Wowser! So your a psychologist/psychiatrist who can diagnose brain differences merely by generic occupations. And you have a serious infatuation with sales.
Here's my, slightly less "I'm a genius and know how other people I've never met brain's work" take:
Most IT people don't have any issues with sales and marketing at all. They just manage the company network and software licensing and hardware and so on. Sales and Marketing is exactly the same as accounting (well sales and marketing probably use things like VPNs more often and so have more contact with IT). Of course some IT people are just jerks and some sales and marketing people are just jerks - but on the whole all is fine.
On the programmer side most programmers also don't have any issues with sales and marketing at all. They never deal with them in the first place and just churn out the code that their manager assigns. We still have some jerk programmers and some jerk sales and marketers.
The main problem arises when you have bad sales and marketing who over promise and then expect the programmers to make it happen for them. The odd sales and marketing person who does that is fine - they tend to get pushed out when management sees that their sales aren't actually profitable because of the huge amounts of work being done to meet them. Just like the odd programmer has the same problem and under estimates the amount of work involved in doing something and the same end result.
Sometimes though it becomes the norm. And most programmers know someone who has worked somewhere where the programmers slave away meeting the ridiculous promises of sales and marketing while sales and marketing people get all the credit in the company and the programmers are constantly criticized for being behind. Since places like that tend to churn through programmers (they burn out due to the "last minute push" being an almost constant event) a much larger percentage of programmers have worked at such a place than the raw number of jobs at such places would indicate. Hence there's a dislike of the generic "sales and marketing" label that spreads.
I don't know any programmers who think sales and marketing is simple or that they would be good at it (well aside a few, but they are good at it just like some programmers are good at rock climbing). I know a lot who put sales and marketing at the same level as "used car salesman" (oh wait that is sales) and "con artist" (oh wait that is marketing) and "read estate agent" (oh wait that is sales and marketing). OK who don't think highly of sales and marketing - not because they think it is easy but because they see it as deceptive (remember they know how the system they wrote works and they see how sales and marketing talks about it and how those two things just aren't the same).
Possibly. But then you get to complain to your rep if they decide to vote for it - not being able to do that was the complaint I was responding to after all.
They only have the second largest market share (with Samsung) being first for LCD TVs in the US (http://www.isuppli.com/Display-Materials-and-Systems/MarketWatch/Pages/Vizio-Remains-on-Top-of-US-LCD-TV-Market-in-Q4-2010.aspx). And they are one of the cheap (and possible nasty...) brands.
But of course your peek at Best Buy is much more representative than actual statistics.
Commodore didn't. The C64 had the "VIC-II" (video interface chip II). The Amiga had Agnus and Denise and later the AGA.
I'm don't think Atari did either. Sure they had a Blitter chips and there was graphics accelerators and so on. But I don't think the term "GPU" was used.
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9912202 - and I'm sure there's something earlier since when I was doing my phd work (which was before that) it was a common excuse amongst those doing computation work.
Because the FDA does far more than just food and drugs. Medical devices for example. Radiation emitting devices for example.Cosmetics for example.
And obviously company wants to sell the things to hospitals, where putting the keyboard into the dishwasher after every 2 minute use isn't exactly practical.
Over 3.5 years for me (by the numbers in that link) - my phone does a discharge/charge cycle once a day basically.
It's hardly suspiciously low.
My phone has a battery in it with 3.7V and 1300mah. My old high school memories tell me that P=IV, so 1300mah*3.7V = 4.8Wh. My electricity bill says that the distribution charge is $0.0654531250/kWh and the energy charge is $0.113187500/kWh (more expensive than the original calc used, and by lord how many decimal places do they want to use...)
So one charge would cost if that was the price of abstract electricity: (0.0654531250+0.113187500)/1000*4.8 = $0.00086
So $1 gets me 1166 charges, at once a day that's 3 years (Wh are likely higher due to the voltage actually being higher when fully charged, but we have enough slop over 3 years to cover that).
The charging efficiency while not 100% is high enough that it is more than covered by the fact my phone doesn't actually get to 0 charge each day - it tends to have 25% or so left.
That is talking about it. He said they could if they wanted to, which is mentioning closing something. You can mention things without having to outright state that you are going to do them right here and now.
Sayyari rejected reports about a possible one-day closure of the Strait of Hormuz during the exercise, adding that Iranian forces are capable of accomplishing such a feat, but such a decision must be made by the nation's leaders.
When the Iranian Navy Commander Rear Admiral says that they could close the straight if they wanted to that counts (well to everyone except you I guess) as mentioning closing something.
Or is the China Daily "american sensasionalist media" in your strange world?
You are up to date on the details that the moon orbits the Earth about once every month, while the Earth rotates once every day, right?
So given that and the statement "The waxing gibbous moon will set around 3 a.m. local time" can you work out what they mean by "local time".
The moon's daily trek across the sky is due to the rotation of the Earth, not the orbit of the moon. Hence the moon will set at 3am "local time" everywhere, excluding daylight saving time - but given it is the middle of winter and we are only talking about the northern parts of the northern hemisphere there won't be anyone on daylight saving time.
OK. Second then, to a country that's 4.5 times as big. Second place and first place seem pretty much the same when you assessment was "nothing". Oh and the US is the third largest steel producer too - again not first but far from "nothing being produced".
And yet the US remains the single largest manufacturer on the planet. I'm pretty aircraft aren't food or entertainment also.
Sure the crappy manufacturing like making steel bars and cheap plastic toys has left the US leaving the high value stuff like building fighter jets and so on.
Really? The US dollar shot up during that period which should have killed foreign investments as well, it was temporary of course but so was that time frame.
And what about all the oil, gas, iron, copper, gold, etc miners and processors in the US?
What about Boeing and the other huge manufacturers in the US? Pretending the US isn't still the world's largest manufacturer doesn't make it so after all.
Slashdot Mirror
Wowser! So your a psychologist/psychiatrist who can diagnose brain differences merely by generic occupations. And you have a serious infatuation with sales.
Here's my, slightly less "I'm a genius and know how other people I've never met brain's work" take:
Most IT people don't have any issues with sales and marketing at all. They just manage the company network and software licensing and hardware and so on. Sales and Marketing is exactly the same as accounting (well sales and marketing probably use things like VPNs more often and so have more contact with IT). Of course some IT people are just jerks and some sales and marketing people are just jerks - but on the whole all is fine.
On the programmer side most programmers also don't have any issues with sales and marketing at all. They never deal with them in the first place and just churn out the code that their manager assigns. We still have some jerk programmers and some jerk sales and marketers.
The main problem arises when you have bad sales and marketing who over promise and then expect the programmers to make it happen for them. The odd sales and marketing person who does that is fine - they tend to get pushed out when management sees that their sales aren't actually profitable because of the huge amounts of work being done to meet them. Just like the odd programmer has the same problem and under estimates the amount of work involved in doing something and the same end result.
Sometimes though it becomes the norm. And most programmers know someone who has worked somewhere where the programmers slave away meeting the ridiculous promises of sales and marketing while sales and marketing people get all the credit in the company and the programmers are constantly criticized for being behind. Since places like that tend to churn through programmers (they burn out due to the "last minute push" being an almost constant event) a much larger percentage of programmers have worked at such a place than the raw number of jobs at such places would indicate. Hence there's a dislike of the generic "sales and marketing" label that spreads.
I don't know any programmers who think sales and marketing is simple or that they would be good at it (well aside a few, but they are good at it just like some programmers are good at rock climbing). I know a lot who put sales and marketing at the same level as "used car salesman" (oh wait that is sales) and "con artist" (oh wait that is marketing) and "read estate agent" (oh wait that is sales and marketing). OK who don't think highly of sales and marketing - not because they think it is easy but because they see it as deceptive (remember they know how the system they wrote works and they see how sales and marketing talks about it and how those two things just aren't the same).
Possibly. But then you get to complain to your rep if they decide to vote for it - not being able to do that was the complaint I was responding to after all.
You realize othing actually happens unless the bill gets passed, right?
Sure one representative can propose something but it takes a majority or representatives voting for it to actually pass.
There was that house episode in which House had "not this leg " written on one of his legs, and "not this leg either" on the other...
They only have the second largest market share (with Samsung) being first for LCD TVs in the US (http://www.isuppli.com/Display-Materials-and-Systems/MarketWatch/Pages/Vizio-Remains-on-Top-of-US-LCD-TV-Market-in-Q4-2010.aspx). And they are one of the cheap (and possible nasty...) brands.
But of course your peek at Best Buy is much more representative than actual statistics.
http://www.vizio.com/lcd-hdtvs/va26lhdtv10t.html
http://www.vizio.com/lcd-hdtvs/vx240m.html
They aren't copying Apple, they are copying Sony: http://www.amazon.com/Sony-NSX-32GT1-32-Inch-Featuring-Google/dp/B004BBA6B2 (who very well may have copied Apple, but that's beside the point).
Commodore didn't. The C64 had the "VIC-II" (video interface chip II). The Amiga had Agnus and Denise and later the AGA.
I'm don't think Atari did either. Sure they had a Blitter chips and there was graphics accelerators and so on. But I don't think the term "GPU" was used.
I don't recall anyone arguing with it at the time either: http://www.tgdaily.com/hardware-brief/18947-nvidia-launches-worlds-first-gpu.
Still PU was common enough already.
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9912202 - and I'm sure there's something earlier since when I was doing my phd work (which was before that) it was a common excuse amongst those doing computation work.
Why such a grumpy dick?
Something 4 years old just didn't seem like a great reference to show something hasn't been disbanded. 1.5 years old is better obviously.
I'm not sure a 4 year old press release counts as evidence something hasn't been discontinued...
You know where they have lawyers and actually might know more than the random crap you'll get here.
So what is exponential growth then? Given you just dismissed the textbook definition as not being "really exponential".
Because the FDA does far more than just food and drugs. Medical devices for example. Radiation emitting devices for example.Cosmetics for example.
And obviously company wants to sell the things to hospitals, where putting the keyboard into the dishwasher after every 2 minute use isn't exactly practical.
Because when somebody dies from a flu-pnemonia one-two we record the death as "died from door knob" or "died from Bill's cough", right?
Do you know what "unordered" means? Can you see how that doesn't apply to the case in which you ordered something?
Over 3.5 years for me (by the numbers in that link) - my phone does a discharge/charge cycle once a day basically.
It's hardly suspiciously low.
My phone has a battery in it with 3.7V and 1300mah. My old high school memories tell me that P=IV, so 1300mah*3.7V = 4.8Wh. My electricity bill says that the distribution charge is $0.0654531250/kWh and the energy charge is $0.113187500/kWh (more expensive than the original calc used, and by lord how many decimal places do they want to use...)
So one charge would cost if that was the price of abstract electricity:
(0.0654531250+0.113187500)/1000*4.8 = $0.00086
So $1 gets me 1166 charges, at once a day that's 3 years (Wh are likely higher due to the voltage actually being higher when fully charged, but we have enough slop over 3 years to cover that).
The charging efficiency while not 100% is high enough that it is more than covered by the fact my phone doesn't actually get to 0 charge each day - it tends to have 25% or so left.
That is talking about it. He said they could if they wanted to, which is mentioning closing something. You can mention things without having to outright state that you are going to do them right here and now.
- http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2011-12/26/content_14324816.htm
When the Iranian Navy Commander Rear Admiral says that they could close the straight if they wanted to that counts (well to everyone except you I guess) as mentioning closing something.
Or is the China Daily "american sensasionalist media" in your strange world?
Seriously???
You are up to date on the details that the moon orbits the Earth about once every month, while the Earth rotates once every day, right?
So given that and the statement "The waxing gibbous moon will set around 3 a.m. local time" can you work out what they mean by "local time".
The moon's daily trek across the sky is due to the rotation of the Earth, not the orbit of the moon. Hence the moon will set at 3am "local time" everywhere, excluding daylight saving time - but given it is the middle of winter and we are only talking about the northern parts of the northern hemisphere there won't be anyone on daylight saving time.
Yeah that's pretty much the definition of "last year". Would you prefer they wrote "this year" so as to be incorrect?
Because noone has ever had their original content taken down due to a DMCA request.
And noone has ever had their domain redirected by the government to a "this site was a child porn host" because the government screwed up.
OK. Second then, to a country that's 4.5 times as big. Second place and first place seem pretty much the same when you assessment was "nothing". Oh and the US is the third largest steel producer too - again not first but far from "nothing being produced".
And yet the US remains the single largest manufacturer on the planet. I'm pretty aircraft aren't food or entertainment also.
Sure the crappy manufacturing like making steel bars and cheap plastic toys has left the US leaving the high value stuff like building fighter jets and so on.
Really? The US dollar shot up during that period which should have killed foreign investments as well, it was temporary of course but so was that time frame.
And what about all the oil, gas, iron, copper, gold, etc miners and processors in the US?
What about Boeing and the other huge manufacturers in the US? Pretending the US isn't still the world's largest manufacturer doesn't make it so after all.
That's irrelevant to whether taxing individuals at 100% would or wouldn't cover the entire federal budget.