Combine this with those new TVs which can project 3D images without glasses as well as different images to 2 different people. These TVs are advertised as such, but are also capable of projecting 4 separate 2D images to individual people. Now, you have up to 4 people looking at a billboard and each one is getting his/her own personalized ad.
Totally agree, but to be a definition nazi - you mean "Start the engine of natural selection again":). Evolution, as you're using the term, implies adding genetic information. Natural Selection is weeding out those who lack certain genetic information.
Why not? I don't consider it "bad PR" to recall something. People either A) Already thought Toyota had a problem and are either glad to see them issueing a recall or still don't trust them or B) Did not have their mind made up, were fairly annoyed by the media, but somewhat relived to see a recall or C) Didn't believe the bloodlusting media to begin with (as their evidence really was VERY weak from the start - statistically speaking) and realize Toyota was just issuing recalls to pacify people in group A and B.
I don't see the harm in the recall, but if they had done nothing people in groups A and B would probably not choose a Toyota in the future. I would put myself somewhere between B and C, but now that even the NHTSA says it wasn't their fault, I'm much-inclined to feel sorry that Toyota had to convince the world it wasn't their fault. Those peope who sued for their own lack of basic driving skills should be financially liable, IMO.
Really? Never heard that one from Mark Twain. I googled it and found several hints towards this, but never a reliable source. In fact, one reliable sources seem to omit this quote:
Electronic books can be indexed and searched (on a PC or iPad you can also copy/paste sometimes (depends on the source). If I were to read a novel, I would prefer it to be a hard-copy. But since 99% of books I read are technical I prefer being able to search for related information and for research I prefer my PC (if nothing else I can always save screenshots in OneNote). Though I've never used a kindle, so I don't know if/how good they can search?
Following assumptions/criteria:
Exactly 2 children.
At least one is a Boy with Blonde hair born on Tuesday
While obviously not even close to true, for the sake of probabilistic analysis, let's assume that possible hair colors are evenly distributed (1/4) between blonde, brown, red and black.
What is the probability of the 2nd child being a boy?
Answer is 55/111
111 total possibilities with at least one Blonde Boy born on Tuesday: Question is not what day of the week the other child is born or what hair color he/she has, therefore normally 4 possible answers: boy/boy, boy/girl, girl/boy, girl/girl. Additional information takes these possibilities times 7 (days of the week) and times 4 (hair colors). 4x4x7 = 112. Here, each possibility allows for EITHER the first or the 2nd child child to have any gender/day of week/hair color. However, with the restriction that one MUST be a Blonde Boy born on Tuesday we lose one possible combination (you cannot count Blonde Boy born on Tuesday for BOTH the first and the 2nd child - that's like rolling dice and counting "double 1" or "double 2" twice in the possible dice combinations). This leaves 111 possible combinations for the other child - of these 55 are boy ("1st child=Brown Boy on Thursday" OR "2nd child=Brown Boy on Thursday" OR "1st child=Black Boy born on Sunday" OR "2nd child=Black Boy born on Sunday" OR "another Blonde Boy born on Tuesday", etc) and 56 are girl.
It's not ambiguous... the question SPECIFICALLY allows for the possibility of the second child (boy or girl) to ALSO be born on Tuesday. This is also taken into account in the answer (13/27).
That's true, given that we have met Peter. The question is stated as such that we have NOT met Peter. We do NOT know the name of the boy and even if we did there is a possibility that BOTH boys are Peter and therefore it's STILL not exactly 50/50, but maybe 49.999/50.001.
I suppose it would depend on the case. It would make sense to me that a particular petition should be allowed anonymity. There's no doubt that petition signing can be enough cause for other's to respond in hate. For online petitions it would be easy to implement a check-box that allows each individual signer the right to remain anonymous as desired, which the court should uphold - afterall, if the checkbox is "opt-in" to remain anonymous it should be clear to the court what a person's intentions are.
If the intention was to be public, I'm sure the petition signers would gladly go picketing, so this is really a different form of expression.
I never understood how companies can get patents for "natural" progression in technology. I bet 99 out of a 100 technology "patents" are based on previous works and given the same situation I would have thought of the same idea in about.. mmm... 5 seconds. Patents should only be awarded for truly excellent and NEW ideas....as determined by me, of course...
Orly? Have you given half your annual salary to solve this problem lately? no? Then don't talk about other's people's livelyhood like it's spare change. You cannot deny that these people have families to care for too. Now, I don't know how exactly these workers are even affected (Will they receive unemployment? Will BP have to pay them regardless?). And it's not like I want this oil spill to get worse. I just hope the workers are taken care of - otherwise, no, I don't think shutting down these "few" rigs reduces the risk enough to warrant putting all those people out of work this year.
There is a foolproof method that video games use to prove that the end-user is at least 18 and according to this infallible system's statistics it seems there are VERY little minors. But I will say it's odd that there are so many players whose birthday is 1992-01-01 0.o
I share your sentiment - I dislike the format, but, like many other dislikable things, it's ingrained now and unavoidable. And Adobe sure hasn't done anything to make the format any better. In fact, the Adobe reader plug-in is often considered the #1 security threat of a browser, and I agree. But that's not the format's fault itself and PDF does have some advantages. So it's good to see it included in a (hopefully, most likely) safer way. And I hate Adobe for screwing up Macromedia's awesome stuff... so suck on it Adobe.
But Chrome is not converting anything. It's more like a plug-in that's native. This is the same way Chrome reads HTML5 natively... it doesn't first convert it to HTML4. It won't look any different than the Adobe's plug-in or FoxIt's plug-in, but you don't have to install it separately. And most awesomely, you won't have to update it separately. Of course this makes Chrome natively a little more vulnerable too... but oodles more secure than Adobe's plug-in.
I can already connect to other providers networks (roaming), but then my battery drains because it's trying to re-connect to my own provider. Now, if cell providers were forced to allow all other cell providers to use their network for a LOW standard flat rate then I could see performance increasing - though I'd imagine this would severely reduce an individual provider's motivation to expand it's own network. The other problem, as stated in other posts is the compatibility of phones with certain networks. "Unlocking" the phone won't help that.
Anyone more cellular-savvy than I want to explain how this will increase performance? And no, cell phone companies won't lose much as a whole, but it WILL make it harder for them to keep a customer (as long as their competitors have compatible networks). That's fine with me, of corse, but the drawback is that purchase costs of new phones could go up. Why should the carrier give you a $300 discount on the phone if you're just gonna switch? I'll say though that most discounts depend on a 2-yr contract, so they should be set to get a good return on their investment anyway. It's likely cell companies will see a small drop in profit (which just gets passed on to the consumer next time the pricing is adjusted).
While public investment definitely CAN leave something of value behind (see interstate) it typically does NOT. For the same amount of money a private entity will usually provide twice the benefit for the amount spent that the government can. This is very evident with relief efforts. But it's not always the case, so it's really a wash - or a mute point. There is nothing wrong with saving money, btw. It means that individual/entity will not have to rely on hand-outs/bailouts/bankruptcies later. Now, "some" tax is of course required, but in today's world I support just about EVERY tax cut in hopes that it might bring government spending down.
Well of course the powersupply and motherboard are still being powered. Short of unplugging the machine they always do. So does the XBOX and any other console/DVD player/TV/etc. But it's still considered off.
While totally hilarious, they REALLY should. Sony does not solely OWN the right to deny a manufaturer from using blu-ray format in their devices and HD-DVD is dead. Now, MS would have to pay licencing fee, of which their direct competitor would benefit, but that would definitely be the final straw to get me to purchase a gaming console. I believe more "casual" gamers are currently going with PS3 because of blu-ray too.
Slashdot Mirror
Combine this with those new TVs which can project 3D images without glasses as well as different images to 2 different people. These TVs are advertised as such, but are also capable of projecting 4 separate 2D images to individual people. Now, you have up to 4 people looking at a billboard and each one is getting his/her own personalized ad.
While creepy... it's pretty awesome.
Totally agree, but to be a definition nazi - you mean "Start the engine of natural selection again" :). Evolution, as you're using the term, implies adding genetic information. Natural Selection is weeding out those who lack certain genetic information.
Why not? I don't consider it "bad PR" to recall something. People either
A) Already thought Toyota had a problem and are either glad to see them issueing a recall or still don't trust them
or B) Did not have their mind made up, were fairly annoyed by the media, but somewhat relived to see a recall
or C) Didn't believe the bloodlusting media to begin with (as their evidence really was VERY weak from the start - statistically speaking) and realize Toyota was just issuing recalls to pacify people in group A and B.
I don't see the harm in the recall, but if they had done nothing people in groups A and B would probably not choose a Toyota in the future. I would put myself somewhere between B and C, but now that even the NHTSA says it wasn't their fault, I'm much-inclined to feel sorry that Toyota had to convince the world it wasn't their fault. Those peope who sued for their own lack of basic driving skills should be financially liable, IMO.
Really? Never heard that one from Mark Twain. I googled it and found several hints towards this, but never a reliable source. In fact, one reliable sources seem to omit this quote:
http://www.twainquotes.com/quotesatoz.html has nothing
Got one for me?
Name a decent alternative? I like it for what it CAN do.
Electronic books can be indexed and searched (on a PC or iPad you can also copy/paste sometimes (depends on the source). If I were to read a novel, I would prefer it to be a hard-copy. But since 99% of books I read are technical I prefer being able to search for related information and for research I prefer my PC (if nothing else I can always save screenshots in OneNote). Though I've never used a kindle, so I don't know if/how good they can search?
Bet they could sell for a nice profit ;-).
Following assumptions/criteria:
Exactly 2 children.
At least one is a Boy with Blonde hair born on Tuesday
While obviously not even close to true, for the sake of probabilistic analysis, let's assume that possible hair colors are evenly distributed (1/4) between blonde, brown, red and black.
What is the probability of the 2nd child being a boy?
Answer is 55/111
111 total possibilities with at least one Blonde Boy born on Tuesday: Question is not what day of the week the other child is born or what hair color he/she has, therefore normally 4 possible answers: boy/boy, boy/girl, girl/boy, girl/girl. Additional information takes these possibilities times 7 (days of the week) and times 4 (hair colors). 4x4x7 = 112. Here, each possibility allows for EITHER the first or the 2nd child child to have any gender/day of week/hair color. However, with the restriction that one MUST be a Blonde Boy born on Tuesday we lose one possible combination (you cannot count Blonde Boy born on Tuesday for BOTH the first and the 2nd child - that's like rolling dice and counting "double 1" or "double 2" twice in the possible dice combinations). This leaves 111 possible combinations for the other child - of these 55 are boy ("1st child=Brown Boy on Thursday" OR "2nd child=Brown Boy on Thursday" OR "1st child=Black Boy born on Sunday" OR "2nd child=Black Boy born on Sunday" OR "another Blonde Boy born on Tuesday", etc) and 56 are girl.
It's not ambiguous... the question SPECIFICALLY allows for the possibility of the second child (boy or girl) to ALSO be born on Tuesday. This is also taken into account in the answer (13/27).
Now you're just reading into the problem. The English wording is specific enough to anyone to understand the problem as such:
Exactly 2 children
at least 1 "boy born on Tuesday"
Based ONLY on this information what are is the probability of the other child being a boy
That's true, given that we have met Peter. The question is stated as such that we have NOT met Peter. We do NOT know the name of the boy and even if we did there is a possibility that BOTH boys are Peter and therefore it's STILL not exactly 50/50, but maybe 49.999/50.001.
I suppose it would depend on the case. It would make sense to me that a particular petition should be allowed anonymity. There's no doubt that petition signing can be enough cause for other's to respond in hate. For online petitions it would be easy to implement a check-box that allows each individual signer the right to remain anonymous as desired, which the court should uphold - afterall, if the checkbox is "opt-in" to remain anonymous it should be clear to the court what a person's intentions are.
If the intention was to be public, I'm sure the petition signers would gladly go picketing, so this is really a different form of expression.
I never understood how companies can get patents for "natural" progression in technology. I bet 99 out of a 100 technology "patents" are based on previous works and given the same situation I would have thought of the same idea in about.. mmm... 5 seconds. Patents should only be awarded for truly excellent and NEW ideas. ...as determined by me, of course...
Orly? Have you given half your annual salary to solve this problem lately? no? Then don't talk about other's people's livelyhood like it's spare change. You cannot deny that these people have families to care for too. Now, I don't know how exactly these workers are even affected (Will they receive unemployment? Will BP have to pay them regardless?). And it's not like I want this oil spill to get worse. I just hope the workers are taken care of - otherwise, no, I don't think shutting down these "few" rigs reduces the risk enough to warrant putting all those people out of work this year.
uhm, how do you feel about losing your job for 6 months?
There is a foolproof method that video games use to prove that the end-user is at least 18 and according to this infallible system's statistics it seems there are VERY little minors. But I will say it's odd that there are so many players whose birthday is 1992-01-01 0.o
I share your sentiment - I dislike the format, but, like many other dislikable things, it's ingrained now and unavoidable. And Adobe sure hasn't done anything to make the format any better. In fact, the Adobe reader plug-in is often considered the #1 security threat of a browser, and I agree. But that's not the format's fault itself and PDF does have some advantages. So it's good to see it included in a (hopefully, most likely) safer way. And I hate Adobe for screwing up Macromedia's awesome stuff... so suck on it Adobe.
Reminds me of a "Dexter's Lab" episode I saw as a kid. Boy Genius goes to an Amish village and powers a light bulb via potato.
But Chrome is not converting anything. It's more like a plug-in that's native. This is the same way Chrome reads HTML5 natively... it doesn't first convert it to HTML4. It won't look any different than the Adobe's plug-in or FoxIt's plug-in, but you don't have to install it separately. And most awesomely, you won't have to update it separately. Of course this makes Chrome natively a little more vulnerable too... but oodles more secure than Adobe's plug-in.
I can already connect to other providers networks (roaming), but then my battery drains because it's trying to re-connect to my own provider.
Now, if cell providers were forced to allow all other cell providers to use their network for a LOW standard flat rate then I could see performance increasing - though I'd imagine this would severely reduce an individual provider's motivation to expand it's own network.
The other problem, as stated in other posts is the compatibility of phones with certain networks. "Unlocking" the phone won't help that.
Anyone more cellular-savvy than I want to explain how this will increase performance?
And no, cell phone companies won't lose much as a whole, but it WILL make it harder for them to keep a customer (as long as their competitors have compatible networks). That's fine with me, of corse, but the drawback is that purchase costs of new phones could go up. Why should the carrier give you a $300 discount on the phone if you're just gonna switch? I'll say though that most discounts depend on a 2-yr contract, so they should be set to get a good return on their investment anyway. It's likely cell companies will see a small drop in profit (which just gets passed on to the consumer next time the pricing is adjusted).
Give me an example where the same is not true of the government.
While public investment definitely CAN leave something of value behind (see interstate) it typically does NOT. For the same amount of money a private entity will usually provide twice the benefit for the amount spent that the government can. This is very evident with relief efforts. But it's not always the case, so it's really a wash - or a mute point.
There is nothing wrong with saving money, btw. It means that individual/entity will not have to rely on hand-outs/bailouts/bankruptcies later.
Now, "some" tax is of course required, but in today's world I support just about EVERY tax cut in hopes that it might bring government spending down.
Well of course the powersupply and motherboard are still being powered. Short of unplugging the machine they always do. So does the XBOX and any other console/DVD player/TV/etc. But it's still considered off.
While totally hilarious, they REALLY should.
Sony does not solely OWN the right to deny a manufaturer from using blu-ray format in their devices and HD-DVD is dead. Now, MS would have to pay licencing fee, of which their direct competitor would benefit, but that would definitely be the final straw to get me to purchase a gaming console. I believe more "casual" gamers are currently going with PS3 because of blu-ray too.