The author states several times that this ONLY looks at a small subset of the population, that this is NOT a proper statistical analysis. Oh, wait, this is/. Nobody here RTF
You know what? I read TFA a few times. There is just vague references for not drawing conclusions, in other words; just CYA. They do not say anything specific. So, don't get all sanctimonious with me about reading the fucking article.
Folks, especially you statisticians out there, what's wrong with these pictures?
The sample: folks on the internet.
Who's missing: folks who aren't on the internet; like old farts, poor people and Amish. As far as the old farts are concerned: they are the most well organized and the most vocal political group in this country. I think these charts reflect nothing.
...sellers make zero economic profit. Economic profit is the profit above the profit you could make in another industry - so, if you build a computer business with 100,000 and get a 20,000 profit and that 100,000 would only have gotten you a 5,000 profit in the pizza business, that 15,000 difference is the economic profit).
This is why I wanted to slap my econ teacher in B-school around.
There are no billionaire economists - but they know it all, don't they? And yet, an uneducated man from Arkansas became one on the richest men in the World from making zero economic profit: Sam Walton founder of Walmart.
you can't run 'what-if' scenarios and keep certain variables constant.
On the other hand, by using the internet, the powers that be wouldn't be able to rig or dumb down any tests so that they succeed. Like they did with some of the Star Wars tests. Useful when justifying budgets to Congress.
defending Web limitations as necessary to protect the country's citizens. Yes, without filtered internet, who knows what untold damage might sweep through the populace!
...these measures are put in place to protect children and other Internet users from illegal and offensive content.
This is an illustration of the slippery slope and we all should show this to anyone who wants to censor or regulate the internet for obscene material or to "protect the children".
As a matter of fact, here's a perfect illustration how the "think of the children" rhetoric can be and is used for oppression of a people.
She admits that the company does not inspect ivory sold via its site to ensure that it was harvested prior to the CITES ban.
How could they? The sellers can just lie and say it's pre-CITES. What' eBay supposed to do? Have everyone who wants to sell ivory get some sort of certificate and mail it to eBay before listing? Or eBay inspects everything? The only recourse is to ban all ivory sales.
An acquaintance of mine went to China an she found something rather interesting. Young folks right out of college would go to China for a couple of years to teach English or whatever, the Chinese Government pays them and gives them a stipend (more $$$ if you can speak Chinese too!). They just bank their pay and when they come home, they have enough money to put a sizable down payment on a house and start their lives. And they had an adventure that they'll remember fir the rest of their life.
Considering that the US will be China's bitch in a few years, I suggest you do in fact learn Chinese!
An inanimate object could also get the blame. The researchers rigged the software agents to implicate three laserjet printers, which were then accused in takedown letters by the M.P.A.A. of downloading copies of âoeIron Manâ and the latest Indiana Jones film.
Download movies and sell them
pin it on cop's printer
in the meantime while they're arresting the printer
FAST could have been Google, it was better, but the upper management decided there was no real money to be made in web search.
Maybe it was and maybe it wasn't, but tell that to the investors. The free market said that Google's original business model wasn't good enough - the tech wasn't good enough apparently.
Unless you have the money and you don't care about any sort of return, when you go into business, you must make a return on investment. And when you have investors, if you squander their money, they fire you and possibly you go to jail for fraud. At the very least, if you do not meet their requirements for a return, they will also fire you. The free market works the same way for technology.
Technology isn't the end all and be all for a successful enterprise. Their management made the right decision as far as I'm concerned and I'm sure Google's stock holders would agree. After the "customers" their opinion matters the most.
...he must show that he is no longer a danger if allowed to practice.
What were those dangers? Just curious. Thompson has a big mouth and all, filed some questionable suits, and made some outlandish accusations. But exactly what real harm has he caused?
Slashdot Mirror
And,...get a grip...this is just a goddamn internet posting site. God!
Cheers, Fuck me.
The asshole who published this now has a disclaimer. So, fuck you in accusing me for not reading the goddamn article.
You know what? I read TFA a few times. There is just vague references for not drawing conclusions, in other words; just CYA. They do not say anything specific. So, don't get all sanctimonious with me about reading the fucking article.
OK, so they reflect trends on the internet and folks who are active on the internet: nothing else.
The sample: folks on the internet.
Who's missing: folks who aren't on the internet; like old farts, poor people and Amish. As far as the old farts are concerned: they are the most well organized and the most vocal political group in this country. I think these charts reflect nothing.
And I have heart burn....Hmmmm, I think you've discovered something here!
Name one.
This is why I wanted to slap my econ teacher in B-school around.
There are no billionaire economists - but they know it all, don't they? And yet, an uneducated man from Arkansas became one on the richest men in the World from making zero economic profit: Sam Walton founder of Walmart.
Mmmmmm, simulated porn sites.
On the other hand, by using the internet, the powers that be wouldn't be able to rig or dumb down any tests so that they succeed. Like they did with some of the Star Wars tests. Useful when justifying budgets to Congress.
1.05 million ~ 1,048,576 -> megabyte! Cool!
Yeah! Who do we talk to about keeping folks from a ".cn" domain modding on China internet stories?
Questioning and opposing their Government?
This is an illustration of the slippery slope and we all should show this to anyone who wants to censor or regulate the internet for obscene material or to "protect the children".
As a matter of fact, here's a perfect illustration how the "think of the children" rhetoric can be and is used for oppression of a people.
How could they? The sellers can just lie and say it's pre-CITES. What' eBay supposed to do? Have everyone who wants to sell ivory get some sort of certificate and mail it to eBay before listing? Or eBay inspects everything? The only recourse is to ban all ivory sales.
The first just times out.
Try spray paint.
I can do it in one .... I outsource it.
An acquaintance of mine went to China an she found something rather interesting. Young folks right out of college would go to China for a couple of years to teach English or whatever, the Chinese Government pays them and gives them a stipend (more $$$ if you can speak Chinese too!). They just bank their pay and when they come home, they have enough money to put a sizable down payment on a house and start their lives. And they had an adventure that they'll remember fir the rest of their life.
Considering that the US will be China's bitch in a few years, I suggest you do in fact learn Chinese!
Maybe it was and maybe it wasn't, but tell that to the investors. The free market said that Google's original business model wasn't good enough - the tech wasn't good enough apparently.
Unless you have the money and you don't care about any sort of return, when you go into business, you must make a return on investment. And when you have investors, if you squander their money, they fire you and possibly you go to jail for fraud. At the very least, if you do not meet their requirements for a return, they will also fire you. The free market works the same way for technology.
Technology isn't the end all and be all for a successful enterprise. Their management made the right decision as far as I'm concerned and I'm sure Google's stock holders would agree. After the "customers" their opinion matters the most.
Move on to something better. Backwards compatibility can too far some times.
What were those dangers? Just curious. Thompson has a big mouth and all, filed some questionable suits, and made some outlandish accusations. But exactly what real harm has he caused?