ok, I am not against nuclear power, but I see some logical fallacies here. First of all, there is no accurate tracking of cancer deaths due to radiation fallout - or deaths and illness due to thyroid problems etc. Secondly, the deaths per KW hour cited in the article are skewed due to some people dying working on single small turbines which produce very small amounts of energy. Third, wind power and roof installation of solar should become safer as the industry matures and common safety pitfalls are logged and steps are taken to mitigate them. Finally, smaller, distributed power sources like algae->ethanol, solar, and wind, that don't rely on large-scale engineering, don't tend to compound large emergencies. How many people will die as a result of being displaced or resources being shifted that could have been better spent on rescuing stranded, hungry and thirsty civilians?
The question I ask myself is why isn't Adobe making a similar product already? Every couple of years I have to shell out another 1200 bucks or so to upgrade the Adobe suite and it never seems to get much better.
There's nothing wrong with using Flash - except that it sucks and is expensive. Other competitors will step up and supply HTML authoring tools for the Web that don't suck as much and Adobe will have motivation to make their products better. Looks like Apple's iAd Producer is a step in that direction.
iAd Producer makes it easy for you to design and assemble high-impact, interactive content for iAd. iAd Producer automatically manages the HTML5, CSS3 and JavaScript behind your iAd to make creating beautiful, motion-rich iAd content as easy as point and click.
For advanced developers, iAd Producer offers sophisticated JavaScript editing and debugging, along with a powerful extension mechanism that enables them to create and re-use their own page templates and components.
...it was another instance of Apple telling their customers what they can do with their property
Not at all. It was Apple trying to design the most robust mobile platform they could with decent battery life and allowing the consumer the choice as to whether they wanted to make the product their property.
Obama has spent very little unless you count the stimulus package to fix the mess that Bush's hands-off approach to the financial markets created.
The bulk of the surplus and the deep disparity between revenues and income comes from a couple of trillion spent between the tax cuts for the mostly well off and the pointless wars we are engaged in.
Maybe if Fox news cares about the effects of violence, they should worry less about symbolic violence and more about the fact that they are consistent cheerleaders for the wars and military culture that results in things like limbs being blown off and people being burned to death in the real world.
I'm sorry, but this whole idea that Apple users have fierce brand loyalty because we are mesmerized by marketing, packaging, and image - or that we are posers - is just crap. Apple succeeds because they believe in design down to their bones - not packaging design, but systems design. Apple believes that all parts of the product should be elegant and well thought out. They don't always succeed, but they try harder than anyone else. I use Apple products because they are well designed and retain their value and usefulness over long periods of time. And, I was an advocate for Apple back when their stock was in the toilet and people like Michael Dell - who wouldn't know innovation if it bit him in the ass - were saying shut the company down.
I also take issue with Apple not being an innovator. Apple's kit is full of innovation - whether it is manufacturing techniques, changes in the direction of computing, Operating systems, design, frameworks, functionality - you name it. By the standards people like to apply to Apple, no one is innovative.
Steve Jobs has been a huge boon to the computer revolution and to people like us who love computers and what they can do. NEXT was doing stuff in the nineties that made Windows look like a joke. The reason we are all walking around with mini touch screen computers is Apple and Steve jobs. One primary reason why MS is kept in check and doesn't own the Internet with their proprietary crap browser is WebKit. Yes, WebKit was KHTML, but it was a shell of what it could be. Now it powers Google Chrome, Android, Rim, WebOS, Nokia's Symbian - hell, even Office 2011 uses it for its HTML email. As someone who loves Linux, I think Apple has given Linux space to breath and helped to create a multi-polar computing world. Besides, isn't that the idea of open source - to not reinvent the wheel and to build on things and make them better while releasing things back into the wild? That is definitely innovation. You guys can keep bashing Apple as a company for posers while the rest of the industry waits for Apple to come out with the next big idea to copy.
That has nothing to do with Apple. That has to do with reading the specs and knowing your machine and its capabilities. Apple makes things easier, but you still have to have something of a clue.
As the poster said below, 52 miles is along way for an inner city bus. Also, the article discusses regenerative breaking and it seems as though the 52 min is pure battery without the benefits of the breaking - which can only be estimated.
As someone in the comments of TFA pointed out, "The interesting thing here is the 'secondary explore state' (seeming second pheromone state) found by the mathematicians.". So, they basically walk around trailing either a 1 a zero or both. I wonder if it is a single bit at a time like a code that goes along in a track or if it is more diffuse than that.
to make voting fair and reliable is to just use the voting machine as a good, adaptable user interface and require it to generate a machine- and human- readable chit that gets placed in the locked and secure ballot box. Then, do random checks with competing machine reading systems and occasional human-counts. It is the only way to get a "recount". Telling me your computer's tally one more time is not a recount - not with closed source software.
The Mac is gaining market share and Apple is poised to be the biggest company in the world by market cap. I think they can afford to lose some software.
As the years go by, memories fade. Apple had to convince the record companies to allow them to use such liberal DRM and they only did so because they never imagined that Apple would be so successful and acquire such a large market share. The iTunes store succeeded because it allowed for a payment and DRM model that, for all intents and purposes, acted just like Napster - actually better than Napster because 100% of the files were actually legit and high quality - no more downloading a song several times hoping it would work. You could buy the song and pretty much forget about the DRM - install it on 5 computers, burn multiple CDs, put it on unlimited iPods, etc. This stuff was unheard of prior to Apple entering the market and wringing concessions from the record companies.
Apple haters tend to forget how restrictive the market was back then on putting music on your portable players, burning CDs, transferring music to other computers, etc. It was ridiculous. Apple broke that logjam. Not only that, the only reason we have DRM-free music is because the record companies got sick of Apple eating their lunch and tried to boost competitors like Amazon by giving them preferential treatment in the form of DRM-free music - a direction they had zero inclination to travel in prior to Apple's arrival on the scene. I love computers. I love Linux, Windows, and the Mac OS. I give credit where credit is due. This hatred of Apple is really getting old. Apple blazes trails that you guys walk down and bitch about.
They aren't stupid. Whatever antennae they end up with will be copied by all the other manufacturers in short order. The antennae design is superior than other antennas in most situations, but worse in a small range of situations where the signal is really low and the user is holding his phone aggressively. People in higher signal areas claim the reception is better.
I can't believe the negativity from you Apple haters. I use the hell out of my iPhone and it as nothing to do with "looking marvelous". The fact that people would buy a phone and put up with a shit network is because the phone is so damn good - not because we want to look marvelous. Look at the stats - we are the ones actually using the Internet traffic.
I'm am Obama supporter and I think it's wrong. I also think the clean up is lame and under-funded and I think BP is calling the shots. As for containing the leak, I have full confidence that Secretary Chu and a consortium of energy contractors who know their shit is at the helm doing all they can.
"secondly why the hell should workers be being interviewed, they are supposed to be cleaning up the mess not standing around yapping to the press."
It's called keeping the public informed. In BP's world, the oil is dispersed away and this all blows over if they can just keep the pictures off the news and the spill off people's minds - which is the sad truth about how people's minds work - never mind that the ecosystem is being destroyed along with thousands of sea turtles, whales, squid, dolphins, pelicans, etc. - out of sight out of mind.
That means you can't walk on a beach where booms are deployed and take pictures, or get up close to an area to see things like dead fish or crabs. And, it means you will be harassed up till about 165 feet away - count on it. If the motive is reasonable safety precautions, fine, but do we really think that's the motive? Was there a developing safety problem? You want safety - get some respirators on those clean up workers.
Slashdot Mirror
ok, I am not against nuclear power, but I see some logical fallacies here. First of all, there is no accurate tracking of cancer deaths due to radiation fallout - or deaths and illness due to thyroid problems etc. Secondly, the deaths per KW hour cited in the article are skewed due to some people dying working on single small turbines which produce very small amounts of energy. Third, wind power and roof installation of solar should become safer as the industry matures and common safety pitfalls are logged and steps are taken to mitigate them. Finally, smaller, distributed power sources like algae->ethanol, solar, and wind, that don't rely on large-scale engineering, don't tend to compound large emergencies. How many people will die as a result of being displaced or resources being shifted that could have been better spent on rescuing stranded, hungry and thirsty civilians?
http://gawker.com/#!5419271/google-ceo-secrets-are-for-filthy-people
The question I ask myself is why isn't Adobe making a similar product already? Every couple of years I have to shell out another 1200 bucks or so to upgrade the Adobe suite and it never seems to get much better.
There's nothing wrong with using Flash - except that it sucks and is expensive. Other competitors will step up and supply HTML authoring tools for the Web that don't suck as much and Adobe will have motivation to make their products better. Looks like Apple's iAd Producer is a step in that direction.
http://developer.apple.com/iad/iadproducer/
Not at all. It was Apple trying to design the most robust mobile platform they could with decent battery life and allowing the consumer the choice as to whether they wanted to make the product their property.
Don't forget evil doers. And what will we ever do without the deciders to protect us?
But, I agree, we can't afford this. Too bad we can't get that money back.
Obama has spent very little unless you count the stimulus package to fix the mess that Bush's hands-off approach to the financial markets created.
The bulk of the surplus and the deep disparity between revenues and income comes from a couple of trillion spent between the tax cuts for the mostly well off and the pointless wars we are engaged in.
Maybe if Fox news cares about the effects of violence, they should worry less about symbolic violence and more about the fact that they are consistent cheerleaders for the wars and military culture that results in things like limbs being blown off and people being burned to death in the real world.
I'm sorry, but this whole idea that Apple users have fierce brand loyalty because we are mesmerized by marketing, packaging, and image - or that we are posers - is just crap. Apple succeeds because they believe in design down to their bones - not packaging design, but systems design. Apple believes that all parts of the product should be elegant and well thought out. They don't always succeed, but they try harder than anyone else. I use Apple products because they are well designed and retain their value and usefulness over long periods of time. And, I was an advocate for Apple back when their stock was in the toilet and people like Michael Dell - who wouldn't know innovation if it bit him in the ass - were saying shut the company down.
I also take issue with Apple not being an innovator. Apple's kit is full of innovation - whether it is manufacturing techniques, changes in the direction of computing, Operating systems, design, frameworks, functionality - you name it. By the standards people like to apply to Apple, no one is innovative.
Steve Jobs has been a huge boon to the computer revolution and to people like us who love computers and what they can do. NEXT was doing stuff in the nineties that made Windows look like a joke. The reason we are all walking around with mini touch screen computers is Apple and Steve jobs. One primary reason why MS is kept in check and doesn't own the Internet with their proprietary crap browser is WebKit. Yes, WebKit was KHTML, but it was a shell of what it could be. Now it powers Google Chrome, Android, Rim, WebOS, Nokia's Symbian - hell, even Office 2011 uses it for its HTML email. As someone who loves Linux, I think Apple has given Linux space to breath and helped to create a multi-polar computing world. Besides, isn't that the idea of open source - to not reinvent the wheel and to build on things and make them better while releasing things back into the wild? That is definitely innovation. You guys can keep bashing Apple as a company for posers while the rest of the industry waits for Apple to come out with the next big idea to copy.
That has nothing to do with Apple. That has to do with reading the specs and knowing your machine and its capabilities. Apple makes things easier, but you still have to have something of a clue.
As the poster said below, 52 miles is along way for an inner city bus. Also, the article discusses regenerative breaking and it seems as though the 52 min is pure battery without the benefits of the breaking - which can only be estimated.
The oxidizing event was the appearance of the mushroom which drifted in from spores floating through space.
Science Daily Article
The dates don't really match, but do they ever?
As someone in the comments of TFA pointed out, "The interesting thing here is the 'secondary explore state' (seeming second pheromone state) found by the mathematicians.". So, they basically walk around trailing either a 1 a zero or both. I wonder if it is a single bit at a time like a code that goes along in a track or if it is more diffuse than that.
What could possibly go wrong?
to make voting fair and reliable is to just use the voting machine as a good, adaptable user interface and require it to generate a machine- and human- readable chit that gets placed in the locked and secure ballot box. Then, do random checks with competing machine reading systems and occasional human-counts. It is the only way to get a "recount". Telling me your computer's tally one more time is not a recount - not with closed source software.
The Mac is gaining market share and Apple is poised to be the biggest company in the world by market cap. I think they can afford to lose some software.
You had me at "diluted urine".
As the years go by, memories fade. Apple had to convince the record companies to allow them to use such liberal DRM and they only did so because they never imagined that Apple would be so successful and acquire such a large market share. The iTunes store succeeded because it allowed for a payment and DRM model that, for all intents and purposes, acted just like Napster - actually better than Napster because 100% of the files were actually legit and high quality - no more downloading a song several times hoping it would work. You could buy the song and pretty much forget about the DRM - install it on 5 computers, burn multiple CDs, put it on unlimited iPods, etc. This stuff was unheard of prior to Apple entering the market and wringing concessions from the record companies.
Apple haters tend to forget how restrictive the market was back then on putting music on your portable players, burning CDs, transferring music to other computers, etc. It was ridiculous. Apple broke that logjam. Not only that, the only reason we have DRM-free music is because the record companies got sick of Apple eating their lunch and tried to boost competitors like Amazon by giving them preferential treatment in the form of DRM-free music - a direction they had zero inclination to travel in prior to Apple's arrival on the scene. I love computers. I love Linux, Windows, and the Mac OS. I give credit where credit is due. This hatred of Apple is really getting old. Apple blazes trails that you guys walk down and bitch about.
3D Printing, my friend. Go to IKEA's Web site, download the plans to your 3D printer, and print.
They aren't stupid. Whatever antennae they end up with will be copied by all the other manufacturers in short order. The antennae design is superior than other antennas in most situations, but worse in a small range of situations where the signal is really low and the user is holding his phone aggressively. People in higher signal areas claim the reception is better.
I can't believe the negativity from you Apple haters. I use the hell out of my iPhone and it as nothing to do with "looking marvelous". The fact that people would buy a phone and put up with a shit network is because the phone is so damn good - not because we want to look marvelous. Look at the stats - we are the ones actually using the Internet traffic.
I'm am Obama supporter and I think it's wrong. I also think the clean up is lame and under-funded and I think BP is calling the shots. As for containing the leak, I have full confidence that Secretary Chu and a consortium of energy contractors who know their shit is at the helm doing all they can.
"secondly why the hell should workers be being interviewed, they are supposed to be cleaning up the mess not standing around yapping to the press."
It's called keeping the public informed. In BP's world, the oil is dispersed away and this all blows over if they can just keep the pictures off the news and the spill off people's minds - which is the sad truth about how people's minds work - never mind that the ecosystem is being destroyed along with thousands of sea turtles, whales, squid, dolphins, pelicans, etc. - out of sight out of mind.
That means you can't walk on a beach where booms are deployed and take pictures, or get up close to an area to see things like dead fish or crabs. And, it means you will be harassed up till about 165 feet away - count on it. If the motive is reasonable safety precautions, fine, but do we really think that's the motive? Was there a developing safety problem? You want safety - get some respirators on those clean up workers.