Another issue with the OCZ product: What problem does it actually solve which cannot also be solved by a good OS, a competent admin, an SSD, and a spinning disk?
The dependency on a good OS and a competent admin?
So they've put it next to coffee, coinage and food coloring. Why doesn't everyone flip out when things like those are added to Group 2B?
You know what else is in Group 2B?! Gasoline! Gasoline causes cancer! OMG we have to get off gasoline NOW!
Seriously though, the quote I took from that same Wikipedia article was "[...] less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals." In other words, if you take "science says it can't prove god exists" as "science says god might exist", then yes the headline is correct.
No value is "lost" in the second hand market. A lot of people find buying a game for $69.95 to be ridiculous, and will never ever do it. Those "sales" are already "lost" because the producers are placing the price higher than the value. Make games a better value and you will get more sales.
I think it's more accurate to say "not all sales" are lost. Possibly even "most sales", but not none. You're right there is a subset of potential buyers of a game that would never even buy the game at full retail. But are you sincerely claiming that there are *no* potential buyers who given a choice between retail or not playing the game at all would choose to go without? I don't buy that.
That doesn't mean I believe we should end second hand sales. Game devs are complaining about a "theoretical" lose of sales. Wallet makers are losing sales every time someone doesn't steal my wallet, but no manufacturer is going to claim theft is good for their sales and we should avoid prevention of theft. Second hand sales--and borrowing/loaning (a scenario where *nobody* makes money I would point out)--might be counter to profit-making, and possibly carry the seeds of communism, but they are arguably a good thing for a healthy society, and if that means someone doesn't get to make quite as much money as they could have, so be it.
Because evolve without quotes could be objectionable to conservative Christians. With quotes, you make it clear you're talking about "pretend" evolution.
Cold War II. Now that we can't rely on the Soviet Union to instill fear and hate and competition in us, we've had to find the next imaginary (or at least, self-created) threat. If the Chinese are a "threat" to anything it's our imagined political and economic importance in the world. In that sense, the threat might be real. Rather than convince ourselves that we will maintain our position by virtue of being more ethically pure than them, perhaps we should focus on improving our own economic and political position.
Basically they are computers within the computer, with their own separate CPU, network, and OS.
But what happens when you need to reboot the computer within the computer? You need a computer within the computer within the computer. But what happens when you need to reboot the computer within the computer within the computer? They need to invent a recursive computer within a computer.
His reaction while driving the Tesla during minutes 1 and 2--Tesla could not have paid for better advertising. Genuine shocked thrill. It's good I didn't see this video when the news about Tesla vs. Top Gear first came out because Tesla got a few moments sympathy out of me. Now they just look like sore-winner assholes.
That is pretty ironic that you want it to be an external app, while the article you refer to gives 4 out of its 7 examples of usability issues that are because PDF is an external app. Having PDF be a native browser format could fix over half the stated usability issues ("Jarring user experience", "Breaks flow", "Orphaned location") and nearly half the examples of user complaints ("It's a pain that I have to download each PDF", "They [PDF files] don't behave like Web pages").
Everyone knows we've never really been to space. The reason these two countries produce such different versions of space images is because neither has actually been there! So of course they came up with two totally different looks. I don't know how much more evidence you need to see the truth.
This Deaths per TWH by energy source (the chart, not the article) gave me some perspective. It's hard to find data on the number of deaths caused by the nuclear disaster in Japan, but it's apparently something 1 (+/-1). If that chart is anything like accurate (and I'm not aware of the World Health Organization having a pro-nuclear power bias), nuclear isn't just safer than coal, it's safer than all the other alternatives.
At first I was wondering what the difference was between increasing gas tax and taxing miles driven, thinking it would just be equivalent. But now I see: we want to punish those driving efficient cars and reward those driving gas-guzzlers.
I'm not a lawyer, but... if one major diference between civil and criminal law is that a criminal offense requires proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, while with civil offense it is only necessary to prove guilt on the basis of a balance of probability, that would seem to me to generally work in favor of the accused.
On the other hand, a civil law "is the branch of law dealing with disputes between individuals and/or organizations", which I think this clearly is. Criminal law "is the body of rules that defines conduct that is prohibited by the state because it is held to threaten, harm or otherwise endanger the safety and welfare of the public", so calling copyright infringement criminal would seem to require a threat to the welfare of the entire public and any justification that it does would have to be quite a stretch of semantics.
It seems like it should be when your judgments are based on precedence (in the US). I can sue a few poor companies for something and win because they don't have the money to defend themselves and then once I have a few easy wins under my belt, then I can go after the guys with bigger pockets because they judges are more likely to weigh the existing precedent in my favor than they would have been with a blank slate.
The "market" isn't made up of only the sellers. The market is the sellers and the buyers. So, McDonald's and Coca Cola's appreach to nutrition can only be seen as "right" if the consumers also see it as right. Of course, that's assuming a free and open market, which we don't have.
This can't be 2010, because in 2010 you would have the technology to throttle a set of sites that were less important to give important network traffic a guaranteed level of throughput--without having to block the sites completely.
Advertisements would transform from a pervasive nuisance into something more like useful information. Advertisers would know so much about your lifestyle and preferences that you would only see ads that made perfect sense for your situation.
I'm sure there's a mathematical/statistical reason why 50% accuracy is better than guessing in this case, but that would be very counter-intuitive. Same with as high as 90% under certain conditions. I could get to 90% accuracy if I could select out everything that reduced my accuracy as well. I don't doubt the full article explains better though. I'm not suggesting MIT, Google, etc scientists are stupid.
Slashdot Mirror
Fonolo's cloud-based visual dialing solutions
This might be the most egergious use of "cloud" I've seen yet.
The Wii won't be able to hold an entire downloaded movie
That's easily solved too. Increase storage... exponentially!
Another issue with the OCZ product: What problem does it actually solve which cannot also be solved by a good OS, a competent admin, an SSD, and a spinning disk?
The dependency on a good OS and a competent admin?
So they've put it next to coffee, coinage and food coloring. Why doesn't everyone flip out when things like those are added to Group 2B?
You know what else is in Group 2B?! Gasoline! Gasoline causes cancer! OMG we have to get off gasoline NOW!
Seriously though, the quote I took from that same Wikipedia article was "[...] less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals." In other words, if you take "science says it can't prove god exists" as "science says god might exist", then yes the headline is correct.
No value is "lost" in the second hand market. A lot of people find buying a game for $69.95 to be ridiculous, and will never ever do it. Those "sales" are already "lost" because the producers are placing the price higher than the value. Make games a better value and you will get more sales.
I think it's more accurate to say "not all sales" are lost. Possibly even "most sales", but not none. You're right there is a subset of potential buyers of a game that would never even buy the game at full retail. But are you sincerely claiming that there are *no* potential buyers who given a choice between retail or not playing the game at all would choose to go without? I don't buy that.
That doesn't mean I believe we should end second hand sales. Game devs are complaining about a "theoretical" lose of sales. Wallet makers are losing sales every time someone doesn't steal my wallet, but no manufacturer is going to claim theft is good for their sales and we should avoid prevention of theft. Second hand sales--and borrowing/loaning (a scenario where *nobody* makes money I would point out)--might be counter to profit-making, and possibly carry the seeds of communism, but they are arguably a good thing for a healthy society, and if that means someone doesn't get to make quite as much money as they could have, so be it.
Because evolve without quotes could be objectionable to conservative Christians. With quotes, you make it clear you're talking about "pretend" evolution.
Let's remember this as we switch our hate from Russia to China.
It could have been a vulnerability in the configuration of the company's Cisco security management software.
Cold War II. Now that we can't rely on the Soviet Union to instill fear and hate and competition in us, we've had to find the next imaginary (or at least, self-created) threat. If the Chinese are a "threat" to anything it's our imagined political and economic importance in the world. In that sense, the threat might be real. Rather than convince ourselves that we will maintain our position by virtue of being more ethically pure than them, perhaps we should focus on improving our own economic and political position.
Basically they are computers within the computer, with their own separate CPU, network, and OS.
But what happens when you need to reboot the computer within the computer? You need a computer within the computer within the computer. But what happens when you need to reboot the computer within the computer within the computer? They need to invent a recursive computer within a computer.
But who could you find to do research for something we all know is true, but would never want to admit and force us to change our behavior?
His reaction while driving the Tesla during minutes 1 and 2--Tesla could not have paid for better advertising. Genuine shocked thrill. It's good I didn't see this video when the news about Tesla vs. Top Gear first came out because Tesla got a few moments sympathy out of me. Now they just look like sore-winner assholes.
That is pretty ironic that you want it to be an external app, while the article you refer to gives 4 out of its 7 examples of usability issues that are because PDF is an external app. Having PDF be a native browser format could fix over half the stated usability issues ("Jarring user experience", "Breaks flow", "Orphaned location") and nearly half the examples of user complaints ("It's a pain that I have to download each PDF", "They [PDF files] don't behave like Web pages").
Everyone knows we've never really been to space. The reason these two countries produce such different versions of space images is because neither has actually been there! So of course they came up with two totally different looks. I don't know how much more evidence you need to see the truth.
It's like a nuclear arms race preventing a country from investing into productive activity.
This Deaths per TWH by energy source (the chart, not the article) gave me some perspective. It's hard to find data on the number of deaths caused by the nuclear disaster in Japan, but it's apparently something 1 (+/-1). If that chart is anything like accurate (and I'm not aware of the World Health Organization having a pro-nuclear power bias), nuclear isn't just safer than coal, it's safer than all the other alternatives.
At first I was wondering what the difference was between increasing gas tax and taxing miles driven, thinking it would just be equivalent. But now I see: we want to punish those driving efficient cars and reward those driving gas-guzzlers.
I'm not a lawyer, but... if one major diference between civil and criminal law is that a criminal offense requires proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, while with civil offense it is only necessary to prove guilt on the basis of a balance of probability, that would seem to me to generally work in favor of the accused.
On the other hand, a civil law "is the branch of law dealing with disputes between individuals and/or organizations", which I think this clearly is. Criminal law "is the body of rules that defines conduct that is prohibited by the state because it is held to threaten, harm or otherwise endanger the safety and welfare of the public", so calling copyright infringement criminal would seem to require a threat to the welfare of the entire public and any justification that it does would have to be quite a stretch of semantics.
It seems like it should be when your judgments are based on precedence (in the US). I can sue a few poor companies for something and win because they don't have the money to defend themselves and then once I have a few easy wins under my belt, then I can go after the guys with bigger pockets because they judges are more likely to weigh the existing precedent in my favor than they would have been with a blank slate.
The "market" isn't made up of only the sellers. The market is the sellers and the buyers. So, McDonald's and Coca Cola's appreach to nutrition can only be seen as "right" if the consumers also see it as right. Of course, that's assuming a free and open market, which we don't have.
This can't be 2010, because in 2010 you would have the technology to throttle a set of sites that were less important to give important network traffic a guaranteed level of throughput--without having to block the sites completely.
Advertisements would transform from a pervasive nuisance into something more like useful information. Advertisers would know so much about your lifestyle and preferences that you would only see ads that made perfect sense for your situation.
I'm sure there's a mathematical/statistical reason why 50% accuracy is better than guessing in this case, but that would be very counter-intuitive. Same with as high as 90% under certain conditions. I could get to 90% accuracy if I could select out everything that reduced my accuracy as well. I don't doubt the full article explains better though. I'm not suggesting MIT, Google, etc scientists are stupid.
As a user, he's an inclusionist. As an editor, he's an exclusionist. I have no idea what that means.
There's nothing to worry about. Facebook is too big to fail!