We were already there. Doesn't "visit us on Facebook" sound a lot like "AOL keyword xyz?"
Re:THe Real Quesion is...
on
When Are You Dead?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Two days after I proposed to my wife, she was t-boned on a major street. She broke both clavicles, cracked a couple ribs, and fractured her sacrum. Unconscious, she was airlifted to the hospital.
When she came to, her first mumbled words were, "Not dead yet!"
I run Windows 7 on a HP Mini 110 that cost me $250. It's not a speed demon, but it's fantastic for browsing the web on my couch. It's way cheaper than an iPad, has a real keyboard, allows me to install most anything I want (even if it's underpowered for serious programs), has a replaceable battery, and could print to any printer from the first day I powered it on. It's also fantastically light, quiet, and cool.
Do you really think that the company that accepts your order at Amazon.com is the same that fulfills it?
You bought from Amazon Seattle, not Amazon Texas. Amazon Texas is doing business with Amazon Seattle and not you. Why would Amazon Texas have to remit sales tax on your behalf? It has no business with you.
You don't have to use the App Store to sell software.
True, but isn't it obvious were the Mac App Store will lead? Why would the average Mac user ever want to buy software from any other source when the App Store is immediate and convenient? Why trust n-many other payment systems, continually handing out credit card numbers on various websites, etc when they can just trust Apple, which they already know and are comfortable with? Why bother with finding download links on different websites and other installation processes when they can just perform the familiar one-click "Install"? And won't it go without saying that apps on the Mac App Store are naturally more trustworthy than apps in the wild?
Mac developers should get ready to immediately suffer profit loss and vaguely defined restrictions in order to get their applications in the App Store, where they must be in order to survive.
From a technical perspective, Microsoft's task is fairly monumental. Windows CE runs on a broad spectrum of devices under a broad spectrum of roles. iOS, Android, etc are specifically created for one market: smart phones (and in the case of iOS, very tightly controlled hardware within that market). In contrast, Microsoft wants Windows CE to be a foundation platform for a wide variety of mobile markets.
From a business perspective, who knows whether this approach is truly smart or unwise. It's clear, however, that the general public perceives that Microsoft is going to be very late and potentially very under-featured in the consumer smart phone market when Windows Phone 7 releases.
Not sure where you got "20 to 40%." There are a bunch of health insurance companies that are publicly traded, which means you can directly check their financial statements. Here's a few:
Whatever happened to taking pride in making something great, and then spending a large portion of your life refining that thing or your ability to make it? Sometimes I wish I was a furniture maker instead of a software developer. New and innovative products are great, but what's the end goal? More new and innovative products? Sure, fine, great. I'm sure it's all just a big race to the bank for most people, like Andreessen, but for some who just need enough money to live comfortably, it's about striving for excellence and enjoying what you're doing for as long as you are physically able.
Notice that the number one website, Google.com, requires only about 0.2-0.3 of a second to load, which is significantly faster than most of the rest of the sites on the list. Seems reasonable that has something to do with it being number one.
Live.com, on the other hand, takes about 3.4 seconds to load. According to those numbers, I could pull up Google.com, enter a query, and get results before I could even load Live.com's home page.
I pay $16.99 a month for Netflix's 3 at-a-time plan, enabling me both to rent as many physical copies of movies and TV shows in a month as I possibly can and watch an unlimited amount of their online content as I desire. I could pay $8.99 a month and achieve near the same thing--only giving up 2 at-a-time physical rentals.
While I agree that mixing all students together, regardless of individual performance, can be a major hindrance to the top-tier students, I also think it's worth noting that many under-achieving students have the potential to be better students. Relegating them to the lower ranks might not be a complete solution.
Some kids have tough lives, and so they do poorly early on in school and get placed in the bottom-tier and are stuck there for life. That creates a certain mentality: Bad student must be in classes with other bad students. Bad student never wants to improve himself, because the other bad students are just as bad and the good students, who he sees only in the halls, think they are inherently superior. Bad student develops a chip on his shoulder and uses physical remedies to make him "feel better."
A student is not going to have much motivation to improve himself if he's in a classroom filled with a bunch of other miscreants and the teacher spends most of his time simply keeping order.
Truly, there are smart people and there are dumb people and there are a whole range of people in the middle. Truly, until some of the bad students prove themselves, they deserve to be where they are and not waste other students' time. Yet still, some of the people in the "dumb classes" are there only because their parents are abusing drunkards or their parents are absent from their lives or whatever other negative thing that can be a severe burden to a growing mind. They can perform better if somehow they are shown the way. They won't find it in a classroom of similar screw-ups.
So what's a complete solution? I don't know, but it probably involves some mixing of the students. Take a couple of the bad students and give them one or two classes with the middle-tier students. Let them see what it's like to perform at one level up. However, you still keep the middle-tier classes mostly middle-tier. Do the same thing with the middle-tier students: give them one or two classes in the top-tier.
I say all this with experience. I was a poor performer in math in middle school. Coincidentally my parents were going through a divorce then. When I got to high school, I had no choice but to start at a level below average for my grade. And even though I made straight 100s in those classes (because I had figured out that I needed to shape up if I wanted to have a chance in college), I was never given the opportunity to jump ahead. Once a screw-up, always a screw-up. Now I have a degree in computer science, which certainly required some math skills to achieve, and I graduated magna cum laude.
Finally, it looks like the industry (or at least Apple) is 'getting it'. No, they aren't. Not for me, anyway. I still buy CDs because I want lossless music* in a format that I can do whatever I want with. If I want a copy in my car, on my portable music player (i.e. any music player, not just on an iPod), in my home stereo, on my laptop, on my phone... at the same time... I can because I have the music in a format that places zero restrictions on its use.
I don't want a subscription to a service. I want to pay for my music and be able to use the purchased music wherever I want whenever I want for the rest of my life sans the company I bought the music from.
I'll start buying music online when companies like Apple offer me lossless, DRM-free files that come in (or at least can be converted to) an open format. Oh, and for less than $0.99 a song (I pay about that much for CDs, but I also get album art and the music already on a "back-up disc").
* I know that CDs aren't truly "lossless," if you consider that any digital format is ultimately an approximation of the real thing. I also know that there are higher quality formats available that go far beyond 16-bit, 44100 Hz. But, at the very least, CDs are always going to contain more information than lossy encodings when the encodings themselves are sourced from CDs.
Interpreting what is meant by scripture is difficult, and Christians and non-Christians alike are guilty of gross misunderstanding of many verses (or whole sections) in the Bible.
I wonder how many people who decry Vista have actually used it. I've been running a 64-bit Vista install for a few months now--as a development machine, no less, with various utilities necessary to perform my job--and have only been pleased with the experience. In fact, I greatly prefer running Vista over XP. I've even had limited to no problems running a few games on the O.S., including Quake 4 and C&C 3.
This comment would almost be shocking if it was not already very present in the thinking of a lot of other American people. Why is it that it has always been okay to give up freedom in a dark hour? I always thought that a time of suffering is when the things we value most shine brightest.
Whether your email, mail, or phone calls contain any information that you care to hide or not is not important. You should have the right to privacy and it should not be undermined, even now.
"Right now, though, I'd rather just let the investigators use whatever means necessary to 'hunt down and punish those responsible'"
That sounds completely irresponsible. "Whatever means necessary?" You must be kidding. Why don't we just shoot every person that remotely resembles Arabic decent in hopes that we get the few people responsible? That certainly constitutes "whatever means necessary" and is no different than going around violating everyone's civil liberties in the investigation or "future solution" to terrorism.
People are (sometimes) intuitive. One can think of ways to curtail terrorism (and find those responsible) without destroying the Constitution in the mean time.
"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin.
Slashdot Mirror
We were already there. Doesn't "visit us on Facebook" sound a lot like "AOL keyword xyz?"
Two days after I proposed to my wife, she was t-boned on a major street. She broke both clavicles, cracked a couple ribs, and fractured her sacrum. Unconscious, she was airlifted to the hospital.
When she came to, her first mumbled words were, "Not dead yet!"
P.S. She recovered completely.
I run Windows 7 on a HP Mini 110 that cost me $250. It's not a speed demon, but it's fantastic for browsing the web on my couch. It's way cheaper than an iPad, has a real keyboard, allows me to install most anything I want (even if it's underpowered for serious programs), has a replaceable battery, and could print to any printer from the first day I powered it on. It's also fantastically light, quiet, and cool.
Do you really think that the company that accepts your order at Amazon.com is the same that fulfills it?
You bought from Amazon Seattle, not Amazon Texas. Amazon Texas is doing business with Amazon Seattle and not you. Why would Amazon Texas have to remit sales tax on your behalf? It has no business with you.
You don't have to use the App Store to sell software.
True, but isn't it obvious were the Mac App Store will lead? Why would the average Mac user ever want to buy software from any other source when the App Store is immediate and convenient? Why trust n-many other payment systems, continually handing out credit card numbers on various websites, etc when they can just trust Apple, which they already know and are comfortable with? Why bother with finding download links on different websites and other installation processes when they can just perform the familiar one-click "Install"? And won't it go without saying that apps on the Mac App Store are naturally more trustworthy than apps in the wild?
Mac developers should get ready to immediately suffer profit loss and vaguely defined restrictions in order to get their applications in the App Store, where they must be in order to survive.
From a technical perspective, Microsoft's task is fairly monumental. Windows CE runs on a broad spectrum of devices under a broad spectrum of roles. iOS, Android, etc are specifically created for one market: smart phones (and in the case of iOS, very tightly controlled hardware within that market). In contrast, Microsoft wants Windows CE to be a foundation platform for a wide variety of mobile markets.
From a business perspective, who knows whether this approach is truly smart or unwise. It's clear, however, that the general public perceives that Microsoft is going to be very late and potentially very under-featured in the consumer smart phone market when Windows Phone 7 releases.
Not sure where you got "20 to 40%." There are a bunch of health insurance companies that are publicly traded, which means you can directly check their financial statements. Here's a few:
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:AET&fstype=ii
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:CI&fstype=ii
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:CVH&fstype=ii
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:HUM&fstype=ii
http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:WLP&fstype=ii
You're Leroy Smith; you can do anything!
Whatever happened to taking pride in making something great, and then spending a large portion of your life refining that thing or your ability to make it? Sometimes I wish I was a furniture maker instead of a software developer. New and innovative products are great, but what's the end goal? More new and innovative products? Sure, fine, great. I'm sure it's all just a big race to the bank for most people, like Andreessen, but for some who just need enough money to live comfortably, it's about striving for excellence and enjoying what you're doing for as long as you are physically able.
Notice that the number one website, Google.com, requires only about 0.2-0.3 of a second to load, which is significantly faster than most of the rest of the sites on the list. Seems reasonable that has something to do with it being number one.
Live.com, on the other hand, takes about 3.4 seconds to load. According to those numbers, I could pull up Google.com, enter a query, and get results before I could even load Live.com's home page.
He paid contractors to create the graphics and sounds. Seems reasonable for a programmer to pay for help in those areas:
http://www.streamingcolour.com/blog/2009/01/02/im-baaaack/
I pay $16.99 a month for Netflix's 3 at-a-time plan, enabling me both to rent as many physical copies of movies and TV shows in a month as I possibly can and watch an unlimited amount of their online content as I desire. I could pay $8.99 a month and achieve near the same thing--only giving up 2 at-a-time physical rentals.
Yes, Amazon's service is too expensive.
While I agree that mixing all students together, regardless of individual performance, can be a major hindrance to the top-tier students, I also think it's worth noting that many under-achieving students have the potential to be better students. Relegating them to the lower ranks might not be a complete solution.
Some kids have tough lives, and so they do poorly early on in school and get placed in the bottom-tier and are stuck there for life. That creates a certain mentality: Bad student must be in classes with other bad students. Bad student never wants to improve himself, because the other bad students are just as bad and the good students, who he sees only in the halls, think they are inherently superior. Bad student develops a chip on his shoulder and uses physical remedies to make him "feel better."
A student is not going to have much motivation to improve himself if he's in a classroom filled with a bunch of other miscreants and the teacher spends most of his time simply keeping order.
Truly, there are smart people and there are dumb people and there are a whole range of people in the middle. Truly, until some of the bad students prove themselves, they deserve to be where they are and not waste other students' time. Yet still, some of the people in the "dumb classes" are there only because their parents are abusing drunkards or their parents are absent from their lives or whatever other negative thing that can be a severe burden to a growing mind. They can perform better if somehow they are shown the way. They won't find it in a classroom of similar screw-ups.
So what's a complete solution? I don't know, but it probably involves some mixing of the students. Take a couple of the bad students and give them one or two classes with the middle-tier students. Let them see what it's like to perform at one level up. However, you still keep the middle-tier classes mostly middle-tier. Do the same thing with the middle-tier students: give them one or two classes in the top-tier.
I say all this with experience. I was a poor performer in math in middle school. Coincidentally my parents were going through a divorce then. When I got to high school, I had no choice but to start at a level below average for my grade. And even though I made straight 100s in those classes (because I had figured out that I needed to shape up if I wanted to have a chance in college), I was never given the opportunity to jump ahead. Once a screw-up, always a screw-up. Now I have a degree in computer science, which certainly required some math skills to achieve, and I graduated magna cum laude.
I don't want a subscription to a service. I want to pay for my music and be able to use the purchased music wherever I want whenever I want for the rest of my life sans the company I bought the music from.
I'll start buying music online when companies like Apple offer me lossless, DRM-free files that come in (or at least can be converted to) an open format. Oh, and for less than $0.99 a song (I pay about that much for CDs, but I also get album art and the music already on a "back-up disc").
* I know that CDs aren't truly "lossless," if you consider that any digital format is ultimately an approximation of the real thing. I also know that there are higher quality formats available that go far beyond 16-bit, 44100 Hz. But, at the very least, CDs are always going to contain more information than lossy encodings when the encodings themselves are sourced from CDs.
Your understanding of the verse is likely incorrect. Read http://www.gotquestions.org/age-limit.html/
Interpreting what is meant by scripture is difficult, and Christians and non-Christians alike are guilty of gross misunderstanding of many verses (or whole sections) in the Bible.
I wonder how many people who decry Vista have actually used it. I've been running a 64-bit Vista install for a few months now--as a development machine, no less, with various utilities necessary to perform my job--and have only been pleased with the experience. In fact, I greatly prefer running Vista over XP. I've even had limited to no problems running a few games on the O.S., including Quake 4 and C&C 3.
This comment would almost be shocking if it was not already very present in the thinking of a lot of other American people. Why is it that it has always been okay to give up freedom in a dark hour? I always thought that a time of suffering is when the things we value most shine brightest.
Whether your email, mail, or phone calls contain any information that you care to hide or not is not important. You should have the right to privacy and it should not be undermined, even now.
"Right now, though, I'd rather just let the investigators use whatever means necessary to 'hunt down and punish those responsible'"
That sounds completely irresponsible. "Whatever means necessary?" You must be kidding. Why don't we just shoot every person that remotely resembles Arabic decent in hopes that we get the few people responsible? That certainly constitutes "whatever means necessary" and is no different than going around violating everyone's civil liberties in the investigation or "future solution" to terrorism.
People are (sometimes) intuitive. One can think of ways to curtail terrorism (and find those responsible) without destroying the Constitution in the mean time.
"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin.
"You are here to enrich the world, and you impoverish yourself if you forget the errand." -- Woodrow Wilson