I always thought that these were used mainly when two intersections were close together so that you wouldn't think that the green lights for the second intersection were meant for the first one. At night it can sometimes be hard to judge the distance.
Sure, the good clerks who have been working there for a while memorize nearly all of the codes for all of the fruits. However, this isn't a job full of highly trained workers. It's entry level, which means that for every good cashier you have a couple people who are relatively new. When you bring up a fruit without a label on it they have to resort to searching through a large book of codes to find the correct one and have a really good chance of entering the wrong one and costing the company money (if the product coded was more expensive people tend to complain more).
As for getting paid, well, again maybe the good ones are paid better. I know someone who was getting $6.43/hr and was looking forward to their $0.17 raise soon...
I think someone didn't read the fine print in TFA. Here, let me quote it for you.
"Objectivity in this sentence has a one-off, government-approved change in definition. Its meaning here, and only here, is the exact opposite of what it usually means."
Well, who would make the list? As many viruses as there are in the world, there are many times more real programs that someone could conceivably want to run. A company could not possibly handle this list. When I build a program that is only meant to run in my office, I don't want to go around to every computer to add the program name to the list, much less submit the program for review to Microsoft.
So basically that would leave it to the users and IT. You have to admit that there is no chance the average home user is going to be able to identify even a third of the processes listed in the task manager.
Also, what would you do to stop a trojan? Somebody gets an email talking about this GREAT PROGRAM and they go and run it. What then? Does the system prompt you asking if this is a program that should be allowed to run? Because if it does that then the user will just press "Yes" and it's all over. Alternatively, if the system just flat out rejects it because it isn't something that was predefined to be allowed to run then how would they get it working if it was legitimate?
Let's get back to your example, but instead of an exclusive club lets just call it a bar. Do you make a list of everyone who could potentially come in the door on any given day, or do you make a list of those punks who caused trouble last weekend and were kicked out? The difference is that a typical computer is not running very exclusive programs. Sure, a ton of home computers are going to be running MS Office, iTunes, maybe WoW or something. But then some computers will be running something like PrimoPDF (no, I've never heard of this program before now either).
Well, R.R. Martin is 61 years old now and I'm sure he made a killing with the first 4 Song of Ice and Fire books, so I can see him slowing down on them a bit.
It took him 5 years to release the last book, so I wouldn't be surprised if he takes until 2010 to release the next one. Of course, at that pace he'll be 72 before he finishes the series. Hopefully Sanderson doesn't have to take over for him too!
One of the comments that came out from people reviewing the PSP Go was that the screen looked "sharper" because it was smaller with the same resolution as the PSP 3000. Wouldn't this just have the opposite effect for the DSi? As it is the DSi has a rather low resolution and I'd be worried that increasing the screen size will just make games "bigger and uglier". I'm skeptical that this is going to do anything but highlight the shortfalls of the system; it being both the oldest and the slowest architecture on the market.
You can't really compare the jump from GBA to DS with the jump from the PSP 3000 to the PSP Go. First of all, a new DS game won't run on a GBA, but a game made for the PSP Go will still work on a PSP 3000.
The DS also has a faster processor (both of them), two screens, and a touch screen. The PSP Go has the same processor, a slightly smaller screen (with the exactly same resolution), and the same controls.
Sony isn't going to kill the old PSP. In fact, the old PSP is selling better now that the PSP Go is out. The old PSP will be shelved at the same time as the PSP Go...when the PSP 2 comes out.
Would this law come into play in the use of bait cars? On one side the police would be tracking a suspect via GPS installed on a car without a warrant. On the other side it would be the cops own vehicle instead of the suspects. Common sense tells me that bait cars would be perfectly fine, but I can still see a car thief using this ruling as a defense.
I would have to say that they are added features in a lot of cases. Rock Band, for example. They keep giving people more songs every week to download. It really doesn't make any sense for them to hold back the release while they transcribe every single song they've made when they would be much better off releasing the game with the songs they've done already and then add more songs as they transcribe them.
Same thing with Gran Turismo. It would be much better for them to spend the time getting the physics engine and graphics engine working just, skin several dozen cars and then ship it. Then they can spend time skinning more cars and adding them as DLC. Of course, there is always the possibility that their design team got way ahead of the development team and so they held back some content for future DLC.
That is perhaps true for you, but other people have completely different schedules.
7 hours of sleep
1/2 hour breakfast
1 hour commute to work per day
8 hours of work
1 hour lunch (break...I guess some of this can be leisure activities like posting on/.)
1 hour supper
1 hour time spent taking care of the dog
1 hour of chores
That only leaves 3.5 hours of leisure activities per day of which at least half of that is spent with my wife.
My kid will be born soon, and I'm I'm fairly sure it will be 4 hours per day spent on chores, 1/2 hour with the dog, 1/2 hour for supper, 1.25 hours spent with the baby. That will (optimistically) leave me about 15 minutes to myself each day.
Swimming near me costs $12.50 CAD, which is £7.22 for an adult. While I'm fairly sure I could find a swimming pool slightly cheaper I doubt I could find one for £3-4.
Even if I could, swimming 2-3 times per month is still only going to be between 2-12 hours of swimming per month (assuming you don't go for longer that 4 hours at a stretch). 12 hours per month playing WoW is actually a low number, and it's quite possible to find someone who plays WoW for 4 hours a day, 7 days a week. 4 hours per day x 7 days per week x 52 weeks per year / 12 months per year gives you 121.3 hours per month on average. Therefore, from a pure entertainment cost per hour, WoW can give you 10 times as much entertainment value for the same price as swimming 2-3 times per month.
I do agree that there are other hobbies which are cheaper than WoW. If you liked to go for walks, for example, the cost is only going to be the additional wear on your shoes (but who the hell would walk for 4 hours a day, 7 days a week?). Reading books from the library is also very cheap, costing me around $15/year for a membership. If you decided to do programming as your fun hobby you could even make some money on the side! But while it's possible to find cheaper entertainment the vast majority of entertainment is significantly more expensive than WoW. This includes most forms of organized sports, watching sporting events, movies, TV subscriptions, going to bars, going out dancing, going for a drive in the country, etc, etc.
Odd. My take on the OP is that he is calling the focus group very smart compared to the average consumer and sort of implied that he was one of those average consumers. His whole point is that while something may be intuitive to the focus group such is not the case for everyone else. How is that arrogant?
Assuming he actually meant N. Korea instead of S. Korea, I'm fairly sure that these countries exploiting the vulnerability in secret is exactly what the OP was getting at.
I remember being at the zoo a few months ago and seeing a desperate mother go running by searching for her child. Thankfully the kid had been found by another parent and they were quickly reunited. However, I'm sure if you asked that mother now she would not think that this GPS watch is completely useless.
No, the Police are not legally responsible for the crimes that are committed and can't be held responsible for not being able to protect their citizens. However, not being legally responsible does not necessarily mean that it isn't their responsibility. You say that it is the job of the police to deal with crime after it happens but they aren't legally responsible for that either. When is the last time someone was able to successfully sue the police because they were not able to catch the criminal?
The police will try to help when they can. This doesn't mean that they can guarantee your safety; unfortunately no one can. The case given by Shakrai is horrifying, true, but it is also more the exception rather than the norm. It is much more common for the police to respond to a 911 call that ends up being a false alarm then it is for them to lose the call. They aren't perfect, but if someone breaks into your house and you're hiding in the closet it is better to call 911 rather than your Uncle Albert (ok, maybe if Uncle Albert lives next door that wouldn't be such a terrible idea). The police also act as a deterrent for criminals. Obviously this doesn't work for everyone or criminal activity would be zero, but it does help.
There has almost always been someone who is responsible (legally or otherwise) for keeping the citizens safe from criminals in any effective society, to varying degrees. Before the London police people were protected by the Crown. Before that serfs would swear fealty to a Lord who would in turn protect them. The extent that you were protected may come into question, but it certainly wasn't complete anarchy.
Slashdot Mirror
I always thought that these were used mainly when two intersections were close together so that you wouldn't think that the green lights for the second intersection were meant for the first one. At night it can sometimes be hard to judge the distance.
Sure, the good clerks who have been working there for a while memorize nearly all of the codes for all of the fruits. However, this isn't a job full of highly trained workers. It's entry level, which means that for every good cashier you have a couple people who are relatively new. When you bring up a fruit without a label on it they have to resort to searching through a large book of codes to find the correct one and have a really good chance of entering the wrong one and costing the company money (if the product coded was more expensive people tend to complain more).
As for getting paid, well, again maybe the good ones are paid better. I know someone who was getting $6.43/hr and was looking forward to their $0.17 raise soon...
I think someone didn't read the fine print in TFA. Here, let me quote it for you.
"Objectivity in this sentence has a one-off, government-approved change in definition. Its meaning here, and only here, is the exact opposite of what it usually means."
Well, who would make the list? As many viruses as there are in the world, there are many times more real programs that someone could conceivably want to run. A company could not possibly handle this list. When I build a program that is only meant to run in my office, I don't want to go around to every computer to add the program name to the list, much less submit the program for review to Microsoft.
So basically that would leave it to the users and IT. You have to admit that there is no chance the average home user is going to be able to identify even a third of the processes listed in the task manager.
Also, what would you do to stop a trojan? Somebody gets an email talking about this GREAT PROGRAM and they go and run it. What then? Does the system prompt you asking if this is a program that should be allowed to run? Because if it does that then the user will just press "Yes" and it's all over. Alternatively, if the system just flat out rejects it because it isn't something that was predefined to be allowed to run then how would they get it working if it was legitimate?
Let's get back to your example, but instead of an exclusive club lets just call it a bar. Do you make a list of everyone who could potentially come in the door on any given day, or do you make a list of those punks who caused trouble last weekend and were kicked out? The difference is that a typical computer is not running very exclusive programs. Sure, a ton of home computers are going to be running MS Office, iTunes, maybe WoW or something. But then some computers will be running something like PrimoPDF (no, I've never heard of this program before now either).
Well, R.R. Martin is 61 years old now and I'm sure he made a killing with the first 4 Song of Ice and Fire books, so I can see him slowing down on them a bit.
It took him 5 years to release the last book, so I wouldn't be surprised if he takes until 2010 to release the next one. Of course, at that pace he'll be 72 before he finishes the series. Hopefully Sanderson doesn't have to take over for him too!
Of course it does! That's why it never needed more than 640k!
One of the comments that came out from people reviewing the PSP Go was that the screen looked "sharper" because it was smaller with the same resolution as the PSP 3000. Wouldn't this just have the opposite effect for the DSi? As it is the DSi has a rather low resolution and I'd be worried that increasing the screen size will just make games "bigger and uglier". I'm skeptical that this is going to do anything but highlight the shortfalls of the system; it being both the oldest and the slowest architecture on the market.
Or maybe your portable is more popular than your home system?
Have you really been saying "My daughter is a lousy driver. Why do we let these people procreate"?
And assuming all the conspiracy theorists are right, it also means you'll be dead before this idiocy crops up again.
- Bus driver texting rear-ends a car
So does that make you the car that the bus driver rear-ends?
You can't really compare the jump from GBA to DS with the jump from the PSP 3000 to the PSP Go. First of all, a new DS game won't run on a GBA, but a game made for the PSP Go will still work on a PSP 3000.
The DS also has a faster processor (both of them), two screens, and a touch screen. The PSP Go has the same processor, a slightly smaller screen (with the exactly same resolution), and the same controls.
Sony isn't going to kill the old PSP. In fact, the old PSP is selling better now that the PSP Go is out. The old PSP will be shelved at the same time as the PSP Go...when the PSP 2 comes out.
Would this law come into play in the use of bait cars? On one side the police would be tracking a suspect via GPS installed on a car without a warrant. On the other side it would be the cops own vehicle instead of the suspects. Common sense tells me that bait cars would be perfectly fine, but I can still see a car thief using this ruling as a defense.
I would have to say that they are added features in a lot of cases. Rock Band, for example. They keep giving people more songs every week to download. It really doesn't make any sense for them to hold back the release while they transcribe every single song they've made when they would be much better off releasing the game with the songs they've done already and then add more songs as they transcribe them.
Same thing with Gran Turismo. It would be much better for them to spend the time getting the physics engine and graphics engine working just, skin several dozen cars and then ship it. Then they can spend time skinning more cars and adding them as DLC. Of course, there is always the possibility that their design team got way ahead of the development team and so they held back some content for future DLC.
No, people used to not get this stuff at all. How many free downloads did you get for your SNES?
That is perhaps true for you, but other people have completely different schedules.
/.)
1 hour supper
1 hour time spent taking care of the dog
1 hour of chores
7 hours of sleep 1/2 hour breakfast 1 hour commute to work per day 8 hours of work 1 hour lunch (break...I guess some of this can be leisure activities like posting on
That only leaves 3.5 hours of leisure activities per day of which at least half of that is spent with my wife.
My kid will be born soon, and I'm I'm fairly sure it will be 4 hours per day spent on chores, 1/2 hour with the dog, 1/2 hour for supper, 1.25 hours spent with the baby. That will (optimistically) leave me about 15 minutes to myself each day.
Swimming near me costs $12.50 CAD, which is £7.22 for an adult. While I'm fairly sure I could find a swimming pool slightly cheaper I doubt I could find one for £3-4.
Even if I could, swimming 2-3 times per month is still only going to be between 2-12 hours of swimming per month (assuming you don't go for longer that 4 hours at a stretch). 12 hours per month playing WoW is actually a low number, and it's quite possible to find someone who plays WoW for 4 hours a day, 7 days a week. 4 hours per day x 7 days per week x 52 weeks per year / 12 months per year gives you 121.3 hours per month on average. Therefore, from a pure entertainment cost per hour, WoW can give you 10 times as much entertainment value for the same price as swimming 2-3 times per month.
I do agree that there are other hobbies which are cheaper than WoW. If you liked to go for walks, for example, the cost is only going to be the additional wear on your shoes (but who the hell would walk for 4 hours a day, 7 days a week?). Reading books from the library is also very cheap, costing me around $15/year for a membership. If you decided to do programming as your fun hobby you could even make some money on the side! But while it's possible to find cheaper entertainment the vast majority of entertainment is significantly more expensive than WoW. This includes most forms of organized sports, watching sporting events, movies, TV subscriptions, going to bars, going out dancing, going for a drive in the country, etc, etc.
Which is why the Grandparent said it cost $15 instead of $7.50.
He's probably making that false assumption that guys on /. have girlfriends.
Odd. My take on the OP is that he is calling the focus group very smart compared to the average consumer and sort of implied that he was one of those average consumers. His whole point is that while something may be intuitive to the focus group such is not the case for everyone else. How is that arrogant?
Though he can only work that into Transformers 3 if he has enough carbon nanotubes.
Assuming he actually meant N. Korea instead of S. Korea, I'm fairly sure that these countries exploiting the vulnerability in secret is exactly what the OP was getting at.
I remember being at the zoo a few months ago and seeing a desperate mother go running by searching for her child. Thankfully the kid had been found by another parent and they were quickly reunited. However, I'm sure if you asked that mother now she would not think that this GPS watch is completely useless.
No, the Police are not legally responsible for the crimes that are committed and can't be held responsible for not being able to protect their citizens. However, not being legally responsible does not necessarily mean that it isn't their responsibility. You say that it is the job of the police to deal with crime after it happens but they aren't legally responsible for that either. When is the last time someone was able to successfully sue the police because they were not able to catch the criminal?
The police will try to help when they can. This doesn't mean that they can guarantee your safety; unfortunately no one can. The case given by Shakrai is horrifying, true, but it is also more the exception rather than the norm. It is much more common for the police to respond to a 911 call that ends up being a false alarm then it is for them to lose the call. They aren't perfect, but if someone breaks into your house and you're hiding in the closet it is better to call 911 rather than your Uncle Albert (ok, maybe if Uncle Albert lives next door that wouldn't be such a terrible idea). The police also act as a deterrent for criminals. Obviously this doesn't work for everyone or criminal activity would be zero, but it does help.
There has almost always been someone who is responsible (legally or otherwise) for keeping the citizens safe from criminals in any effective society, to varying degrees. Before the London police people were protected by the Crown. Before that serfs would swear fealty to a Lord who would in turn protect them. The extent that you were protected may come into question, but it certainly wasn't complete anarchy.