Add wikipedia and wikileaks to that list. Cock Suckerburg isn't in this to save the world, make it better or anything of the kind. He's in it to conquer society and screw anyone who gets in his way.
Real philanthropy is done by those who don't want the fame, money, or power.
I wouldn't put too much stock in their predictions. You know its fishy when they forecast Angola as a "team with strong fundamentals and underlying security". (I'm not even sure Angola has a team).
Can someone explain to me how its possible than an accretion disk can spin opposite to the black hole?
Is the spin of a black hole determined by the event that created it? For example the spin of the star that collapsed? And doesn't an opposing accretion disk create a lot of drag on the spin of the black hole?
...like an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.
It seems to me, most of us want high bandwidth and unlimited downloading. At least that's what I gather from net-neutrality strings and such. The 4G technology for us, then, won't make much difference unless we can bittorrent our daily 1GB of "educational material"
Just look at what you do with your mobile data connection right now. 99% of even the most hardcore nerds probably used under 500MB of data transfer per month over the 3g connection. The only major change I see happening with this technology is it allows us to actually use skype on our mobiles. Yes I know skype just updated the app to allow that. However spotty 3g will limit its real usefulness.
4G is a fad... at least until bandwidth and usage caps disappear. Then it can potentially disrupt traditional cable broadband providers.
While the top guys are often not engineers, what you're saying isn't entirely true. They have very rationally considered the options. Here's a nice link to a technical briefing from last week where they outline their options and the current situation.
In addition Tony Hayward is a geologist with a PhD.
Besides that, BP isn't a US company. This will clearly violate foreign sovereignty as well. Its a good way to piss off one of the US's only real allies in Europe.
The US enjoys one of the lowest tax burdens in the western world already. What you see as hugely wasteful (yes, the wars and the bailouts certainly were that) is a drop in the bucket compared to the taxes that actually go to things you use.
with a handle like gothzilla, you've obviously attended the public school system. That was also paid for by taxes. As is much of the medical research that has kept Americans from dying from McDonald's induced coronaries.
The lazy who feed off the welfare system are also just a miniscule percentage
Removing the two groups you just mentioned would not drop your tax burden in reality. It would just balance the budget and maintain what you have now... instead of what will happen in the near future: tax hikes.
if you drive, you use roads. if you go outside, police are there to protect you (unless you're in LA, then they're there to brutalize you). your taxes are going to secure oil sources around the world. your taxes go to subsidize corn which is in nearly every product you consume.
Just a quick question for you. Would you be interested in a magazine (print, app, email, or web-delivered) that was customized specifically to your tastes, aggregated from content across different magazines? Just curious...
No, part of my point is that for large advertisers and large publishers the type of content (mostly written), your demographics (your typical readership), and actual content (subject matter) isn't going to change much. Essentially you're migrating distribution channels but you're not actually changing your business model very much. The ipad does nothing to really change the long term growth perspectives of any individual publication. The US market is saturated in this regard.
Also we can take the ipad and compare it to something people thought similarly about when they were new: smartphones. These still only have something like a 20% market penetration even now (and should be 35% by 2013). Were ipads to replace magazines at that scale, it would still not "change the game" for the industry.
To draw a beloved slashdot car analogy: the development of hybrids and electric cars has done nothing really to the overall demand of cars or drivers' behavior. As such, the ipad is not revolutionizing anything in the industry nor is it really providing a more attractive future over current distribution models.
In a practical sense, the ipad is no more the future of magazines than an implant that instantly and automatically allows you to download content into your brain. The dominance of these devices is so far off that it can't be accurately predicted nor assumed.
For large volumes you are correct; there would be a trend in targeted advertising towards more valuable demographics.
However, a little bit more info about the print and publication industry. They've profiled their readership exceedingly well over the past decades and while the ipad offers some unique opportunities like interactive or individually targeted advertising, true value to most large advertisers comes from reaching a significant volume of people.
The type of advertisers that would be interested in major publications, also have ad runs far larger that the number of potential ipad customers out there regardless of the ipad user's individual value. This would lead the large advertisers to create ad campaigns that spread across many different digital publications and thus losing much of the targeted value that comes from a 'Time-reader-with-ipad' demographic.
Even if we take those 10,000 and say they're worth 10x the typical Time reader, that's still only 100,000 subscribers worth of value to advertisers which is negligible to an advertiser who's targeting the 3.3million circulation of a major publication.
All in all you have a great point for smaller print run publications where the proportion of ipad-subscription to tradition subscriptions is much higher, but the only real value for the big guys is in finding a new way to create more awareness amongst the general public for their traditional print business.
Give it a few more years so that 1 in 5 Americans have a device like this and the trends will start reflecting your insights.
Is the iPad (and similar devices) the future of magazines? Short Answer: No
Long Answer: Just do the numbers. Time Magazine has a circulation of 3.3million. Which is 1% of the US population roughly. Now if the same ratio holds true that Time would get a 1% market share of ipad users, that would make for currently... 10,000+/- ipad subscriptions. Even if the ratio is skewed totally out of proportion... Its simply not interesting from a business perspective to shift your content strategy to targeting ipads anytime soon. It will take a lot more than a few million ipads and ipad type devices sold for magazines to shift focus.
Now I'm not sure how many employees are in Taiwan but that would make for 91 suicides per year at Foxconn globally to meet the Taiwanese norm. All in all, I think the news stories are just sensationalizing a normal societal trend.
Slashdot Mirror
HAHA or PETA gets smart, puts a billboard right next to it with chemicals that interact with the steak chemicals to make the whole cloud smell vile.
Probably the same as the one for the local fish market.
Add wikipedia and wikileaks to that list. Cock Suckerburg isn't in this to save the world, make it better or anything of the kind. He's in it to conquer society and screw anyone who gets in his way.
Real philanthropy is done by those who don't want the fame, money, or power.
Indeed... There would be no traffic accidents if there were no traffic.
Considering its only June, its hard to do a comprehensive 2010 roundup.
I wouldn't put too much stock in their predictions. You know its fishy when they forecast Angola as a "team with strong fundamentals and underlying security". (I'm not even sure Angola has a team).
Can someone explain to me how its possible than an accretion disk can spin opposite to the black hole?
Is the spin of a black hole determined by the event that created it? For example the spin of the star that collapsed? And doesn't an opposing accretion disk create a lot of drag on the spin of the black hole?
It will fit nicely into my man-purse.
...like an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.
:)
Very challenging
Now i've got something MUCH more challenging to worry about: Girlfriend. :)
There, fixed that for you.
It seems to me, most of us want high bandwidth and unlimited downloading. At least that's what I gather from net-neutrality strings and such. The 4G technology for us, then, won't make much difference unless we can bittorrent our daily 1GB of "educational material"
Just look at what you do with your mobile data connection right now. 99% of even the most hardcore nerds probably used under 500MB of data transfer per month over the 3g connection. The only major change I see happening with this technology is it allows us to actually use skype on our mobiles. Yes I know skype just updated the app to allow that. However spotty 3g will limit its real usefulness.
4G is a fad... at least until bandwidth and usage caps disappear. Then it can potentially disrupt traditional cable broadband providers.
While the top guys are often not engineers, what you're saying isn't entirely true. They have very rationally considered the options. Here's a nice link to a technical briefing from last week where they outline their options and the current situation.
In addition Tony Hayward is a geologist with a PhD.
Besides that, BP isn't a US company. This will clearly violate foreign sovereignty as well. Its a good way to piss off one of the US's only real allies in Europe.
The US enjoys one of the lowest tax burdens in the western world already. What you see as hugely wasteful (yes, the wars and the bailouts certainly were that) is a drop in the bucket compared to the taxes that actually go to things you use.
with a handle like gothzilla, you've obviously attended the public school system. That was also paid for by taxes. As is much of the medical research that has kept Americans from dying from McDonald's induced coronaries.
The lazy who feed off the welfare system are also just a miniscule percentage
A much much larger chunk goes to the retirees and their medicare.Example: "In 2004 Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid were 8 percent of national income." Taking an average 25% tax rate, that means 32% of your taxes went to these benefits.
Removing the two groups you just mentioned would not drop your tax burden in reality. It would just balance the budget and maintain what you have now... instead of what will happen in the near future: tax hikes.
if you drive, you use roads. if you go outside, police are there to protect you (unless you're in LA, then they're there to brutalize you). your taxes are going to secure oil sources around the world. your taxes go to subsidize corn which is in nearly every product you consume.
Yes, your taxes go to your lifestyle.
wow, paranoid much?
Taxes aren't evil - they pay for your lifestyle. If you don't want to pay them, get the government to spend less.
Just a quick question for you. Would you be interested in a magazine (print, app, email, or web-delivered) that was customized specifically to your tastes, aggregated from content across different magazines? Just curious...
No, part of my point is that for large advertisers and large publishers the type of content (mostly written), your demographics (your typical readership), and actual content (subject matter) isn't going to change much. Essentially you're migrating distribution channels but you're not actually changing your business model very much. The ipad does nothing to really change the long term growth perspectives of any individual publication. The US market is saturated in this regard.
Also we can take the ipad and compare it to something people thought similarly about when they were new: smartphones. These still only have something like a 20% market penetration even now (and should be 35% by 2013). Were ipads to replace magazines at that scale, it would still not "change the game" for the industry.
To draw a beloved slashdot car analogy: the development of hybrids and electric cars has done nothing really to the overall demand of cars or drivers' behavior. As such, the ipad is not revolutionizing anything in the industry nor is it really providing a more attractive future over current distribution models.
In a practical sense, the ipad is no more the future of magazines than an implant that instantly and automatically allows you to download content into your brain. The dominance of these devices is so far off that it can't be accurately predicted nor assumed.
For large volumes you are correct; there would be a trend in targeted advertising towards more valuable demographics.
However, a little bit more info about the print and publication industry. They've profiled their readership exceedingly well over the past decades and while the ipad offers some unique opportunities like interactive or individually targeted advertising, true value to most large advertisers comes from reaching a significant volume of people.
The type of advertisers that would be interested in major publications, also have ad runs far larger that the number of potential ipad customers out there regardless of the ipad user's individual value. This would lead the large advertisers to create ad campaigns that spread across many different digital publications and thus losing much of the targeted value that comes from a 'Time-reader-with-ipad' demographic.
Even if we take those 10,000 and say they're worth 10x the typical Time reader, that's still only 100,000 subscribers worth of value to advertisers which is negligible to an advertiser who's targeting the 3.3million circulation of a major publication.
All in all you have a great point for smaller print run publications where the proportion of ipad-subscription to tradition subscriptions is much higher, but the only real value for the big guys is in finding a new way to create more awareness amongst the general public for their traditional print business.
Give it a few more years so that 1 in 5 Americans have a device like this and the trends will start reflecting your insights.
Because your puny language is unable to contain my awesomeness.
Is the iPad (and similar devices) the future of magazines? Short Answer: No
Long Answer: Just do the numbers. Time Magazine has a circulation of 3.3million. Which is 1% of the US population roughly. Now if the same ratio holds true that Time would get a 1% market share of ipad users, that would make for currently... 10,000+/- ipad subscriptions. Even if the ratio is skewed totally out of proportion... Its simply not interesting from a business perspective to shift your content strategy to targeting ipads anytime soon. It will take a lot more than a few million ipads and ipad type devices sold for magazines to shift focus.
Makes sense since Microsoft is adding VBA support to Office 2011. They left it out of Office 2008.
1st trial: kindle (fail)
2nd trial: ipad (will fail)
3rd trial: pen & paper WIN
Taiwan's Suicide rate is 18.8 per 100,000.
Foxconn has 486,000 employees globally
Now I'm not sure how many employees are in Taiwan but that would make for 91 suicides per year at Foxconn globally to meet the Taiwanese norm. All in all, I think the news stories are just sensationalizing a normal societal trend.
Does your laptop contain porn? Yes? I'm going to have to search this. I'll be back in 10 minutes.