Not true. As cars have gotten more complex, they've also gotten more reliable because electronics allow greater precision and control. Problems per mile has been going down for the entire industry, and the most complex cars (hybrids) are among the most reliable.
Citation needed.
And before using how often something breaks down as the sole determinant of whether it's better or not, consider costs of replaced parts, costs for labor, the fact that less hobbyists can fix the problem, etc. I'd rather have some shocks wear out after 50k miles and be able to replace a few gaskets for $100 and do it myself than have my new computer controlled BS and god-knows-what-they-bundled-in-this part wearing out after 60k miles only to have to haul it in to a mechanic with the right equipment and get that entirely replaced for $850.
Personally, I'd rather have something simple, but not too simple. The parts are cheaper, and there's significantly less to break down. As far as TFA goes, I'd only be interested in this type of suspension if it's easy to install/fix and the parts remain cheap.
The only problem with a pull system is bandwidth. It takes significantly more to provide that than to simply blast a signal and continue to amplify and split it. Given that fact, when the cable company finally gives in to some kind of pay-per-view model exclusively, they'll still charge you out the ass citing bandwidth costs. Cable companies will only have a future if they provide that kind of programming at a cheap rate (since anybody can be a competitor now) or if they switch entirely to a pay-per-channel model. After all, many people still like to idly channel surf.
— n
a person who studies or practises any of the sciences or who uses scientific methods"
So, what exactly would you consider a "scientist"? It might not be their profession per se but when they are using scientific methods on the show to test out various hypotheses, they are technically "scientists".
Maybe the poster should have clarified that most people are fine if the use is in a limited time frame. You're not supposed to be on that shit your entire birthing window. Furthermore, saying "most people are fine" is misleading, as messing with those hormones has obvious side effects. That was the point of my post.
So thanks for the polite and helpful reply, dumbshit.
Fact: If you read the Constitution, even though you blatantly over-generalized it, the Federal Government's job is actually defense, not paying out entitlements.
$4 million? A pittance! Apparently a paid registration system costs ten times that.
Servers and hosting cost a few thousand to a few tens of thousands per year, full time developers and admins cost a less than $100k per year. All I can say is that whoever managed to walk off with the rest of the cash has got it made.
And now, for just $50 to the Catholic Church, we'll cleanse your PC from satanist filth and increase it's speed by up to 150% using the power of Christ!
True, but greed can be a powerful thing. Considering his actions compared to other super-rich billionaires, it does stand out. After all, he could just sit on it. Yes, I realize there's some major tax breaks for giving to charities, but those breaks have limits. Giving away at least half (and trying to convince other billionaires to do the same) is going above and beyond.
Considering that he's willingly giving up half his wealth to charity, I'd say he's not bad. I don't know about his business ethics but I don't believe he's a bad person.
Steve Ballmer, on the other hand, watches you poop.
"Specifically, the complaint charges that Google hurts competition by "walling off" content on its YouTube site, so other search engines can't display accurate results; by making it difficult for Microsoft's mobile phone software to show videos from YouTube; by blocking access to content owned by book publishers which Google has copied and stored; by not allowing advertisers to use their own data about customers garnered from Google on other sites, such as those owned by Microsoft; by blocking websites from using competing "search boxes"; and by making it expensive for potential competitors to Google to advertise online."
Slashdot Mirror
Not true. As cars have gotten more complex, they've also gotten more reliable because electronics allow greater precision and control. Problems per mile has been going down for the entire industry, and the most complex cars (hybrids) are among the most reliable.
Citation needed.
And before using how often something breaks down as the sole determinant of whether it's better or not, consider costs of replaced parts, costs for labor, the fact that less hobbyists can fix the problem, etc. I'd rather have some shocks wear out after 50k miles and be able to replace a few gaskets for $100 and do it myself than have my new computer controlled BS and god-knows-what-they-bundled-in-this part wearing out after 60k miles only to have to haul it in to a mechanic with the right equipment and get that entirely replaced for $850.
Personally, I'd rather have something simple, but not too simple. The parts are cheaper, and there's significantly less to break down. As far as TFA goes, I'd only be interested in this type of suspension if it's easy to install/fix and the parts remain cheap.
Yeah, it's called Charlie Sheen.
The only problem with a pull system is bandwidth. It takes significantly more to provide that than to simply blast a signal and continue to amplify and split it. Given that fact, when the cable company finally gives in to some kind of pay-per-view model exclusively, they'll still charge you out the ass citing bandwidth costs. Cable companies will only have a future if they provide that kind of programming at a cheap rate (since anybody can be a competitor now) or if they switch entirely to a pay-per-channel model. After all, many people still like to idly channel surf.
It's called a passport.
You want something more than that? Fuck you.
"World English Dictionary
scientist
— n
a person who studies or practises any of the sciences or who uses scientific methods"
So, what exactly would you consider a "scientist"? It might not be their profession per se but when they are using scientific methods on the show to test out various hypotheses, they are technically "scientists".
The problem is that all you really have a choice between is "jagoff A" or "jagoff B"
False. Well, until reality slaps you in the face.
Maybe the poster should have clarified that most people are fine if the use is in a limited time frame. You're not supposed to be on that shit your entire birthing window. Furthermore, saying "most people are fine" is misleading, as messing with those hormones has obvious side effects. That was the point of my post.
So thanks for the polite and helpful reply, dumbshit.
False. Birth control pills have many side effects, one of the more famous is having a significantly higher risk for developing blood clots.
I got one from US Bank, so there goes that.
No kidding. And I wouldn't expect them to release the secrets of their search engine either.
Hey Little Debbies! You guys are total bastards because you refuse to give me your exact recipes! ARRGGGHHH!
Also, in the real world, 99.9% of politicians are corrupt and will always vote for the desires of the highest bidder.
And idiots who always vote "their" party no matter what's at stake.
Gotta start the Happy Meal addiction while they're young!
Kind of like blowing on hot coals?
God needed to test our faith again. Those other ones were only pre-tests.
Those frozen banana daiquiris must have been damn good!
Ironically the US Government probably spent far more than $4 million trying to shut it down.
Funny how it all works.
Fact: If you read the Constitution, even though you blatantly over-generalized it, the Federal Government's job is actually defense, not paying out entitlements.
$4 million? A pittance! Apparently a paid registration system costs ten times that.
Servers and hosting cost a few thousand to a few tens of thousands per year, full time developers and admins cost a less than $100k per year. All I can say is that whoever managed to walk off with the rest of the cash has got it made.
Welcome to Government Contracting 101.
And now, for just $50 to the Catholic Church, we'll cleanse your PC from satanist filth and increase it's speed by up to 150% using the power of Christ!
I was just logging in to challenge that all 228 people a) believed in souls and b) that (if souls exist) all 228 people had one.
Only if all 228 people weren't gingers.
True, but greed can be a powerful thing. Considering his actions compared to other super-rich billionaires, it does stand out. After all, he could just sit on it. Yes, I realize there's some major tax breaks for giving to charities, but those breaks have limits. Giving away at least half (and trying to convince other billionaires to do the same) is going above and beyond.
You can't just stab anyone in the back though. You have to be strategic about it.
Considering that he's willingly giving up half his wealth to charity, I'd say he's not bad. I don't know about his business ethics but I don't believe he's a bad person.
Steve Ballmer, on the other hand, watches you poop.
BTW, your username is awesome. Made my day!
From TFA:
"Specifically, the complaint charges that Google hurts competition by "walling off" content on its YouTube site, so other search engines can't display accurate results; by making it difficult for Microsoft's mobile phone software to show videos from YouTube; by blocking access to content owned by book publishers which Google has copied and stored; by not allowing advertisers to use their own data about customers garnered from Google on other sites, such as those owned by Microsoft; by blocking websites from using competing "search boxes"; and by making it expensive for potential competitors to Google to advertise online."