It's about good citizenship, not an extra two cents profit per device.
Actually, business are run by MBAs. It is about the extra two cents profit per device.
But not necessarily smart ones. Good citizenship can significantly increase sales, which can result in far more profit than trying to squeeze two cents more out of each device.
In the past couple decades we've been watching a lot of companies run themselves into the ground by trying to maximize profit margins at the expense of customers. This is a foolish approach on par with, "We may not be making a profit, but we'll make it up with volume." Instead they attempt, "We make an excellent profit on everything sold, even though no one really wants to buy it from us."
The parent post's link is pre-selected to contain ONLY the 1-star reviews. That is not the regular distribution of reviews on Amazon for this book. In the general distribution it appears to be a generally well-liked book with minor controversy (as one would expect).
Someone edited my story and added sensationalist quotes I could swear I didn't include.
That's definitely NOT a professionally correct thing to do, especially for a news site. Zonk, please be more careful when editing to NOT attribute the edited portions to someone who did not submit them.
And also, please do not move links from text which clearly describe what they are, like "report by the Boston Globe" over to things which make it very difficult to figure out what the link is about, such as, "who thought she was armed with a bomb". Think about it. The first section, as chosen by the original submitter, clearly shows that this link contains an article discussing this story. The second text portion looks like it's supposed to link to a blog entry by someone who thought she had a bomb. It makes no sense to change it. We should not have to guess the contents of links when they can be easily labeled.
In fact, if the providers were smart, they'd have a script that inserts different commercials every week so that they aren't stale (and they can sell more "time" to advertisers)
This is quite right. One of the worst things about video advertising on the web so far is its painful redundancy. For example, if I watch 30 short videos on metacafe, I can NOT tolerate seeing 30 identical advertisements for the Bourne Ultimatum. All things like that do is make me irritated with both the service and the product being advertised.
My impression was that the 95% probability was that two postings were by the same author, not that they knew the identity of the author.
Which is impressive from an academic standpoint, but perhaps not very useful for mass surveillance. If you have 10,000 identified posts, and 10,000 unidentified posts, and you want to match them up with a one-to-one mapping, suddenly that 5% sounds much more troublesome. If each unidentified post scores a positive on 500 identified posts, and each identified post scores a positive on 500 unidentified posts, then you would have little more than a meaningless cluster of associations.
So I imagine this would only be useful for adding a tiny bit more confidence to an existing suspicion.
We should probably not use words like "communication" to describe entanglement, because it only confuses people. Connection and correlation do not equal classical communication.
In the real world, no regulations means you get to give your lunch money to the biggest bully, because there's no checks in place preventing the bullying. Saying that the kid is free to pick the least expensive bully is balderdash...
Thank you. That's the best analogy I've heard all week.:)
The founding fathers were relying on the people, not SCOTUS, to defend their constitution.
I believe they were relying on both, and a number of other mechanisms as well. Security against tyranny is best achieved by redundant protection mechanisms.
The day where they have the legal right to detain me for no reason is the day I start worrying.
Did you even read the article? They DID forcibly detain him and his family, and when he called the police on them, the police officer arrested him instead of making them let him go.
You say that you will worry when they have the legal right to detain you. Well, either he wins a lawsuit (or at least a settlement) against them, or they had the legal right to detain him (and you) by virtue of receiving no punishment.
It's not an assumption of guilt, it's called preventative procedures.
Demanding that I prove that I have paid for the things in my possession is NOT a preventative procedure. It is an investigative procedure with a presumption of guilt.
Example: I buy a pair of sunglasses at a drug store. One month later, I walk to the same drug store, put the sunglasses in my pocket, and go in to buy a toothbrush. Is it a "preventative procedure" if on the way out of the store they demand that I prove that I paid for the sunglasses in my pocket?
Even if the guys technically right, the judge is going to give him a little bit of practical advice and tell him to work the store next time to help prevent theft, keeping the prices lower for everyone else.
What sort of ridiculous statement is that? A judge is going to tell the guy, "Next time people are assuming you are guilty without reason, you should do what you're supposed to and prove that you are innocent of random charges to some random employee"???
We're not a fascist state yet. Don't go out of your way to rush us in that direction. To hell with "lower prices". If you want to prevent theft, find a way that will actually spot it happening, so that there is actually compelling evidence of its occurrence. THEN you can go making accusations and pressing charges.
A receipt check isn't the same as accusing someone of shoplifting and they can't detain you for refusing a receipt check.
A receipt check is an assumption of guilt for everyone which asks everyone to prove their innocence. We have a civic duty to object to this mindset and approach, as it goes against the core values of justice.
How much of an ass do you have to be to argue against individual freedom, at least as an ideal?
I think the problem shows up when people say "individual freedom" and then really mean, "I don't want to pay any taxes." In a society where taxes are excessively minimized, only the children of the wealthy have opportunity, and thus only the children of the wealthy can actually exercise this individual freedom.
I love neutrinos, but my doctor said I shouldn't eat them.
It's quite alright. They go right through you.
His paypal account was used.
on
Fox Hacks Fark
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
From the article, "Phillips also purchased, using PayPal, a paid subscription to TotalFark, a premium Fark service. The accounts all used the same IP addresses as the hacker." This makes it look a lot more like it was actually the individual. This is not just a case of the attack coming from an IP of a possibly compromised computer.
For it to be a different individual, someone would have had to compromise the PayPal account of Phillips without him noticing. I expect there would be a shocked response from Phillips if this had been the case. Instead, the website of Darrell Phillips seems to be blank today.
Actually I haven't been very pleased with chat support so far. I often feel like someone on the other end is copying and pasting (or right-clicking and choosing) standardized answers to me, when the problem I contact them about does not have a standardized answer. Then you go outside of those answers, and they tell you they can't help you any further and for more assistance you have to call the phone support.
Hopefully my experience is the minority, but I haven't seen it done right yet.
The people are tired and want change, and they currently trust the Democratic platform to bring them this. They're simply dissatisfied with the rate of progress Congress has been having.
Slashdot Mirror
But not necessarily smart ones. Good citizenship can significantly increase sales, which can result in far more profit than trying to squeeze two cents more out of each device.
In the past couple decades we've been watching a lot of companies run themselves into the ground by trying to maximize profit margins at the expense of customers. This is a foolish approach on par with, "We may not be making a profit, but we'll make it up with volume." Instead they attempt, "We make an excellent profit on everything sold, even though no one really wants to buy it from us."
The parent post's link is pre-selected to contain ONLY the 1-star reviews. That is not the regular distribution of reviews on Amazon for this book. In the general distribution it appears to be a generally well-liked book with minor controversy (as one would expect).
(Disclaimer: I have not read the book.)
An intentional defect is not a feature.
That's definitely NOT a professionally correct thing to do, especially for a news site. Zonk, please be more careful when editing to NOT attribute the edited portions to someone who did not submit them.
And also, please do not move links from text which clearly describe what they are, like "report by the Boston Globe" over to things which make it very difficult to figure out what the link is about, such as, "who thought she was armed with a bomb". Think about it. The first section, as chosen by the original submitter, clearly shows that this link contains an article discussing this story. The second text portion looks like it's supposed to link to a blog entry by someone who thought she had a bomb. It makes no sense to change it. We should not have to guess the contents of links when they can be easily labeled.
... Exactly how big was your room service bill?
I don't know, but it'll be really funny when all the positrons leak out into their pocket.
This is quite right. One of the worst things about video advertising on the web so far is its painful redundancy. For example, if I watch 30 short videos on metacafe, I can NOT tolerate seeing 30 identical advertisements for the Bourne Ultimatum. All things like that do is make me irritated with both the service and the product being advertised.
Which is impressive from an academic standpoint, but perhaps not very useful for mass surveillance. If you have 10,000 identified posts, and 10,000 unidentified posts, and you want to match them up with a one-to-one mapping, suddenly that 5% sounds much more troublesome. If each unidentified post scores a positive on 500 identified posts, and each identified post scores a positive on 500 unidentified posts, then you would have little more than a meaningless cluster of associations.
So I imagine this would only be useful for adding a tiny bit more confidence to an existing suspicion.
We should probably not use words like "communication" to describe entanglement, because it only confuses people. Connection and correlation do not equal classical communication.
Thank you. That's the best analogy I've heard all week.
I believe they were relying on both, and a number of other mechanisms as well. Security against tyranny is best achieved by redundant protection mechanisms.
Did you even read the article? They DID forcibly detain him and his family, and when he called the police on them, the police officer arrested him instead of making them let him go.
You say that you will worry when they have the legal right to detain you. Well, either he wins a lawsuit (or at least a settlement) against them, or they had the legal right to detain him (and you) by virtue of receiving no punishment.
Demanding that I prove that I have paid for the things in my possession is NOT a preventative procedure. It is an investigative procedure with a presumption of guilt.
Example: I buy a pair of sunglasses at a drug store. One month later, I walk to the same drug store, put the sunglasses in my pocket, and go in to buy a toothbrush. Is it a "preventative procedure" if on the way out of the store they demand that I prove that I paid for the sunglasses in my pocket?
Is that really the world you want to live in?
What sort of ridiculous statement is that? A judge is going to tell the guy, "Next time people are assuming you are guilty without reason, you should do what you're supposed to and prove that you are innocent of random charges to some random employee"???
We're not a fascist state yet. Don't go out of your way to rush us in that direction. To hell with "lower prices". If you want to prevent theft, find a way that will actually spot it happening, so that there is actually compelling evidence of its occurrence. THEN you can go making accusations and pressing charges.
A receipt check is an assumption of guilt for everyone which asks everyone to prove their innocence. We have a civic duty to object to this mindset and approach, as it goes against the core values of justice.
I think the problem shows up when people say "individual freedom" and then really mean, "I don't want to pay any taxes." In a society where taxes are excessively minimized, only the children of the wealthy have opportunity, and thus only the children of the wealthy can actually exercise this individual freedom.
And they will be fusion powered.
It's quite alright. They go right through you.
From the article, "Phillips also purchased, using PayPal, a paid subscription to TotalFark, a premium Fark service. The accounts all used the same IP addresses as the hacker." This makes it look a lot more like it was actually the individual. This is not just a case of the attack coming from an IP of a possibly compromised computer.
For it to be a different individual, someone would have had to compromise the PayPal account of Phillips without him noticing. I expect there would be a shocked response from Phillips if this had been the case. Instead, the website of Darrell Phillips seems to be blank today.
Actually I haven't been very pleased with chat support so far. I often feel like someone on the other end is copying and pasting (or right-clicking and choosing) standardized answers to me, when the problem I contact them about does not have a standardized answer. Then you go outside of those answers, and they tell you they can't help you any further and for more assistance you have to call the phone support.
Hopefully my experience is the minority, but I haven't seen it done right yet.
If you check the current polls, Democrats are currently favored over Republicans in 10 out of 10 key issues, leaving no good grounds for a Republican presidential campaign, and Obama polls ahead of every Republican candidate.
The people are tired and want change, and they currently trust the Democratic platform to bring them this. They're simply dissatisfied with the rate of progress Congress has been having.
Do they have valet parking?
Wouldn't approval voting be a better patch than IRV?
Approval voting has a greater tendency to exclude extremists.
It could just be phaser fire.
Attention. You have just violated a law of thermodynamics. Please report for sentencing.