That's because MSN search quite frankly sucks. It's a reasonable decision from the perspective of marketing, not to even offer a bottom-barrel service as an option. If MSN were better, it would be an option.
And Microsoft knows it. There's a reason MS tried to buy Yahoo!, and put forth such a serious offer that it caused a small political drama in the Yahoo! board of directors when Yahoo! refused...
Funny, I got the impression that chrome went to almost-ridiculous lengths to suggest I use a search service other than the one which is, quite frankly, the clear industry leader.
Of course I want to use google for search! Have you tried MSN? Duh...
Not that I'm a google fanboy at any rate; I respect their work but retain healthy skepticism; even to the point that I don't use chrome solely because google may be watching. I still think that they are careful about showing the appearance of "leveraging", to the point of silliness.
>Windows has been a great platform for large-memory engineering usage for many years, due to the availability of XP-64 and OEM's like HP who make stable supported systems for XP-64.
Re:Not hard to get...
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Thank you for providing an explanation of this. I got modded down troll and berated a few years ago for mentioning the 3GB thing.
Of course, one reason you might want to swap out those libraries is if you are running one very optimized special-purpose software package and actually want the full 4 gigabytes you paid for, to load and manipulate some very dense data. Linux let me do it, Windows didn't.
I spoke to a lot of clueful (and clueless) people and not one of them mentioned this PAE thing. In the end, I suggested my company go with the linux version of the software and they listened to me. (Don't anyone bother telling me I'm a moron, and to look at MS knowledge base article #whateverthefuck, it's water under the bridge now.)
Once again, thank you; at least there's an explanation, even if it reinforces my belief that Windows shouldn't be used for serious scientific or technical computing.
I would understand "offtopic" or even "overrated" but what is flamebait about this?
The little thing about libertarian paradise? Come on! Any purely ideological society will leave something to be desired; it's just naive to think that everything will get better for everyone, under libertarianism, or anything else! Humanity as a whole may make better progress overall; the elite will certain have more freedom; but I'd hate to be renting an apartment...
And the scope of that is severely limited by very many state, county and city regulations, unless you happen to live in a libertarian "paradise". This is why contracts always have a clause like "If a portion of this contract is void due to conflict with laws, the remaining portions of the contract will still be in full effect." Contracts are not only legal instruments; like all human communication, they are also used to intimidate and establish a notion of security. Do yourself a favor and read up on the law; it takes about an hour at the library or online, and it can save you $thousands and a lot of pain...
For example, I remember reading in the Seattle city code (in the late 90s), that if you ask the landlord for permission and funding to do reasonable minor renovations to your apartment, and don't hear anything within 30 days, it is an implied agreement. You may proceed, and if you present receipts, the landlord is legally required to reimburse you for costs up to something like $200. (I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice, simply my recollection of my own experiences.)
The difference is, the online realm doesn't have these community standards yet.
Still, they probably want to have a clear click-through agreement before the download, giving them legitimacy to C&D anyone else offering the files.
Another possibility is that EA themselves doesn't want their downloads slowed/blocked by overzealous ISPs thinking they are music downloads. How ironic that would be in face of this conspiracy theory.
In short there are many, many explanations more reasonable than EA wanting to sabotage the bittorrent protocol by not offering a download through it. RIAA is already working a million times harder, and not really getting very far.
Not everyone is out to get you and sabotage the new economy (though the RIAA is).
It's possible that they just want to collect data on how much demand there is for old "classic" games. This is one thing you absolutely cannot reliably get from BitTorrent or other p2p, and I can think of several ways the data could be useful. Getting marketing data for the cost of bandwidth is practically free.
The FTC is considering taking anti-trust action against the bundling of so-called "over-draft protection" with consumer banking accounts. I hope it works out with a minimum of foolishness.
I have, and mine aren't. Of course I only use it in clear cases of fraud or obvious mistakes (so far once each).
Yes, of course an abusive use of the policy is and should be noted.
I would suspect that overturning charges on Enzyte-scam-"goods" once in your life would not be an abuse (and hopefully once is all it takes). For one, it is law that customers can return any goods received by mail, within 30 days. I wouldn't know, I was smart enough to at least avoid this scam.:)
Yes, that's true, but they also have contracts with sellers (who are screwed just as bad (or as good) as consumers are overall). Enough complaints, and the system gets good feedback about what retailers are shit, and can act on this accordingly.
A lot of people wrongly assume that reversing charges is one of the ways you get "bad" credit. That either you get dinged directly, or the credit card company puts you on a naughty list or something, for future note. Seriously!
Even after I explain to them, that it is one of the major reasons to have a CC and that the issuing bank is happy to find out which of their merchants are screw-ups, they only barely believe me. Financial superstition; two evils, together greater than the sum.
The "urine" is hard to explain, but some people are saying it was actually grey water.
Most of this stuff is not unusual to be found in a home. When I was a kid, most of my friends had "wrist rockets"; I got mine at walmart for $15 or so. The novelty wore off quickly, once we realized that we didn't actually want to go around breaking windows and they just gathered dust mostly.
The throwing knives are suspicious, but since they've not been charged with weapons possession, I suspect they are actually paring knives or something. Recall that almost everyone in this country has "drug distribution paraphernalia" in their homes (as polyethylene baggies or latex balloons).
Caltrops, well OK. Maybe. Or they might have had a couple of these, possibly homemade (I did). If I could trust the police and media just a little bit, I'd take them much more seriously.
I mean, really. "Flammable liquids"? I'd be more suspicious of a suburban home without any flammable liquids.
Your post is somewhat unfocused, still it's been interesting to think about it.
First, regarding RBHT milk, I've had no trouble finding it; it just needs a disclaimer like "Scientific tests can not show a significant difference between this product and RBHT-treated milk," which is maybe a little bullshitty, but all-in-all fine by me. (There are much worse problems with food labeling.)
There is no indication that Creekstone is doing anything more humanely - the idea of humaneness is generally a red herring to play on your sympathies.
The ruling is obviously not designed to protect the foreign customer but again, neither is it concerned with the hypothetical case of "a few positive results". It is about domestically preventing a panic and market-wise tangential expenditure on a snake-oil treatment, as everyone plays catch-up so that they can put a nearly-meaningless "100% tested" label on their meat. To be fair, figures indicate that the total cost of 100% inspection in the US would be $400 million which is not all that much against the retail value of the beef industry (about $75 billion).
Your point about air quality testing in NY is invalid. Please note that Creekstone farms is a business, and not a private individual. It is very common on slashdot to get these confused, but they could not be more different; the step from natural person, to small business is a much larger step than small business to big business. BTW, we are in agreement with regard to the air quality testing ban in NY. It is ridiculous.
We are also assuming that a positive test result from Creekstone (or whomever) will necessarily be publicized. Do you not think, that Creekstone would just 3S (shoot, shovel, & shut up) the contaminated cow(s) anyway? If we give up regulated testing, as we implicitly do by giving companies the nod to go ahead with their own 100% plans, we may lose the opportunity to get a heads-up on an epidemic and need to rely on whistle-blowers.
Maybe the testing rate should be increased somewhat. Then again, Japan has 100% testing at slaughter and they still have at least one case of BSE.
in re: free range: I'll concede this point because I've only studied human epidemiology and frankly pulled it out of my arse in the first place:). At any rate, not recycling cows would still be the "right" solution; has anyone done a cost-benefit analysis of when this would become feasible?
I think that the issue at hand is that the company is using the test at too young of an age to be effective. (The cynic notes that they are administering the test at a time in which the cow is guaranteed to pass... truly a PR coup.)
Regarding the general effectiveness of the test, we quickly enter the realm of speculation. However it is easy to imagine that the test is not much more powerful at the 100% level than at the 1% level. This is particularly since, as you note, the cattle share feed (the primary vector) and thus if one is infected likely the others will be, and conversely. When samples are highly correlated, the returns of sampling diminish quickly. If this is in fact the case, it seems reasonable that the USDA restrict testing in order to ensure efficient supply of the test kits at the effective 1% rate.
Is it really too much of a stretch to read it in terms of providing an enlightened and stimulating upbringing with regard to behavior, curiosity, education, &c., rather than just donating "good" genes?
Slashdot Mirror
Economics, Reaganomics, Birth Control, The Status Quo
Shooting rockets to the moon, kids growing up too soon
Politicians say
And the band played on
...
Eve of destruction; tax deduction; city inspectors; bill collectors
Solid Gold in demand; population out of hand; suicide
Too many bills, hippies movin' to the hills
People all over the world are dying in the war
And the band played on
...
Ball of confusion, ball of confusion
That's what the world is today, hey, hey
Largely because being worried is more and more being considered a mental illness.
"-1 Disinsightful"
That's because MSN search quite frankly sucks. It's a reasonable decision from the perspective of marketing, not to even offer a bottom-barrel service as an option. If MSN were better, it would be an option.
And Microsoft knows it. There's a reason MS tried to buy Yahoo!, and put forth such a serious offer that it caused a small political drama in the Yahoo! board of directors when Yahoo! refused...
Funny, I got the impression that chrome went to almost-ridiculous lengths to suggest I use a search service other than the one which is, quite frankly, the clear industry leader.
Of course I want to use google for search! Have you tried MSN? Duh...
Not that I'm a google fanboy at any rate; I respect their work but retain healthy skepticism; even to the point that I don't use chrome solely because google may be watching. I still think that they are careful about showing the appearance of "leveraging", to the point of silliness.
>Windows has been a great platform for large-memory engineering usage for many years, due to the availability of XP-64 and OEM's like HP who make stable supported systems for XP-64.
Gee thanks friendly Microsoft-HP partnership alliance representative!
Thank you for providing an explanation of this. I got modded down troll and berated a few years ago for mentioning the 3GB thing.
Of course, one reason you might want to swap out those libraries is if you are running one very optimized special-purpose software package and actually want the full 4 gigabytes you paid for, to load and manipulate some very dense data. Linux let me do it, Windows didn't.
I spoke to a lot of clueful (and clueless) people and not one of them mentioned this PAE thing. In the end, I suggested my company go with the linux version of the software and they listened to me. (Don't anyone bother telling me I'm a moron, and to look at MS knowledge base article #whateverthefuck, it's water under the bridge now.)
Once again, thank you; at least there's an explanation, even if it reinforces my belief that Windows shouldn't be used for serious scientific or technical computing.
The use of words expressing something other than their literal intention... Now that is irony!
Speak for yourself. It's worse under linux, but it's no spring chicken in Windows. Slashdot seems to agree, as this came up in an article earlier too.
Flamebait?!
I would understand "offtopic" or even "overrated" but what is flamebait about this?
The little thing about libertarian paradise? Come on! Any purely ideological society will leave something to be desired; it's just naive to think that everything will get better for everyone, under libertarianism, or anything else! Humanity as a whole may make better progress overall; the elite will certain have more freedom; but I'd hate to be renting an apartment...
And the scope of that is severely limited by very many state, county and city regulations, unless you happen to live in a libertarian "paradise". This is why contracts always have a clause like "If a portion of this contract is void due to conflict with laws, the remaining portions of the contract will still be in full effect." Contracts are not only legal instruments; like all human communication, they are also used to intimidate and establish a notion of security. Do yourself a favor and read up on the law; it takes about an hour at the library or online, and it can save you $thousands and a lot of pain...
For example, I remember reading in the Seattle city code (in the late 90s), that if you ask the landlord for permission and funding to do reasonable minor renovations to your apartment, and don't hear anything within 30 days, it is an implied agreement. You may proceed, and if you present receipts, the landlord is legally required to reimburse you for costs up to something like $200. (I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice, simply my recollection of my own experiences.)
The difference is, the online realm doesn't have these community standards yet.
Thanks for the link, it was interesting.
Still, they probably want to have a clear click-through agreement before the download, giving them legitimacy to C&D anyone else offering the files.
Another possibility is that EA themselves doesn't want their downloads slowed/blocked by overzealous ISPs thinking they are music downloads. How ironic that would be in face of this conspiracy theory.
In short there are many, many explanations more reasonable than EA wanting to sabotage the bittorrent protocol by not offering a download through it. RIAA is already working a million times harder, and not really getting very far.
Not everyone is out to get you and sabotage the new economy (though the RIAA is).
It's possible that they just want to collect data on how much demand there is for old "classic" games. This is one thing you absolutely cannot reliably get from BitTorrent or other p2p, and I can think of several ways the data could be useful. Getting marketing data for the cost of bandwidth is practically free.
The FTC is considering taking anti-trust action against the bundling of so-called "over-draft protection" with consumer banking accounts. I hope it works out with a minimum of foolishness.
That's what I originally thought he meant, but it didn't make much sense to me as a reply.
In that case, I should have said "Good! I'm no friend of merchants either."
I have, and mine aren't. Of course I only use it in clear cases of fraud or obvious mistakes (so far once each).
Yes, of course an abusive use of the policy is and should be noted.
I would suspect that overturning charges on Enzyte-scam-"goods" once in your life would not be an abuse (and hopefully once is all it takes). For one, it is law that customers can return any goods received by mail, within 30 days. I wouldn't know, I was smart enough to at least avoid this scam. :)
Yes, that's true, but they also have contracts with sellers (who are screwed just as bad (or as good) as consumers are overall). Enough complaints, and the system gets good feedback about what retailers are shit, and can act on this accordingly.
A lot of people wrongly assume that reversing charges is one of the ways you get "bad" credit. That either you get dinged directly, or the credit card company puts you on a naughty list or something, for future note. Seriously!
Even after I explain to them, that it is one of the major reasons to have a CC and that the issuing bank is happy to find out which of their merchants are screw-ups, they only barely believe me. Financial superstition; two evils, together greater than the sum.
The "urine" is hard to explain, but some people are saying it was actually grey water.
Most of this stuff is not unusual to be found in a home. When I was a kid, most of my friends had "wrist rockets"; I got mine at walmart for $15 or so. The novelty wore off quickly, once we realized that we didn't actually want to go around breaking windows and they just gathered dust mostly.
The throwing knives are suspicious, but since they've not been charged with weapons possession, I suspect they are actually paring knives or something. Recall that almost everyone in this country has "drug distribution paraphernalia" in their homes (as polyethylene baggies or latex balloons).
Caltrops, well OK. Maybe. Or they might have had a couple of these, possibly homemade (I did). If I could trust the police and media just a little bit, I'd take them much more seriously.
I mean, really. "Flammable liquids"? I'd be more suspicious of a suburban home without any flammable liquids.
Under capitalism, man exploits man.
Under communism, it is just the opposite.
And sorry about bashing the unfocusedness of your post based on that.
By the way, I found this linked from wikipedia; sounds interesting: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/31/AR2006123100672.html
Your post is somewhat unfocused, still it's been interesting to think about it.
First, regarding RBHT milk, I've had no trouble finding it; it just needs a disclaimer like "Scientific tests can not show a significant difference between this product and RBHT-treated milk," which is maybe a little bullshitty, but all-in-all fine by me. (There are much worse problems with food labeling.)
There is no indication that Creekstone is doing anything more humanely - the idea of humaneness is generally a red herring to play on your sympathies.
The ruling is obviously not designed to protect the foreign customer but again, neither is it concerned with the hypothetical case of "a few positive results". It is about domestically preventing a panic and market-wise tangential expenditure on a snake-oil treatment, as everyone plays catch-up so that they can put a nearly-meaningless "100% tested" label on their meat. To be fair, figures indicate that the total cost of 100% inspection in the US would be $400 million which is not all that much against the retail value of the beef industry (about $75 billion).
Your point about air quality testing in NY is invalid. Please note that Creekstone farms is a business, and not a private individual. It is very common on slashdot to get these confused, but they could not be more different; the step from natural person, to small business is a much larger step than small business to big business. BTW, we are in agreement with regard to the air quality testing ban in NY. It is ridiculous.
We are also assuming that a positive test result from Creekstone (or whomever) will necessarily be publicized. Do you not think, that Creekstone would just 3S (shoot, shovel, & shut up) the contaminated cow(s) anyway? If we give up regulated testing, as we implicitly do by giving companies the nod to go ahead with their own 100% plans, we may lose the opportunity to get a heads-up on an epidemic and need to rely on whistle-blowers.
Maybe the testing rate should be increased somewhat. Then again, Japan has 100% testing at slaughter and they still have at least one case of BSE.
I don't think any worries are extraneous at this point in time...
in re: free range: I'll concede this point because I've only studied human epidemiology and frankly pulled it out of my arse in the first place :). At any rate, not recycling cows would still be the "right" solution; has anyone done a cost-benefit analysis of when this would become feasible?
I think that the issue at hand is that the company is using the test at too young of an age to be effective. (The cynic notes that they are administering the test at a time in which the cow is guaranteed to pass... truly a PR coup.)
Regarding the general effectiveness of the test, we quickly enter the realm of speculation. However it is easy to imagine that the test is not much more powerful at the 100% level than at the 1% level. This is particularly since, as you note, the cattle share feed (the primary vector) and thus if one is infected likely the others will be, and conversely. When samples are highly correlated, the returns of sampling diminish quickly. If this is in fact the case, it seems reasonable that the USDA restrict testing in order to ensure efficient supply of the test kits at the effective 1% rate.
Is it really too much of a stretch to read it in terms of providing an enlightened and stimulating upbringing with regard to behavior, curiosity, education, &c., rather than just donating "good" genes?