Given that large financial institutions tend to be very conservative and very slow, I do have my doubts though
50 years ago if you wanted to cash a check or send a wire transfer, it would take 3 days.
Today with high speed communication linking every institution in the world, if *still* takes 3 days to cash a check or send a wire transfer.
Face it, this is not about banks adopting technology, this is about banks sitting on your money for 3 days and making interest off it. It's already left the source bank, it hasn't reached the destination bank, but someone, somewhere, is laughing their ass off at us.
I wouldn't use "spell check" in *any* sentence to be honest. A spell is something cast by Harry Potter, so a "spell check" is presumably to make sure he cast it correctly.
Your example of 'Would you say "Pearl Jam is on tour" or "... are on tour"?' is misplaced logic anyway. Pearl Jam is a proper noun, referring to the group as a whole, not the individual members. Therefore "Pearl Jam is on tour". It's a completely different useage than two individual common nouns separated with "and".
Now if Pearl Jam *and* Metallica were on tour, then the correct useage would be "A and B are on tour".
"Hmm. Google gives...". Well considering there are about 33 million English English speakers, and 330 million American English speakers, those results are hardly surprising are they ? It's a biased sample, and renders your assertion void. Likewise your reference to Wikipedia, for the same reasons.
If you want to abbreviate / bastardise / trivialise the language because it's too complicated for you, then be my guest, but the word is "spelling" and always will be.
Here's a gem from the Urban Dictionary you might appreciate (or possibly not).
Bastardised English
The act of removing letters from words because the populace of your country is to stupid to comprehend them any other way. (A process synonymous with "Butchering")
It probably pisses you guys off that the English language is named after...the English, but why not go and find another middle eastern country to invade or something.
American 1: "Dude, what's aluminium?" American 2: "I don't know, let's ignore the system international naming protocol of scientific standards, and just call it something else because we can't handle that many syllables!" American 1: "Hey man, that's a great idea! Hoo-Arr!"
Agreed... which is why any paper / electronic system should be able to tell you "yes, you have already voted". What it should NOT tell you after the fact is WHO you voted for.
The whole point about voting is that it is anonymous. No one, not even yourself, should be able to later verify WHO you voted for. Ergo, no coercion possible, because despite any threats, there is no way for anyone to verify later the actual choices you made.
So why not a simple receipt with a unique ID / hash on it ? You can go online later and verify that you *did* in fact vote, and that that vote has been counted. What you cannot do is retrieve the data on *who* you voted for.
Why must everything be so complicated with you Yanks ?
A physicist who eats a bowl of spaghetti, cuts himself shaving or takes a particularly large dump will probably publish a paper for peer review. It's their way of validating their existence, just humour them...
Seriously though, even if everyone did have an internet connection, that's 679 people per server.
I've seen 679 open httpd processes bring the best servers to their knees.
Not to mention 679 simultaneous database connections, especially as most of them are serving SELECT '%pr0n%' FROM results ORDER BY pagerank ASC LIMIT N,20
Even with a 2TB hard disk, that's only 3GB storage per person.
I think for Google to "be the cloud", they'll need a tad more than 10 million servers.
I suppose you said the same thing about the JRE, or shockwave flash when it was first being deployed ? Any third party tool that extends the capabilities of the web browser needs to be deployed before it can be used (and hence become popular).
No, but hell, that's not MS, so nothing to bash right ?
This might surprise you, but a lot of people use the net for more than:-
Watching the latest lolcat video - check Browsing their mail for the latest penis enlargement offer - check Posting uninformed comments to Slashdot - check
Slashdot Mirror
Meanwhile, there are 370 people stuck in basements, trying to work out why the curtains open every time they play a game of Minesweeper.
I'd like to think that the human race will learn to be a bit more rational over the next 200 years
Only if you abolish religion. Nothing like a good "doomsday prediction" to keep those pews filled with brainless sheep.
Given that large financial institutions tend to be very conservative and very slow, I do have my doubts though
50 years ago if you wanted to cash a check or send a wire transfer, it would take 3 days.
Today with high speed communication linking every institution in the world, if *still* takes 3 days to cash a check or send a wire transfer.
Face it, this is not about banks adopting technology, this is about banks sitting on your money for 3 days and making interest off it. It's already left the source bank, it hasn't reached the destination bank, but someone, somewhere, is laughing their ass off at us.
English English.
I wouldn't use "spell check" in *any* sentence to be honest. A spell is something cast by Harry Potter, so a "spell check" is presumably to make sure he cast it correctly.
Your example of 'Would you say "Pearl Jam is on tour" or "... are on tour"?' is misplaced logic anyway. Pearl Jam is a proper noun, referring to the group as a whole, not the individual members. Therefore "Pearl Jam is on tour". It's a completely different useage than two individual common nouns separated with "and".
Now if Pearl Jam *and* Metallica were on tour, then the correct useage would be "A and B are on tour".
"Hmm. Google gives ...". Well considering there are about 33 million English English speakers, and 330 million American English speakers, those results are hardly surprising are they ? It's a biased sample, and renders your assertion void. Likewise your reference to Wikipedia, for the same reasons.
If you want to abbreviate / bastardise / trivialise the language because it's too complicated for you, then be my guest, but the word is "spelling" and always will be.
Here's a gem from the Urban Dictionary you might appreciate (or possibly not).
Bastardised English
The act of removing letters from words because the populace of your country is to stupid to comprehend them any other way. (A process synonymous with "Butchering")
It probably pisses you guys off that the English language is named after...the English, but why not go and find another middle eastern country to invade or something.
American 1: "Dude, what's aluminium?"
American 2: "I don't know, let's ignore the system international naming protocol of scientific standards, and just call it something else because we can't handle that many syllables!"
American 1: "Hey man, that's a great idea! Hoo-Arr!"
Spelling and grammar checks aren't enough to ensure proper sentences.
FTFY
2 shared MP3s ... about 100 million dollars fine and 150 years hard labour in Siberia.
Funnily enough, the Linux world is like Baskin Robbins ... more than 1000 flavours, and they all leave a nasty taste in your mouth.
Ah, the OSS Mantra ... "it is mostly fixed".
There's a drought in Ethiopia comparable to the one in 1984 that took 1 million lives ... and you're worried about broadband access ?
Get a grip, ffs.
Yup, well no one is better at speaking (very bad) English than the Americans. The Nigerians are welcome to it, no one else wants it.
I'm sure people but 10x more McDonalds than Fillet Mignon in Blue Cheese Sauce ... your point is ?
A company that advertises it's own products ? What a bunch of bastards !
We didn't want "web portals" filled with ads, news, and junk.. just a simple place to find sites from
Maybe Yahoo could learn from this.
This is not some buy and sell flea market.
Fuck off with your spam !
If humanity originated in Africa and the first humans were black
Then you are also distantly related to a black person, and by your logic, you are the very thing you hate.
Bloody throwbacks :-(
There are plenty of examples of small groups making do in an isolated environment for years at a time
The Amish ? Scientologists ?
I hear Bernie Madoff isn't too busy for the foreseeable future ...
By the time they get to Mars, they won't have any shirts ... if he hasn't already sold the spacecraft to someone in Washington.
At least with the lag time to Mars, they'd get a chance to read it before the DRM server wipes it from their Kindles.
you want a system that prevents voting coercion
Agreed ... which is why any paper / electronic system should be able to tell you "yes, you have already voted". What it should NOT tell you after the fact is WHO you voted for.
The whole point about voting is that it is anonymous. No one, not even yourself, should be able to later verify WHO you voted for. Ergo, no coercion possible, because despite any threats, there is no way for anyone to verify later the actual choices you made.
So why not a simple receipt with a unique ID / hash on it ? You can go online later and verify that you *did* in fact vote, and that that vote has been counted. What you cannot do is retrieve the data on *who* you voted for.
Why must everything be so complicated with you Yanks ?
A physicist who eats a bowl of spaghetti, cuts himself shaving or takes a particularly large dump will probably publish a paper for peer review. It's their way of validating their existence, just humour them ...
640 servers ought to be enough for anybody.
Seriously though, even if everyone did have an internet connection, that's 679 people per server.
I've seen 679 open httpd processes bring the best servers to their knees.
Not to mention 679 simultaneous database connections, especially as most of them are serving SELECT '%pr0n%' FROM results ORDER BY pagerank ASC LIMIT N,20
Even with a 2TB hard disk, that's only 3GB storage per person.
I think for Google to "be the cloud", they'll need a tad more than 10 million servers.
Perhaps they could sell it back to Monty ... I'm sure he'd know what to do with it.
What a nonsensical thing to say.
I suppose you said the same thing about the JRE, or shockwave flash when it was first being deployed ? Any third party tool that extends the capabilities of the web browser needs to be deployed before it can be used (and hence become popular).
No, but hell, that's not MS, so nothing to bash right ?
Then why is it so hard to simply REMOVE the files from the plugin directory and next time Firefox starts, he DOESN'T detect them anymore ?
What am I missing here ?
This might surprise you, but a lot of people use the net for more than :-
Watching the latest lolcat video - check
Browsing their mail for the latest penis enlargement offer - check
Posting uninformed comments to Slashdot - check
Point taken ?