I don't know if it's because I've never used goog-411, and I read this article _first_ -- but when I listen to that sound, I think it _sounds_ like someone trying to mimick a computer. Which annoys the piss out of me. I listened to it twice and I think if I heard it a third time I'd get angry.
And the article talks about how they've turned down a jeopardy-like theme song, along with a fake conversation. So this was #1 of 3 ideas? Those ideas are *all* horrible. I can think of a million ideas that would be better off the top of my head.
None of them involve a human pretending to be a computer, badly.
Yeah... I remember the last time I produced a report card showing good grades at the Bank, and to my employer. Good grades don't earn you anything else in life, intelligence does.
This guy is obviously lacking it.
"Parents wonder why their children aren't ready for the real world" -- wtf? You think the solution is to just let any moron with a minimum wage job do the work of a parent? That's why kids aren't ready for the real world? Are you joking me?
The real world is what we make it. The real world doesn't have loser sales clerks demanding good grades -- which is why this guy isn't a sales clerk anymore.
No matter what 'system' he came up with, he should be fired for putting another step in the middle of the "Hi I want to buy this", "Here you go" process.
If anybody thinks this guy is a good Samaritan or should be rewarded, you're living in your own little hippy infested lovey dovey moron world. He just made customers go another block to the 'other of a million' game stores and buy there for the same competitive price.
He also took away a pretty basic freedom / right from all of his younger customers. So maybe he's the one that needs to learn a lesson. I wish I lived close enough to refuse to buy anything from this store ever again. If the government instituted the same policy for merchants - there would be riots in the streets.
It's ok to be disrespectful to someone who deigns to teach you, so long as they are the absolute worst examples of role-models, have horrible teaching skills and can't engage anybody with their lessons.
Let me put it another way: The school and the school board shouldn't be allowed to throw anybody at a room full of students and say, 'yeah we did our duty'. Which is exactly what they want to do, zero effort on the curriculum, zero effort with the staff - blame the students for ruining the school.
If these same students want this teacher replaced with a better teacher - what recourse do they have? Pretty much none. What more can they do but make light of the situation and tell the entire world they don't respect or want to be taught by this teacher? Sometimes Humour, as in this case, is the last resort of people that are fed up with no ability to stand up for themselves. And when that's not the case, the case is usually dropping out or methodically moving from classroom to classroom with double-barreled sawed off shotguns.
Then we can all watch t.v. and say, 'wow, those kids were really f*#*#ed up. Its amazing the -teachers- that dealt with them everyday didn't pick up on the warning signs. I guess that's not their job.'
what the hell is their job? I've had a lot of great teachers - and none of them would have requested this woman be transferred to work with them.
The school should be embarrased to have her working there. The video points out she's unhygienic, the classroom looks disgusting, nobody respects her. That's just what I got in the first 60 seconds.
The school is alleging the video disrupted class - so that's why the student was suspended. So how disrupted was the class that they had to find the video on YouTube to know about it? Did the teacher not mention how 'disrupted' her class was? Ok then fire her.
Allowing this to go on is a disgusting example of a school board as a whole.
this gem is too much? What about testosterone replacement therapy? Is that too much for you?
Do I have any idea how much CPU time is wasted in the world? Hmm... no. and I don't care. Do I have any idea how much CPU time is dedicated to scientific distributed computing projects in the world? No.
but it would be good if it were dedicated to projects that advance science.
You're correct about everything you say, except the fact that this shouldn't be made public.
If I were the kingpin in a multi-million dollar drug bust and I wanted to kill the 'informant' (ok, let's pretend we're in a movie) - don't you think I would hire the $1000 private investigator to go find this 'so hard to discover' information?
This entire site is made up of very very easily obtained information. They didn't subpoena anybody, beg a judge, pay people off. They just looked at publicly available documents. Maybe the error is in these documents being publicly available - and more than that, maybe the error is that we're blaming the messenger.
Ok, I know this is an overplayed argument - the 'humanity' card. Like when NASA announces they've found a way to get 3 men to the moon for just under 8 billion dollars - and people say, "Umm, couldn't we use 8 billion dollars in Florida for our worst-in-the-country school system?"
Obviously, that's a long and involved argument. But in this case - factoring a very large prime number - just by using methods we *knew* would work - but had never dedicated the resources to - what kind of real progress is that? We haven't really learned anything - have we?
Wouldn't that computing time have been way way more valuable to any of the 'potentially useful' distributed computing projects floating around out there? This sounds like a monumental waste of sciences new most-precious resource - CPU time.
I'm 28 and I don't get what it is that you do. Why don't you see if you can explain it to one of your neighbors first. There's all different levels of understanding, I mean if I were your neighbor and you said anything close to 'physicist' I would start the 'uh huh, ok' nodding ritual until you were done. Tell your son you measure things all day - I'm sure he'll see you for the exciting frat party you truly are.
"Hey kid - I know you think it's important that your mother died from aids and your dad was shot trying to raid a food depot, and you can't raise enough money to go to school. But this evil corporation, called Microsoft - are the people that made part of what makes that computer you're holding work. Unfortunately they just want to make money off of you, because they know one day - you'll have saved up $100, 10,000 times the cost of eating everyday - and they'll want that $100 from you. Because they're evil.
We tried to stop them from making that laptop work, and now your whole world is destroyed. Sorry buddy."
They're destroying us! By advertising a better product!
I thought the article was going to be about how Intel had raised the price of the chip they need, or how they refused to deliver the chips on time, or how they did something to stop them from selling their laptops.
This is awesome, they're actually crying because Intel is advertising a more expensive laptop to the same customers. How ridiculous.
Seriously, was there ever any doubt? Did _anybody_ believe the government over all of the eye witnesses, the drawn out court-case, the ridiculous implausible explanation required, or the pristine perfect bullet found OUTSIDE his body?
It's good somebody finally _proved_ they were lying, but we still don't know why they lied - and really, what moron ever thought the case was closed.
That is completely incorrect. Keeping in mind, there have been responses explaining why there would be a 'cost per transaction' - so I was wrong.
But saying there's a correlation between infrastructure and doubling of transactions is incorrect. If you run two programs on windows, does your cost per program go up? Would you ever bother figuring out what your cost per cpu cycle was on a home computer?
There's a correlation, it just happens to be completely useless.
Well, a couple of people have explained why there might be a legitimate cost-per-transaction, but when it comes to the example of the factory - yes I'm sure someone would want to know their cost per widget. And to figure that out, they wouldn't include the price of the sign they have mounted outside.
Cost per widget should scale, at least to some degree. If you're making 9000 at a cost of $1 each, and 10,000 still costs you $9000 - your cost per widget math seems redundant and useless.
I'm just mentioning those two scenarios so that nobody responds with them calling me an idiot. The bottom line is (if I'm correct) you can't say you're halving the cost per transaction. That would be like saying you're doubling your output. Either phrase is misleading to a potential investor.
And while it's 'just semantics', in a financial article it's sort of the entire point.
The article makes it sound like transactions are on a cost-per basis, "[Francis Feldman] estimates the move will halve the cost of transactions" -- does that make any sense?
I think the author of the article got into a tangent with him about how many transactions they do, and what their operating costs are and then incorrectly made the correlation that there is a cost-per-transaction from a computing stand-point. That can't be true. You don't insert fifties into the A: drive.
Look at it this way: If they make the big switch, and all of a sudden they can handle double-the-transactions per day - that would halve the cost of transactions. Only there's not going to all of a sudden be double-the-transactions. They're still working with the same number of transactions.
If they halve their staff, and they do the same number of transactions than that halves their costs. But what if tuesday is a slow day, and they only do 60% of their normal business? They're still paying for all the staff, electricity and third party support.
Am I wrong, or is it unlikely they can correlate a cost per transaction in this case?
What does the Securities Exchange Commission have to say about all of this? It would be interesting to know who has recently shorted a tonne of Apple Stock - as they would have the most to gain from a temporary smear campaign.
Wow, I take a commonly discussed 'question' about global warming - reference it. As if it, you know, is discussed by people - and I'm called a Troll.
All of your links to other web sites appear to me, to be Trolling. Am I the scientists that are debating the causes of global warming? No. So I'm not going to look at your chosen data sets and do the math - I'm not qualified to. Is global warming a linear process? No, and all of the scientists agree on that. Until someone wants to prove it's caused by CO2 - then the data is linear running along with the linear correlation between food production and global warming. Maybe producing food is causing global warming.
Why don't the MODS here think for themselves? I know I do when I'm a moderator. You should lose your account just for using 'poster is a troll' in the subject of your message. I'm not encouraging you to talk to me at all, believe me. I'm saying it's possible that earth and mars atmospheres and weather have some connection to each other. Maybe, man-made global warming triggers the onset of a hospitable environment on mars.
The article mentions that a new round of global-warming may be taking place on Mars - does this lend any credence to the theory that global warming is an unavoidable solar event? Maybe Mars and Earth switch off and on in turns - making one hospitable to life while the other becomes a desolate barren wasteland. Maybe we all just need to move 35 Million Miles away.
Sometimes I feel like I need to.
Also, The slashdot write-up says a, 'wrong command to the wrong computer address'. It was the right command, to the wrong computer address. If you're going to just play 'telephone' entering stories, pay attention. You made it more complicated and wrong. Maybe you should go work for NASA; got some diapers and surgical tubing?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if it's because I've never used goog-411, and I read this article _first_ -- but when I listen to that sound, I think it _sounds_ like someone trying to mimick a computer. Which annoys the piss out of me. I listened to it twice and I think if I heard it a third time I'd get angry.
And the article talks about how they've turned down a jeopardy-like theme song, along with a fake conversation. So this was #1 of 3 ideas? Those ideas are *all* horrible. I can think of a million ideas that would be better off the top of my head.
None of them involve a human pretending to be a computer, badly.
---
Even the audio from this would be better.
---
Yeah... I remember the last time I produced a report card showing good grades at the Bank, and to my employer. Good grades don't earn you anything else in life, intelligence does.
This guy is obviously lacking it.
"Parents wonder why their children aren't ready for the real world" -- wtf? You think the solution is to just let any moron with a minimum wage job do the work of a parent? That's why kids aren't ready for the real world? Are you joking me?
The real world is what we make it. The real world doesn't have loser sales clerks demanding good grades -- which is why this guy isn't a sales clerk anymore.
No matter what 'system' he came up with, he should be fired for putting another step in the middle of the "Hi I want to buy this", "Here you go" process.
If anybody thinks this guy is a good Samaritan or should be rewarded, you're living in your own little hippy infested lovey dovey moron world. He just made customers go another block to the 'other of a million' game stores and buy there for the same competitive price.
He also took away a pretty basic freedom / right from all of his younger customers. So maybe he's the one that needs to learn a lesson. I wish I lived close enough to refuse to buy anything from this store ever again. If the government instituted the same policy for merchants - there would be riots in the streets.
Future of privacy? Your privacy is already completely gone. You gave it up to find the terrorists, remember?
Sure, there's no such thing as a 'terrorist' - but at least you're getting cheap oil out of Afghanistan. I mean Iraq. I mean more expensive.
It's ok to be disrespectful to someone who deigns to teach you, so long as they are the absolute worst examples of role-models, have horrible teaching skills and can't engage anybody with their lessons.
Let me put it another way: The school and the school board shouldn't be allowed to throw anybody at a room full of students and say, 'yeah we did our duty'. Which is exactly what they want to do, zero effort on the curriculum, zero effort with the staff - blame the students for ruining the school.
If these same students want this teacher replaced with a better teacher - what recourse do they have? Pretty much none. What more can they do but make light of the situation and tell the entire world they don't respect or want to be taught by this teacher? Sometimes Humour, as in this case, is the last resort of people that are fed up with no ability to stand up for themselves. And when that's not the case, the case is usually dropping out or methodically moving from classroom to classroom with double-barreled sawed off shotguns.
Then we can all watch t.v. and say, 'wow, those kids were really f*#*#ed up. Its amazing the -teachers- that dealt with them everyday didn't pick up on the warning signs. I guess that's not their job.'
what the hell is their job? I've had a lot of great teachers - and none of them would have requested this woman be transferred to work with them.
---
engaging!
The school should be embarrased to have her working there. The video points out she's unhygienic, the classroom looks disgusting, nobody respects her. That's just what I got in the first 60 seconds.
The school is alleging the video disrupted class - so that's why the student was suspended. So how disrupted was the class that they had to find the video on YouTube to know about it? Did the teacher not mention how 'disrupted' her class was? Ok then fire her.
Allowing this to go on is a disgusting example of a school board as a whole.
---
Bride of Mongzilla?
this gem is too much? What about testosterone replacement therapy? Is that too much for you?
Do I have any idea how much CPU time is wasted in the world? Hmm... no. and I don't care.
Do I have any idea how much CPU time is dedicated to scientific distributed computing projects in the world?
No.
but it would be good if it were dedicated to projects that advance science.
Got it? Good.
You're correct about everything you say, except the fact that this shouldn't be made public.
If I were the kingpin in a multi-million dollar drug bust and I wanted to kill the 'informant' (ok, let's pretend we're in a movie) - don't you think I would hire the $1000 private investigator to go find this 'so hard to discover' information?
This entire site is made up of very very easily obtained information. They didn't subpoena anybody, beg a judge, pay people off. They just looked at publicly available documents. Maybe the error is in these documents being publicly available - and more than that, maybe the error is that we're blaming the messenger.
---
Subpoena sounds like a South American donkey sex show
Sterno's gonna save my life one day, me and that child that won't shut up!
---
won't shut up!
Ok, I know this is an overplayed argument - the 'humanity' card. Like when NASA announces they've found a way to get 3 men to the moon for just under 8 billion dollars - and people say, "Umm, couldn't we use 8 billion dollars in Florida for our worst-in-the-country school system?"
Obviously, that's a long and involved argument. But in this case - factoring a very large prime number - just by using methods we *knew* would work - but had never dedicated the resources to - what kind of real progress is that? We haven't really learned anything - have we?
Wouldn't that computing time have been way way more valuable to any of the 'potentially useful' distributed computing projects floating around out there? This sounds like a monumental waste of sciences new most-precious resource - CPU time.
---
monumental waste!
I'm 28 and I don't get what it is that you do. Why don't you see if you can explain it to one of your neighbors first. There's all different levels of understanding, I mean if I were your neighbor and you said anything close to 'physicist' I would start the 'uh huh, ok' nodding ritual until you were done. Tell your son you measure things all day - I'm sure he'll see you for the exciting frat party you truly are.
---
Frat party?
lol, 'hooked on windows' - that's awesome.
"Hey kid - I know you think it's important that your mother died from aids and your dad was shot trying to raid a food depot, and you can't raise enough money to go to school. But this evil corporation, called Microsoft - are the people that made part of what makes that computer you're holding work. Unfortunately they just want to make money off of you, because they know one day - you'll have saved up $100, 10,000 times the cost of eating everyday - and they'll want that $100 from you. Because they're evil.
We tried to stop them from making that laptop work, and now your whole world is destroyed. Sorry buddy."
---
whole world destroyed?
They're destroying us! By advertising a better product!
I thought the article was going to be about how Intel had raised the price of the chip they need, or how they refused to deliver the chips on time, or how they did something to stop them from selling their laptops.
This is awesome, they're actually crying because Intel is advertising a more expensive laptop to the same customers. How ridiculous.
---
Talk about ridiculous
Seriously, was there ever any doubt? Did _anybody_ believe the government over all of the eye witnesses, the drawn out court-case, the ridiculous implausible explanation required, or the pristine perfect bullet found OUTSIDE his body?
It's good somebody finally _proved_ they were lying, but we still don't know why they lied - and really, what moron ever thought the case was closed.
---
this moron
Yeah the costs are performance based and not hard-dollars.
I've said that multiple times.
Way to point out what everyone else and myself have already agreed on, hours after the fact.
cost per transaction is a horrible metric if the equipment is a one-time fee.
I think that was the obvious, stated multiple times point.
That is completely incorrect. Keeping in mind, there have been responses explaining why there would be a 'cost per transaction' - so I was wrong.
But saying there's a correlation between infrastructure and doubling of transactions is incorrect. If you run two programs on windows, does your cost per program go up? Would you ever bother figuring out what your cost per cpu cycle was on a home computer?
There's a correlation, it just happens to be completely useless.
Well, a couple of people have explained why there might be a legitimate cost-per-transaction, but when it comes to the example of the factory - yes I'm sure someone would want to know their cost per widget. And to figure that out, they wouldn't include the price of the sign they have mounted outside.
Cost per widget should scale, at least to some degree. If you're making 9000 at a cost of $1 each, and 10,000 still costs you $9000 - your cost per widget math seems redundant and useless.
Thank you.
I thought maybe the article was correct, but I didn't understand how it could be.
---
incorrect!
I'm just mentioning those two scenarios so that nobody responds with them calling me an idiot. The bottom line is (if I'm correct) you can't say you're halving the cost per transaction. That would be like saying you're doubling your output. Either phrase is misleading to a potential investor.
And while it's 'just semantics', in a financial article it's sort of the entire point.
The article makes it sound like transactions are on a cost-per basis, "[Francis Feldman] estimates the move will halve the cost of transactions" -- does that make any sense?
I think the author of the article got into a tangent with him about how many transactions they do, and what their operating costs are and then incorrectly made the correlation that there is a cost-per-transaction from a computing stand-point. That can't be true. You don't insert fifties into the A: drive.
Look at it this way: If they make the big switch, and all of a sudden they can handle double-the-transactions per day - that would halve the cost of transactions. Only there's not going to all of a sudden be double-the-transactions. They're still working with the same number of transactions.
If they halve their staff, and they do the same number of transactions than that halves their costs. But what if tuesday is a slow day, and they only do 60% of their normal business? They're still paying for all the staff, electricity and third party support.
Am I wrong, or is it unlikely they can correlate a cost per transaction in this case?
---
This is completely free.
What does the Securities Exchange Commission have to say about all of this? It would be interesting to know who has recently shorted a tonne of Apple Stock - as they would have the most to gain from a temporary smear campaign.
---
This doesn't smear
I'm confused, if we don't know what dark matter is, or if it even exists - why do we know that it would burn slowly?
You sure have a lot of evidence to argue against such a cut and dry subject.
Mods put the parent back up, its obvious this has been a discussion from the first second. Discussion != troll.
Wow, I take a commonly discussed 'question' about global warming - reference it. As if it, you know, is discussed by people - and I'm called a Troll.
All of your links to other web sites appear to me, to be Trolling. Am I the scientists that are debating the causes of global warming? No. So I'm not going to look at your chosen data sets and do the math - I'm not qualified to. Is global warming a linear process? No, and all of the scientists agree on that. Until someone wants to prove it's caused by CO2 - then the data is linear running along with the linear correlation between food production and global warming. Maybe producing food is causing global warming.
Why don't the MODS here think for themselves? I know I do when I'm a moderator. You should lose your account just for using 'poster is a troll' in the subject of your message. I'm not encouraging you to talk to me at all, believe me. I'm saying it's possible that earth and mars atmospheres and weather have some connection to each other. Maybe, man-made global warming triggers the onset of a hospitable environment on mars.
There I said it again, ban me.
The article mentions that a new round of global-warming may be taking place on Mars - does this lend any credence to the theory that global warming is an unavoidable solar event? Maybe Mars and Earth switch off and on in turns - making one hospitable to life while the other becomes a desolate barren wasteland. Maybe we all just need to move 35 Million Miles away.
Sometimes I feel like I need to.
Also, The slashdot write-up says a, 'wrong command to the wrong computer address'. It was the right command, to the wrong computer address. If you're going to just play 'telephone' entering stories, pay attention. You made it more complicated and wrong. Maybe you should go work for NASA; got some diapers and surgical tubing?
---
Diapers and surgical tubing!