Ironically, a few weeks after the engineers had sent all the brokers away, all the engineers died because they was no one refilling the vending machines.
SAP's "German engineering" stems from the philosophy of the more efficient the better.
Unfortunately, this means that it is much too utilitarian (and ultimately, why products like Peoplesoft are making headway).
If you find that you have developed a good product to help with operating SAP, you can sell it as a third party add on. Many of the popular add on's were created out of a sense of frustration with the "mother product".
Two articles, but the same magazine and by the same journalist. NO, there's nothing behind THAT curtain.
BTW, I notice that the professor of heliophysics quoted says there is no relation between sunspots and solar output. Goes a long way to make that point.
Okay, but that's not the theory that is argued. It's not whether solar spots are related to output, but whether the sun's total output rises and falls. And in fact, it does. It also coincides nicely with earthside temperature variations.
BTW, I'll see your article and raise you one:
http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2005/09/sunwarm.html
and Columbia... and.. well, I could go on with several dozen other links, but who what's the point. Google it yourself if you want. If we're all gonna die, I have better things to do. Come to think if it, I do even if we aren't all gonna die.
You must not be a "nerd", or you might be able to do sophisticated math like this:
Even in the most populous state (California), only 800 square miles are developed out of 155,000. Gee, that leaves us with a mere 99% left to work with. What will we do?
We nerds are insensitive - especially to people who believe any crap they want (25%, hah!) because they want to believe it, and who can't do basic fact checking and math. Most of the environmental movement is based on "feeling" and not facts. When you let anecdotes dictate your philosophy, you are doomed to live in unhappiness.
I remember in an episode of X-Files where Mulder talks about a worldwide dying off of frogs, and it only started just happening - most likely due to the ravages of mankind's lifestyle. That much is true.
What was never addressed was the fact that the amphibians were dying off because researchers (who were trying to protect and count them) carried microbial parasites from one frog hole to the next. They would return to a hole a while later and presto many dead frogs.
End of the story:
*If you are a frog counting biologist - just jump to the immediate conclusion man is bad. End story. No need to go on.
*If you are a normal person - "wait a second, isn't there more to the story"?
FCB - "no there isn't"
NP - "but I thought YOU were actually responsible for..."
FCB "The story is over, discussion is over, no more questions, man is bad - period"
2 Things: First of all, you should think of jargony words like a zip file. For those in the know, all you need is the name of the file to know what's inside and you mentally decode it and move on. For the less informed, you have to inflate the word to make the telling easier. Most people can't tell you the difference between and aneurysm and an embolism, but they can make complex medical decisions when they have the time to sit with a doctor who can explain what's what in layman terms. "Layman terms" is just another way of saying that the complex medical terminology was decompressed for the benefit of the patient's understanding. Second, you should not assume most people are dumb. While it is true in many cases, I think the fault lies more with the writer than the reader. Uninformed journalists frequently don't filter out "junk science" because they lack the ability. They take press releases for fact, and superstition for news. Here's a flamer for you. Global warming. Many people accept it as fact - especially a high concentration of journalists, so that is what gets reported, and eventually, that's what the public believes. The problem is that most "agendaless" science points that water vapor is many times more powerful than CO2 at warming the earth, but that is not reported since how can water be bad? Also underreported is that there is a much better correlation between earth temperatures and solar output than carbon dioxide levels, but again, this is not reported... I mean "repeated" by the media as often as it should be. Finally, the last couple of years, we seem to be breaking records for cold and snow going back several decades. If a record hot day in 2005 is evidence of warming, why (if you are objective about it) isn't a record snow fall in 2008 evidence of the opposite, or at least evidence that maybe global warming isn't happening?
Steve Fosset Declared dead after 5 months. When I read the summary, the first thing that came to my mind was "That was awful quick", and I see some of you arrived at the same idea (look to the wife). I understand about filing taxes and conducting business, but I don't believe that a billionaire keeps his money in his savings account. He has a few corporations and trusts set up - which are designed to account for "incapacitation" of the benefactor. She could have had him declared missing, and done what was needed. To be honest, there isn't anything to convict her, but it is suspicious. What makes it more so is that he disappeared in a desert area (as opposed to say, the forest), and despite a massive search effort (including military help), no trace was found. Another oddity is that he typical waiting period on a declaration of death is 3 years (at least, many jurisdictions require 4, 5 or even 7 years of waiting), so someone was pushing hard to get this judgment done in only 5 months.
"I'm thinking about setting up a Web site driven by user submissions. I was wondering which locations have the most liberal (i.e., libertarian) privacy laws.
Anyone who things "liberal" and "libertarian" are essentially the same thing, is confused. You might just as easily say, "I need a new computer, and I think I will get a PC (i.e. Mac).
Off topic, yes, but it bothers me to claim I'm a libertarian, and ignorant people associate me with Hillary Clinton (Ugh!).
FYI - Libertarians believe in liberty, but the fundamental philosophy is one of personal responsibility "I.E." Do whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone. If you do hurt someone though - you are going down, hard. Government's role should be limited to handling things like squabbles among citizens and national defense.
Libertarianism
Liberals, also believe in doing whatever you want, but personal responsibility is anathema to them. If you are poor, blame it on society. If you hurt someone, blame it on circumstance. Government's role is to make everyone equal (i.e. redistribution of wealth), and to protect the little guy from big entities (i.e. corporations) who screw them out of honest work and give them nothing to show for it but a paycheck. And, oh yeah, be forgiving of criminals, since it is likely the only reason they committed the crime was because they had no other choice.
Liberalism
Slashdot Mirror
Ironically, a few weeks after the engineers had sent all the brokers away, all the engineers died because they was no one refilling the vending machines.
Unfortunately, this means that it is much too utilitarian (and ultimately, why products like Peoplesoft are making headway).
If you find that you have developed a good product to help with operating SAP, you can sell it as a third party add on. Many of the popular add on's were created out of a sense of frustration with the "mother product".
Yeah, what If I'm just trying to smuggle my bong through security? That might make me look nervous too.
It sounds like you said the government pays the evil corporations to build planes. I must have misunderstood.
BTW, I notice that the professor of heliophysics quoted says there is no relation between sunspots and solar output. Goes a long way to make that point.
Okay, but that's not the theory that is argued. It's not whether solar spots are related to output, but whether the sun's total output rises and falls. And in fact, it does. It also coincides nicely with earthside temperature variations. BTW, I'll see your article and raise you one: http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2005/09/sunwarm.html
... must just be some crackpots from Duke... http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html
and Columbia ... and .. well, I could go on with several dozen other links, but who what's the point. Google it yourself if you want. If we're all gonna die, I have better things to do. Come to think if it, I do even if we aren't all gonna die.
Even in the most populous state (California), only 800 square miles are developed out of 155,000. Gee, that leaves us with a mere 99% left to work with. What will we do?
We nerds are insensitive - especially to people who believe any crap they want (25%, hah!) because they want to believe it, and who can't do basic fact checking and math. Most of the environmental movement is based on "feeling" and not facts. When you let anecdotes dictate your philosophy, you are doomed to live in unhappiness.
I would rather fly in an airplane built by a "tyranical" corporation than one built by the "democratic" government.
What we need to start asking ourselves is "What would global warming do?"
I even have a graph of temperatures shaped like an upside down hockey stick to prove it.
posted by Ptolemy was right!
By the way, is it just me, or does the statement "Don't blame sun for global warming." not make you want to laugh on the face of it.
What was never addressed was the fact that the amphibians were dying off because researchers (who were trying to protect and count them) carried microbial parasites from one frog hole to the next. They would return to a hole a while later and presto many dead frogs.
End of the story:
*If you are a frog counting biologist - just jump to the immediate conclusion man is bad. End story. No need to go on.
*If you are a normal person - "wait a second, isn't there more to the story"? FCB - "no there isn't" NP - "but I thought YOU were actually responsible for ..."
FCB "The story is over, discussion is over, no more questions, man is bad - period"
2 Things: ... I mean "repeated" by the media as often as it should be. Finally, the last couple of years, we seem to be breaking records for cold and snow going back several decades. If a record hot day in 2005 is evidence of warming, why (if you are objective about it) isn't a record snow fall in 2008 evidence of the opposite, or at least evidence that maybe global warming isn't happening?
First of all, you should think of jargony words like a zip file. For those in the know, all you need is the name of the file to know what's inside and you mentally decode it and move on. For the less informed, you have to inflate the word to make the telling easier. Most people can't tell you the difference between and aneurysm and an embolism, but they can make complex medical decisions when they have the time to sit with a doctor who can explain what's what in layman terms. "Layman terms" is just another way of saying that the complex medical terminology was decompressed for the benefit of the patient's understanding.
Second, you should not assume most people are dumb. While it is true in many cases, I think the fault lies more with the writer than the reader. Uninformed journalists frequently don't filter out "junk science" because they lack the ability. They take press releases for fact, and superstition for news.
Here's a flamer for you. Global warming. Many people accept it as fact - especially a high concentration of journalists, so that is what gets reported, and eventually, that's what the public believes. The problem is that most "agendaless" science points that water vapor is many times more powerful than CO2 at warming the earth, but that is not reported since how can water be bad? Also underreported is that there is a much better correlation between earth temperatures and solar output than carbon dioxide levels, but again, this is not reported
Steve Fosset Declared dead after 5 months.
When I read the summary, the first thing that came to my mind was "That was awful quick", and I see some of you arrived at the same idea (look to the wife). I understand about filing taxes and conducting business, but I don't believe that a billionaire keeps his money in his savings account. He has a few corporations and trusts set up - which are designed to account for "incapacitation" of the benefactor. She could have had him declared missing, and done what was needed.
To be honest, there isn't anything to convict her, but it is suspicious.
What makes it more so is that he disappeared in a desert area (as opposed to say, the forest), and despite a massive search effort (including military help), no trace was found.
Another oddity is that he typical waiting period on a declaration of death is 3 years (at least, many jurisdictions require 4, 5 or even 7 years of waiting), so someone was pushing hard to get this judgment done in only 5 months.
"I'm thinking about setting up a Web site driven by user submissions. I was wondering which locations have the most liberal (i.e., libertarian) privacy laws.
Anyone who things "liberal" and "libertarian" are essentially the same thing, is confused. You might just as easily say, "I need a new computer, and I think I will get a PC (i.e. Mac). Off topic, yes, but it bothers me to claim I'm a libertarian, and ignorant people associate me with Hillary Clinton (Ugh!). FYI - Libertarians believe in liberty, but the fundamental philosophy is one of personal responsibility "I.E." Do whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone. If you do hurt someone though - you are going down, hard. Government's role should be limited to handling things like squabbles among citizens and national defense. Libertarianism Liberals, also believe in doing whatever you want, but personal responsibility is anathema to them. If you are poor, blame it on society. If you hurt someone, blame it on circumstance. Government's role is to make everyone equal (i.e. redistribution of wealth), and to protect the little guy from big entities (i.e. corporations) who screw them out of honest work and give them nothing to show for it but a paycheck. And, oh yeah, be forgiving of criminals, since it is likely the only reason they committed the crime was because they had no other choice. Liberalism
Just pick one, will ya!