You think a firewall is the only layer of security you need??? I hope you don't work in IT! Viruses commonly come in via email, IM, usb drive, file-sharing, and web use. Firewalls do nothing to protect from these common vectors.
If you use Windows to do anything other than play Minesweeper, patch your shit, run a firewall, run AV, and think before you click!!
I know very few people, even in IT, who have full-featured back-ups of their home systems. Even fewer have easy, convenient remote access to their data.
Using online apps with online data services give you both of these things 99% of the time. They are a better option (assuming they have the features you need) than running things locally for the vast majority of people. Yes SaaS/cloud services might screw up, but the chances of them doing so are far lower than the chances of YOU screwing up.
You are basing your decision based on anecdotes, not on statistics or evidence. Gmail's backup system is better than yours. Their remote access is better than yours. Use the brain your ancestors evolved for you. It can reason based on probabilities rather than bullshit if you let it.
The federal government creates one big wiki-like system with strong (2-factor) authentication. There is an entry for each person, with full name, birthday, location of birth, SSN, and photograph.
All hospitals would be required to upload X-ray data, test results, and other important notes to the patient wiki.
When you go to any hospital anywhere, doctors would immediately have access to your medical history. You would never get extra X-rays, never have to fill out pointless "list every medical condition you or your family have ever had" forms
That would be incredibly easy to implement. The most expensive part would be getting smart cards and SecurIDs to hospitals, but if stock trading sites can do it, a government program could.
With a book store one third of the size, it sounds like the Nook will only satisfy people who read primarily copyright-expired works. Those of us who want books written in the past seventy years have only the Kindle as a legitimate ebook option. As much as you talk about the format, you forget that it's the books that matter--not the binding. Some day, if BN can get enough publishers to play ball, it may be a contender. But right now, the Nook is the Zune to Amazon's iPod.
I would gladly pay a premium for food that doesn't cause animal suffering, is less likely to contain disease, tastes better (clone only the best tissue from the best animals), and has less of a negative impact on the environment.
The point, if you missed it, is that very many books are available for the Kindle. If the publishers don't release books in a format the Nook can read, it doesn't matter much at all what format it supports.
I'm not sure if your confusion stems from the fact that this is to complicated for you to understand, or that you don't want to understand.
First, the Kindle supports mobi. Regular, non-DRM mobi format. Your claim otherwise is factually, indisputably false.
Secondly, it's the number of books supported that matters. If a book is only available in a format the Nook can't read but the Kindle can, the fact that the Nook supports your favorite format doesn't count for shit.
So in conclusion: both the Kindle and the Nook support open ebook formats. The Kindle also supports the format used by the Amazon store; the nook does not. If the number of books available from the Amazon store is much larger than those available for the Nook, that's a serious advantage for the Kindle as an ebook reader.
Good luck to B&N. I hope they get full publisher support eventually. Without it, the Nook will be a 2nd-class citizen of the ebook world.
Where I work, we get $0.50/hour for being on-call. We get paid no extra for actually getting called. So I could end up driving into work at 3am and spending the next eight hours there, all at a third-world pay rate. It's legal to pay us less than minimum wage because we are "exempt," whatever that means. Sounds like some bullshit.
In slashdot parlance, you are spreading FUD. The Kindle most certainly uses non-proprietary book formats. You can use mobi, txt, and pdf directly, for example. Any other format can be used by via conversion.
Having a more limited selection of books for the Nook is not an advantage of the Nook; it's an advantage of the Kindle.
That thing looks great, too. But how many books are available for it? Until most publishers wise up and start offering DRM-free books, the size of the library your ebook has access to is an extremely important factor.
The Kindle is actually $260 now, and it has an non-backlit eInk screen with a three-week battery-life. It has always-on, free 3G internet access, and it has accesses to the gigantic Amazon digital book store.
This thing might have been a cool (concept for a) gadget, but it is certainly not a replacement for the Kindle. The Kindle is aimed at (and is perfect for) people who like to read BOOKS.
You are forgetting that the pirates don't call themselves "pirates." They say they're collecting a toll on behalf of the nation of Somalia. Since Somalia doesn't have much of a government, so who's to say they're wrong?
The best standard need not be "compelling," it need only be best.
I'm not sure whether one mark would have been less accidental than another when using quill pens, but I don't think the answer is even relevant in the digital age, anyway.
Hi! Thanks for the input; I was not aware of the Finnish system. However, it seems this system is ambiguous. If several numbers are used in a row, how could you distinguish where one number starts and the other stops? And using "point or comma" sort of defeats the purpose of having a standard in the first place...
Here's where you're confused: I did not say the English way is the "perfect" way. I said it is superior to the only competing standard. And I gave support for that statement.
That's a bit naive of you. A better question is: why can't everyone do it the same way? Having a universal standard like this would have many advantages, while having multiple differing formats has only disadvantages.
So a reasonable person is left with the conclusion: doing it the same way everywhere is better. The question naturally follows: which would make a better standard?
The answer to this is: the English way. Why? Because when writing in any language, multiple commas may be used indicating the continuation of the sentence, just as they may be used indicating the continuation of an integer in English number notation. Furthermore, in any language, a period is used to indicate the end of a sentence, similarly to how they are used in English number notation to indicate the end of the integer.
The English way of writing numbers is simply superior, as it is consistent with the way punctuation is used in all languages.
To illustrate my point. I leave you with this bizzare. confusing continental-style punctuation use,
So by your definition, the Roman Catholic Church was not a "church" until what date, exactly? The late 1800s? And for the rest of its history, it was a "cult?" Or did it gain and lose its "church" status repeatedly over time, like a holy sine wave, as it promoted "atrocious" methods for conversion and conquest, burned witches, etc.?
I suppose Islam is not a church even today, as some of its followers atrociously circumcise women? I'm just trying to understand your requirements for what "is a church."
Slashdot Mirror
You think a firewall is the only layer of security you need??? I hope you don't work in IT! Viruses commonly come in via email, IM, usb drive, file-sharing, and web use. Firewalls do nothing to protect from these common vectors.
If you use Windows to do anything other than play Minesweeper, patch your shit, run a firewall, run AV, and think before you click!!
Most humans do have to wait on javascript to load. And they have to deal with its popups.
Actually, that's not "good enough" because it does not protect your data from fire or theft damage. Clearly, you are not in IT.
I know very few people, even in IT, who have full-featured back-ups of their home systems. Even fewer have easy, convenient remote access to their data.
Using online apps with online data services give you both of these things 99% of the time. They are a better option (assuming they have the features you need) than running things locally for the vast majority of people. Yes SaaS/cloud services might screw up, but the chances of them doing so are far lower than the chances of YOU screwing up.
You are basing your decision based on anecdotes, not on statistics or evidence. Gmail's backup system is better than yours. Their remote access is better than yours. Use the brain your ancestors evolved for you. It can reason based on probabilities rather than bullshit if you let it.
Here's what I want:
That would be incredibly easy to implement. The most expensive part would be getting smart cards and SecurIDs to hospitals, but if stock trading sites can do it, a government program could.
With a book store one third of the size, it sounds like the Nook will only satisfy people who read primarily copyright-expired works. Those of us who want books written in the past seventy years have only the Kindle as a legitimate ebook option. As much as you talk about the format, you forget that it's the books that matter--not the binding. Some day, if BN can get enough publishers to play ball, it may be a contender. But right now, the Nook is the Zune to Amazon's iPod.
It will be compared to meat, not to plants, Mr. Coward.
I would gladly pay a premium for food that doesn't cause animal suffering, is less likely to contain disease, tastes better (clone only the best tissue from the best animals), and has less of a negative impact on the environment.
The point, if you missed it, is that very many books are available for the Kindle. If the publishers don't release books in a format the Nook can read, it doesn't matter much at all what format it supports.
Step one: speak to class action lawyers
Step two: subpoena contact info for everyone who bought these
Step three: contact a subset of the owners to see if the failure rate is high enough to justify a suit
Step four: profit?
I'm not sure if your confusion stems from the fact that this is to complicated for you to understand, or that you don't want to understand.
First, the Kindle supports mobi. Regular, non-DRM mobi format. Your claim otherwise is factually, indisputably false.
Secondly, it's the number of books supported that matters. If a book is only available in a format the Nook can't read but the Kindle can, the fact that the Nook supports your favorite format doesn't count for shit.
So in conclusion: both the Kindle and the Nook support open ebook formats. The Kindle also supports the format used by the Amazon store; the nook does not. If the number of books available from the Amazon store is much larger than those available for the Nook, that's a serious advantage for the Kindle as an ebook reader.
Good luck to B&N. I hope they get full publisher support eventually. Without it, the Nook will be a 2nd-class citizen of the ebook world.
Where I work, we get $0.50/hour for being on-call. We get paid no extra for actually getting called. So I could end up driving into work at 3am and spending the next eight hours there, all at a third-world pay rate. It's legal to pay us less than minimum wage because we are "exempt," whatever that means. Sounds like some bullshit.
Yes, I'm looking for a better job.
In slashdot parlance, you are spreading FUD. The Kindle most certainly uses non-proprietary book formats. You can use mobi, txt, and pdf directly, for example. Any other format can be used by via conversion.
Having a more limited selection of books for the Nook is not an advantage of the Nook; it's an advantage of the Kindle.
That thing looks great, too. But how many books are available for it? Until most publishers wise up and start offering DRM-free books, the size of the library your ebook has access to is an extremely important factor.
The Kindle is actually $260 now, and it has an non-backlit eInk screen with a three-week battery-life. It has always-on, free 3G internet access, and it has accesses to the gigantic Amazon digital book store.
This thing might have been a cool (concept for a) gadget, but it is certainly not a replacement for the Kindle. The Kindle is aimed at (and is perfect for) people who like to read BOOKS.
You are forgetting that the pirates don't call themselves "pirates." They say they're collecting a toll on behalf of the nation of Somalia. Since Somalia doesn't have much of a government, so who's to say they're wrong?
Supertanker rates are actually only $15k/day these days.
http://www.nat.bm/IR/press_releases/1355615.html
They're expensive; don't give them away. Just holster one on your belt and blast any smelly coworkers with your plasma gun.
The best standard need not be "compelling," it need only be best.
I'm not sure whether one mark would have been less accidental than another when using quill pens, but I don't think the answer is even relevant in the digital age, anyway.
Hi! Thanks for the input; I was not aware of the Finnish system. However, it seems this system is ambiguous. If several numbers are used in a row, how could you distinguish where one number starts and the other stops? And using "point or comma" sort of defeats the purpose of having a standard in the first place...
Here's where you're confused: I did not say the English way is the "perfect" way. I said it is superior to the only competing standard. And I gave support for that statement.
You offer no refutation to that in your post.
That's a bit naive of you. A better question is: why can't everyone do it the same way? Having a universal standard like this would have many advantages, while having multiple differing formats has only disadvantages.
So a reasonable person is left with the conclusion: doing it the same way everywhere is better. The question naturally follows: which would make a better standard?
The answer to this is: the English way. Why? Because when writing in any language, multiple commas may be used indicating the continuation of the sentence, just as they may be used indicating the continuation of an integer in English number notation. Furthermore, in any language, a period is used to indicate the end of a sentence, similarly to how they are used in English number notation to indicate the end of the integer.
The English way of writing numbers is simply superior, as it is consistent with the way punctuation is used in all languages.
To illustrate my point. I leave you with this bizzare. confusing continental-style punctuation use,
Silly. n'est-ce pas?
So, sounds like your definition of "cult" is "whatever I feel like calling a cult." That makes the word meaningless, at least when you speak it.
So by your definition, the Roman Catholic Church was not a "church" until what date, exactly? The late 1800s? And for the rest of its history, it was a "cult?" Or did it gain and lose its "church" status repeatedly over time, like a holy sine wave, as it promoted "atrocious" methods for conversion and conquest, burned witches, etc.?
I suppose Islam is not a church even today, as some of its followers atrociously circumcise women? I'm just trying to understand your requirements for what "is a church."
You are implying that other large, organized "churches" never committed atrocities. That's... amusing.