Betty Crocker has a FAQ on all the ways you can screw up cooking Hamburger Helper. Would you say the people who need the help have no business eating?
I'm not entirely joking - it's in the best interest of everyone for companies to make their products accessible to as large a market as possible. In this case, MS probably decided that autorun was doing more harm than good, but the concept (make it as easy as possible to install software) was a good one.
Well, I am by no means an expert on this stuff, but I think the idea is to make what's called a protein subunit vaccine. They take a key protein from the disease and implant it in some other virus. Your body attacks that virus and develops an immune response to the targeted protein. It's being used in experimental vaccines for AIDS and, apparently, Influenza. However, I don't know if there are any cases of it being done successfully on a large scale.
If it works out, it would be fantastic - effective vaccination for two of the worlds biggest killers, which could potentially save millions of lives per year. However, first they need to get it working, and then they need to find a way to make it cheap enough to use in the third world, since that's where most of the deaths occur. It might help that a universal flu vaccine would be very popular in the first world, and could provide them with the money to ramp production.
Content costs money. They've been providing it for free for a long time, and will continue to provide it for free in many cases. Asking a small fee to support their efforts hardly seem unreasonable. I already pay for Pandora (also $3/month) and it's well worth it.
The NY Times spent a few weeks going over the leaks' content, with the leaks as the front page story quite often. I suspect other respectable outlets did the same. The problem is more that most people get their news from cable TV, where real news always takes second billing to scandals, shootings, and abductions of pretty white girls.
In fact, just to see how bad it was, I went over to CNN's website, where the title of this story is "Could Assange end up in Gitmo?" Typical of tabloid journalism, they take some outrageous and shocking headline, phrase it as a question (so that they can't be proven wrong), and rack up the page views. At least CNN gives the story a reasonably high booking. MSNBC is running with "Is Facebook the new Craigslist for hookers?" (there's that outrageous question again). And Fox's top story is "Did Google Exec Spark Egypt Revolt?" (yet another question, this time with an almost farcical suggestion).
Ah, but now the companies have learned how to handle that. Just flood people with propaganda about how they can't trust the government (see: TFA). Next thing you know, people are calling net neutrality a government regulation. The very people who are concerned about censorship start demanding that the government allow businesses to censor the net.
Yes, and I'm sure that it was desire to "increase the spread of knowledge" that led to a 7200 word missive on Sailor Moon. Of course, that's just the top-level article. I'm not going to bother getting the word counts for the 124 sub-articles.
That depends on whether the gender imbalance is really natural, or if it is caused by a culture of misogyny. In the case of Wikipedia, my guess is that it is indeed a natural imbalance - the people who edit it tend to be obsessive and may have minor autism spectrum disorders. Since autism is generally 3-4 times as common in men as in women, that would explain most of the imbalance.
However, there are other cases where the imbalance is legitimately caused by cultures which are hostile towards women. Whether it's internet forums with near constant sexist jokes ranging from sandwich-making to rape, or corporate good old boys getting together at strip clubs, it does happen, and often. So don't always dismiss imposed diversity as sexism, because it's not.
The difference is that people aren't choosing not to be vaccinated themselves, they're choosing not to vaccinate their children. The state can't force you to eat healthy, but if you malnourish your children, they can be taken away.
Put another way, you have the right to stupidly harm yourself. You do not have the right to stupidly harm others.
The problem isn't the order of the tickets, its that the tickets have visible info on them that gives away the hidden info. Of course, you're still right that you don't need to be non-random to control the number of winners. Just use a true random process to generate the tickets, and a separate process to analyze the tickets created and hold back any winning tickets once you pass a certain quota (and re-introduce them to the stream at a random point if you fall too far below quota).
Statistics isn't hard? Let me guess, you base that on a couple of college courses? As an engineer, I've frequently run into statistical problems that neither I nor my coworkers have even the foggiest notion of how to approach. Things can get really ugly when you start dealing with the real world.
You're certainly right about one thing though - most mathematicians do the math because they enjoy it. Those aforementioned problems that were beyond me? I typically recruit some mathematicians and physicists I know from college, and they solve them for free.
After calculating that his average winnings would come out to $600 a day:
"People often assume that I must be some extremely moral person because I didn't take advantage of the lottery," he says. "I can assure you that that's not the case. I'd simply done the math and concluded that beating the game wasn't worth my time."
Moral of the story for those who play the lotto: Even if you figure out how to break the game, it still isn't worth playing.
Copying can be innovation if your copy is better. See any Apple product in the past ten years.
Releasing the best AV on the market for free is innovation, even if it is to protect your own system. If it's not innovative, then why can't Kaspersky or Eset or Norton keep up?
Allowing streaming isn't innovative, but it is good. Do you really think Apple would allow open-source competitors to AppleTV to run on their platforms?
Microsoft isn't really the evil monopoly they used to be. They are oftentimes inept (Zune, Surface, Kin, Vista, Office '07....) but they do have their hits as well (Xbox, Windows 7, MSSE). To deny that really just shows prejudice against them.
Doesn't that suggest that when (if?) the universe stops expanding, it would be possible to look through a theoretical super-telescope and see your own galaxy as it existed a zillion years ago?
The difference between Microsoft and Nokia is that MS exists outside the mobile market. Microsoft has plenty of income from Windows and Office, plus some from Xbox to keep them going. They can afford to lose money on Bing and Windows Phone and all the other markets they try to buy their way in to. Eventually, they'll find one they can succeed in, and it'll make the company that much more successful. Compare that to Nokia, which is steadily losing ground in its bread and butter. As their market share shrinks, they have less money to put into R&D, which means their likely to lose more market share in the future. They may be able to pull out of it, but they are in jeopardy. Microsoft, on the other hand, will still be perfectly healthy if (when?) the W7 Phone goes the way of the Kin or Zune.
Now, if Windows' market share fell to 2nd place, you could fairly state that Microsoft was in serious trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
Betty Crocker has a FAQ on all the ways you can screw up cooking Hamburger Helper. Would you say the people who need the help have no business eating?
I'm not entirely joking - it's in the best interest of everyone for companies to make their products accessible to as large a market as possible. In this case, MS probably decided that autorun was doing more harm than good, but the concept (make it as easy as possible to install software) was a good one.
You do realize that the Catholic Church probably doesn't care too much about what Martin Luther thinks, right?
Well, I am by no means an expert on this stuff, but I think the idea is to make what's called a protein subunit vaccine. They take a key protein from the disease and implant it in some other virus. Your body attacks that virus and develops an immune response to the targeted protein. It's being used in experimental vaccines for AIDS and, apparently, Influenza. However, I don't know if there are any cases of it being done successfully on a large scale.
If it works out, it would be fantastic - effective vaccination for two of the worlds biggest killers, which could potentially save millions of lives per year. However, first they need to get it working, and then they need to find a way to make it cheap enough to use in the third world, since that's where most of the deaths occur. It might help that a universal flu vaccine would be very popular in the first world, and could provide them with the money to ramp production.
Probably the same price they're asking - $3 per month per user.
So about $300.
Content costs money. They've been providing it for free for a long time, and will continue to provide it for free in many cases. Asking a small fee to support their efforts hardly seem unreasonable. I already pay for Pandora (also $3/month) and it's well worth it.
The NY Times spent a few weeks going over the leaks' content, with the leaks as the front page story quite often. I suspect other respectable outlets did the same. The problem is more that most people get their news from cable TV, where real news always takes second billing to scandals, shootings, and abductions of pretty white girls.
In fact, just to see how bad it was, I went over to CNN's website, where the title of this story is "Could Assange end up in Gitmo?" Typical of tabloid journalism, they take some outrageous and shocking headline, phrase it as a question (so that they can't be proven wrong), and rack up the page views. At least CNN gives the story a reasonably high booking. MSNBC is running with "Is Facebook the new Craigslist for hookers?" (there's that outrageous question again). And Fox's top story is "Did Google Exec Spark Egypt Revolt?" (yet another question, this time with an almost farcical suggestion).
Ah, but now the companies have learned how to handle that. Just flood people with propaganda about how they can't trust the government (see: TFA). Next thing you know, people are calling net neutrality a government regulation. The very people who are concerned about censorship start demanding that the government allow businesses to censor the net.
Yes, and I'm sure that it was desire to "increase the spread of knowledge" that led to a 7200 word missive on Sailor Moon. Of course, that's just the top-level article. I'm not going to bother getting the word counts for the 124 sub-articles.
That depends on whether the gender imbalance is really natural, or if it is caused by a culture of misogyny. In the case of Wikipedia, my guess is that it is indeed a natural imbalance - the people who edit it tend to be obsessive and may have minor autism spectrum disorders. Since autism is generally 3-4 times as common in men as in women, that would explain most of the imbalance.
However, there are other cases where the imbalance is legitimately caused by cultures which are hostile towards women. Whether it's internet forums with near constant sexist jokes ranging from sandwich-making to rape, or corporate good old boys getting together at strip clubs, it does happen, and often. So don't always dismiss imposed diversity as sexism, because it's not.
The difference is that people aren't choosing not to be vaccinated themselves, they're choosing not to vaccinate their children. The state can't force you to eat healthy, but if you malnourish your children, they can be taken away. Put another way, you have the right to stupidly harm yourself. You do not have the right to stupidly harm others.
You may of course reject this offer simply because it makes you uneasy, guided by Pliny’s dictum quod dubitas ne feceris. When in doubt, don’t.
They'd just drop the weakest suits, and nail the others for millions. Remember, they can walk away from the suit pretty much whenever they want.
Have you used it in the past few years? Most sites refuse to take emails from any of Malinator's domains.
Those "few advantages" are the only valuable aspects. Plus addressing is borderline worthless, because it requires you to reveal your real address.
Are you joking or something? Sic is a verb meaning "to attack".
"Official six license police on computer scientist" wouldn't make any sense.
The problem isn't the order of the tickets, its that the tickets have visible info on them that gives away the hidden info. Of course, you're still right that you don't need to be non-random to control the number of winners. Just use a true random process to generate the tickets, and a separate process to analyze the tickets created and hold back any winning tickets once you pass a certain quota (and re-introduce them to the stream at a random point if you fall too far below quota).
Statistics isn't hard? Let me guess, you base that on a couple of college courses? As an engineer, I've frequently run into statistical problems that neither I nor my coworkers have even the foggiest notion of how to approach. Things can get really ugly when you start dealing with the real world.
You're certainly right about one thing though - most mathematicians do the math because they enjoy it. Those aforementioned problems that were beyond me? I typically recruit some mathematicians and physicists I know from college, and they solve them for free.
Sure, but those are big crooks. Ripping off the lotto to the tune of $150k a year makes you a small crook, and small crooks do big time.
After calculating that his average winnings would come out to $600 a day:
"People often assume that I must be some extremely moral person because I didn't take advantage of the lottery," he says. "I can assure you that that's not the case. I'd simply done the math and concluded that beating the game wasn't worth my time."
Moral of the story for those who play the lotto: Even if you figure out how to break the game, it still isn't worth playing.
Yeah, won't somebody think of all those poor schoolchildren sitting in the dark. At 5 PM. On a Sunday.
Seriously.... Gates doesn't even work there any more, and Apple is more borg-ish than MS, what with the tight control over hardware.
I know /. is strictly anti-MS, but they could at least update the picture to a flying chair, if only to stay relevant.
Copying can be innovation if your copy is better. See any Apple product in the past ten years.
Releasing the best AV on the market for free is innovation, even if it is to protect your own system. If it's not innovative, then why can't Kaspersky or Eset or Norton keep up?
Allowing streaming isn't innovative, but it is good. Do you really think Apple would allow open-source competitors to AppleTV to run on their platforms?
Microsoft isn't really the evil monopoly they used to be. They are oftentimes inept (Zune, Surface, Kin, Vista, Office '07....) but they do have their hits as well (Xbox, Windows 7, MSSE). To deny that really just shows prejudice against them.
Doesn't that suggest that when (if?) the universe stops expanding, it would be possible to look through a theoretical super-telescope and see your own galaxy as it existed a zillion years ago?
How do you propose the Amish get there? Horse-drawn jetliner?
The difference between Microsoft and Nokia is that MS exists outside the mobile market. Microsoft has plenty of income from Windows and Office, plus some from Xbox to keep them going. They can afford to lose money on Bing and Windows Phone and all the other markets they try to buy their way in to. Eventually, they'll find one they can succeed in, and it'll make the company that much more successful. Compare that to Nokia, which is steadily losing ground in its bread and butter. As their market share shrinks, they have less money to put into R&D, which means their likely to lose more market share in the future. They may be able to pull out of it, but they are in jeopardy. Microsoft, on the other hand, will still be perfectly healthy if (when?) the W7 Phone goes the way of the Kin or Zune.
Now, if Windows' market share fell to 2nd place, you could fairly state that Microsoft was in serious trouble.