I think I'll have to watch it again this weekend.
(This is off-topic)
In regards to your sig: You know, just because someone is an expert in one field, does not mean their opinion is more valid then another's in an unrelated field. When discussing science, a quote of Albert Einstein is a great thing to bring up. When discussing politics and war, most nearly as valid.
Who's the most famous baseball player? Is there anything in that sentence that restricts me from answering Babe Ruth? Did Babe Ruth become and invalid answer when he stopped playing?
More Companies make money because of Microsoft then Apple. If Apple had Microsofts market share with their current business model, how many other companies would not exsist?
Why is he removed from consideration? He was a CEO. Lee Iacocca is still remembered as a great CEO, even thought he's dead now. The phrase, "most famous tech CEO" does not limit itself to current CEO's. If you were to have a lsit of most Famous X's, you'd expect to see some retired/dead people on that list, no?
Wendy's potatoes can be used as a battery to power your router!
Does a baseball player stop being refered to as a baseball player after they retire? If I asked you "what baseball player has the best batting average?", would that exclude anyone who had previously retired? no, of course not. I'd have to ask "What current baseball player".
I certainly feel you. Prior to a friend showing me craps, I never liked gambling. I had the same "throwing money away" feeling about it. Games like Black jack still feel like throwing money away to me, just because there is a gambling excitment, but certainly not the same crowd excitement as craps. Guess the energy level isn't high enough on Black Jack for the price tag to play for me.
They should really make a race where you can enter any stock car. But what would you call such a race?
With digital you get someone who will take 100+ shots and with Film you get someoen who takes 10. If they both hsave the same skill, you have a much better chance of getting a good photo from the ditigal guy. Most of us are old enough to remembre the pre-digital days when you went ot a place liek Owen-Mills to get photos and you have ~5-10 to choose from and most of them were snapped when someone was not ready and you had to choose the best of the worst. Now, that is not the case as much. you get to choose from ~50 shots were people still were not ready.
They are socially unpopular because yo uare betting against everyone. Craps, unlike poker, you are all on the same if. If one win, you al lwin type situation. You all want the roller to keep rolling and winning. When someone comes and bets the rolelr will lose, he is at odds with the interests of everyone else at the table.
That beign said, I love craps. It's a lot of fun. Do I play to win money? No, but it is nice when it happens. I play for the entertainment value. The excitement of when the dice hit my number, the cheering and yelling. What other game at the casino can I stand around with complete strangers (and friends) and yell and scream and generally make an ass of myself? Sure, you get the occational noise from a winnign group at another game, but if you spend any time in a casino you will soon find out that all the noise is coming from the craps table.
Also, if you bet wise and dont get carried away its pretty easy to play for a long while and break even. But its hard not to get swept up in the game and start betting all crazy. Dont win big if you dont bet big.
And as for "throwing money into a hole", most entertainment is just that. You spend money on thigns that are enjoyable: A meal, a concert, camping, hookers coke and craps. At the end of each you've lost your money and gained entertment (and possibly a rash)
That activity is not considered wrong in my culture.
It might not be what we consider a livable wage, but it is the yearly salary for a lot of people.
Adjusting to less revenue then before? Sure. Shutting the doors, going off-air, and out of business, no.