1) Don't read the article
2) Barely skim over the slashdot blurb and make some post that is intended to show anger, but pretending you're too cool to care by using an "ironic" posture
3) Get FP!
4) ????
5) Gloat in self satisfaction.
Anybody who read the article would see that Ebert didn't particularilly dislike the movie. He thought it was visually intriguing and had some interesting cinematographic effects. Yes, he did feel that the plot and dialogue were lacking. Actually, the complaints sound exactly like those aired over many anime films: style over substance. And sometimes that's what people want.
Other manufacturers won't pay Philips to liscense it. AFAIK Philips makes the vast majority of the cable set box and broadcaster supplied DVRs. Their customers are the cable companies that want you to watch the commercials.
Promoters, the lighting guy, safety inspectors, the venue itself, road crew, sound tech, security, wardrobe, catering, the guys who actually write the music... they split the two mill. Madonna just gets one because yeah... she's the star, but wouldn't be able to do any of that other stuff on her own. (Note: I have no idea if she writes her own music and whatnot, but I know she doesn't play the instrunments live on stage.)
I think it has to do with their love of beer. Beer can cause bad decisions, like taking that Helga home for the night, driving drunk, or buying David Hasselhoff CDs.
Sorry, but encore's are just a way for a band to satisfy their own ego.
An encore is forgettable now that it is mandatory. Most memorable ending to a concert? The singer saying something along the lines of:
I'd like to think that every one of you in the audience is my friend. And you know what? Friends don't make their friends beg. So we can be like every other band, leave the stage for a bit 10 minutes before we actually have to be off the stage and stroke our egos while you beg for us to come back. On the other hand, we can just use that time to get one more song in... what do you guys want us to do?
The didn't end up doing an encore, but they still got out at the same time as other bands that did encores (this was Summerfest in Milwaukee, so there were a few shows going on at once.)
I understand your concerns, but information that you yourself put on a webpage should not be considered private. If you don't want personal information to get out, don't post it in a public forum. Besides, it doesn't sound like this particular piece of software is really collecting personal information; all it does is look for spikes in a particular mood tag, and then parses through the text in the publically readable text to find unusual words. If this helps companies figure out what products actually excite people, then they will come out with products that people actually like (if used properly.)
As a company (and especially as an investor) I would, however, take any information gathered through such a technique with a grain of salt or two. It seems that it would be close to trivial for a company game the system and set up enough accounts or bribe enough bloggers to tip the scales one way or the other, essentially creating inter-corporate astroturphing.
why on Earth would you want people who are strictly of average intelligence
You would want someone of average intelligence because people who score highly on the test have been shown to burn out and quit early, thus being a waste of resources on training them in the first place. Whether or not it has been properly shown that people who score highly quit early isn't something I know, but the article claims that is true.
Re:The problem of nerve impulse conduction
on
An Alternate Human
·
· Score: 1
Isn't Bell's palsy thought to be cuased by a viral infection localized on the facial nerve?
Re:The problem of nerve impulse conduction
on
An Alternate Human
·
· Score: 2, Funny
My guess is that saved by the bell was watched by the vast majority of people who watch adult swim. Cartoon Network probably got a very good deal on the rights to it, and figured "hey, why not?" My guess is that it's similar to how I think the whole Adult Swim thing started anyways... They were given a good deal on the rights to mix up a lot of the old Hanna Barbara cartoons and played around with it a bit on Space Ghost Coast to Coast. The show proved to be a huge hit to a demographic that has been steadilly losing viewers (18-24 year old males, same as tech tv. There's my nod to being on topic.) So, they decided to set up a whole block of shows based mostly on ripping old Hanna Barbara shows apart and applying non-sequetors and uncomfortable pauses. Aqua Teen Hunger Force was also created which is the same in concept and humor style as the old HB rips (Sealab 2021, Harvey Birdman Attorney at Law, Brak Show and so on) except it uses original characters rather than the old ones.
After a bit they started adding more cartoons designed to appeal to 18-24 year old males and were then able to stretch it from one night a week to most nights of the week.
What is meant by that is that IF there is life on those places, it may function in similar ways, pressumably in relation to energy needs. Analyzing any life found in these subglacial lakes will give us clues as to what to look for when trying to find whether or not there is life on other planets/moons/random cosmological object.
Most games with this "Saved Games" option have something called "Save Points."
You can't just save the game in any old spot, just certain locations. If you are in the middle of some tedious part between saves and you get bored or simply can't keep playing, the only options are 1)keep playing untill you eventually hit the save point 2)eventually replay the game or 3)give up the game completely. Then there are games like Black that take it even a level further... There are checkpoints that you will respawn at if you die, but if you quit the game and come back later you are dumped back at the beginning of the level.
The problem isn't so much that they are a monopoly, but they are using their monopoly in one market (OS) to leverage power over competitors in another market (media player.) Being a monopoly is not in and of itself a bad thing, but using the power that comes with being a monopoly to stifle competition is a very bad thing in a capitolistic market.
It's theoretically not possible to read 100% efficient, but it is THEORETICALLY possible to reach 99.9% efficiency. Depending on how many significant figures you have when measuring light output, energy usage, etc, that would round up to 100% efficient. Using this in market literature would indeed be stretching the truth, but saying 99.9% would also be lying if your measurement system was not accurate past the decimal.
So, you can't actually get to perfect efficiency, but you can semantically get there.
I'd say the reason this isn't a good design is the majority of people in the world probably heat their house on average less than half the time. There are a lot of places which are on average warmer than human comfort level, and so have to spend more energy on cooling than heating. Any thermal inefficiency in the equipment these people use then shows up TWICE on their energy bill as they have to pump that excess heat out of the building. Trying to pump this heat to a place that needs heating would be fairly energy inneficient as well. With VERY large sources of heat is sometimes make economical sense to pump the heat around (I.E. power plants will oftentimes have a network of pipes set up that they can sell of the steam to local residences and businesses that is essentially a waste product.
Ahh... but a dimmer means the bulb is not running at it's most efficient point, and so you use more electricity per lumen.
Which gets us to the real reason light bulbs don't have drastically longer lives... tuning a light bulb so it has a longer life means that it has significantly lower energy efficiency. Those "long life" light bulbs you see in the supermarket usually end up costing you more in the long run. They do make some sense to use them in a situation where they are difficult or even dangerous to replace, but then you would be wise to consider compact flourescent as they last VASTLY longer and use significantly less energy. And that "bad light" and "flicker that makes people sick" is pretty much an artifact of the past. Newer tubes and bulbs have much cleaner light.
I know a few people over 30 who have Myspace accounts. Eventually they will convince other people over 30 to get accounts. Hey, there is just about no penalty for simply creating an account. I haven't recieved any spam in my email account due to myspace. It's wierd, as you sit on it more and more people that you used to know start showing up. And then you find that they are already friends with people that you used to hang out with. It's a pretty vicious circle.
I could imagine a significant proportion of elderly people running Firefox. For a while the elderly were the stereotypical victims of many confidence scams, so people getting old take precautions to watch out for the usual signs. Throw that on with many news sources talking about hackers and the like, and you form a healthy dose of paranoia. They start doing a little research on what to do to secure your system, or they ask their tech support/IT professional grandkids what to do to be more secure. In some cases, grandma just wants to be able to email, send photos, find recipes and, well, purchase yarn. They know very little about computers, so again the grandkids are called in to set up the computer, and the grandkids set it up in such a way that they hope will lead to less visits to fix the computer (installing Firefox and removing the IE shortcuts.)
I just love how several of the ingredients are poppy. Sure, they may not be using parts that have quite the concentration of opiods, but they're still there.
As a social networking site, the only reason that Myspace is popular is... because it is popular. Almost everybody knows a few people on it, and it therefore becomes a way to communicate between those people you know that are on it are already on it.
But hasn't the best medical care been available primarilly for the most affluent anyways? I'm not saying that's right, I'm not saying that's wrong, it's just the way it is.
Slashdot Mirror
Instructions on how to be a Karma Whore:
1) Don't read the article
2) Barely skim over the slashdot blurb and make some post that is intended to show anger, but pretending you're too cool to care by using an "ironic" posture
3) Get FP!
4) ????
5) Gloat in self satisfaction.
Anybody who read the article would see that Ebert didn't particularilly dislike the movie. He thought it was visually intriguing and had some interesting cinematographic effects. Yes, he did feel that the plot and dialogue were lacking. Actually, the complaints sound exactly like those aired over many anime films: style over substance. And sometimes that's what people want.
I really doubt this content will be implemented on the television itself... it will be implemented on the cable box that you lease from the company.
Other manufacturers won't pay Philips to liscense it. AFAIK Philips makes the vast majority of the cable set box and broadcaster supplied DVRs. Their customers are the cable companies that want you to watch the commercials.
Promoters, the lighting guy, safety inspectors, the venue itself, road crew, sound tech, security, wardrobe, catering, the guys who actually write the music... they split the two mill. Madonna just gets one because yeah... she's the star, but wouldn't be able to do any of that other stuff on her own. (Note: I have no idea if she writes her own music and whatnot, but I know she doesn't play the instrunments live on stage.)
I think it has to do with their love of beer. Beer can cause bad decisions, like taking that Helga home for the night, driving drunk, or buying David Hasselhoff CDs.
An encore is forgettable now that it is mandatory. Most memorable ending to a concert? The singer saying something along the lines of:
The didn't end up doing an encore, but they still got out at the same time as other bands that did encores (this was Summerfest in Milwaukee, so there were a few shows going on at once.)
Like a website that simply asks "Are you happy right now?" or "Are you sad right now?"
Nah... noone would ever bother to set up such a website.
I understand your concerns, but information that you yourself put on a webpage should not be considered private. If you don't want personal information to get out, don't post it in a public forum. Besides, it doesn't sound like this particular piece of software is really collecting personal information; all it does is look for spikes in a particular mood tag, and then parses through the text in the publically readable text to find unusual words. If this helps companies figure out what products actually excite people, then they will come out with products that people actually like (if used properly.)
As a company (and especially as an investor) I would, however, take any information gathered through such a technique with a grain of salt or two. It seems that it would be close to trivial for a company game the system and set up enough accounts or bribe enough bloggers to tip the scales one way or the other, essentially creating inter-corporate astroturphing.
why on Earth would you want people who are strictly of average intelligence
You would want someone of average intelligence because people who score highly on the test have been shown to burn out and quit early, thus being a waste of resources on training them in the first place. Whether or not it has been properly shown that people who score highly quit early isn't something I know, but the article claims that is true.
Isn't Bell's palsy thought to be cuased by a viral infection localized on the facial nerve?
He's had a lot of people feel his feet.
My guess is that saved by the bell was watched by the vast majority of people who watch adult swim. Cartoon Network probably got a very good deal on the rights to it, and figured "hey, why not?" My guess is that it's similar to how I think the whole Adult Swim thing started anyways... They were given a good deal on the rights to mix up a lot of the old Hanna Barbara cartoons and played around with it a bit on Space Ghost Coast to Coast. The show proved to be a huge hit to a demographic that has been steadilly losing viewers (18-24 year old males, same as tech tv. There's my nod to being on topic.) So, they decided to set up a whole block of shows based mostly on ripping old Hanna Barbara shows apart and applying non-sequetors and uncomfortable pauses. Aqua Teen Hunger Force was also created which is the same in concept and humor style as the old HB rips (Sealab 2021, Harvey Birdman Attorney at Law, Brak Show and so on) except it uses original characters rather than the old ones.
After a bit they started adding more cartoons designed to appeal to 18-24 year old males and were then able to stretch it from one night a week to most nights of the week.
What is meant by that is that IF there is life on those places, it may function in similar ways, pressumably in relation to energy needs. Analyzing any life found in these subglacial lakes will give us clues as to what to look for when trying to find whether or not there is life on other planets/moons/random cosmological object.
Most games with this "Saved Games" option have something called "Save Points."
You can't just save the game in any old spot, just certain locations. If you are in the middle of some tedious part between saves and you get bored or simply can't keep playing, the only options are 1)keep playing untill you eventually hit the save point 2)eventually replay the game or 3)give up the game completely. Then there are games like Black that take it even a level further... There are checkpoints that you will respawn at if you die, but if you quit the game and come back later you are dumped back at the beginning of the level.
The problem isn't so much that they are a monopoly, but they are using their monopoly in one market (OS) to leverage power over competitors in another market (media player.) Being a monopoly is not in and of itself a bad thing, but using the power that comes with being a monopoly to stifle competition is a very bad thing in a capitolistic market.
It's theoretically not possible to read 100% efficient, but it is THEORETICALLY possible to reach 99.9% efficiency. Depending on how many significant figures you have when measuring light output, energy usage, etc, that would round up to 100% efficient. Using this in market literature would indeed be stretching the truth, but saying 99.9% would also be lying if your measurement system was not accurate past the decimal.
So, you can't actually get to perfect efficiency, but you can semantically get there.
I'd say the reason this isn't a good design is the majority of people in the world probably heat their house on average less than half the time. There are a lot of places which are on average warmer than human comfort level, and so have to spend more energy on cooling than heating. Any thermal inefficiency in the equipment these people use then shows up TWICE on their energy bill as they have to pump that excess heat out of the building. Trying to pump this heat to a place that needs heating would be fairly energy inneficient as well. With VERY large sources of heat is sometimes make economical sense to pump the heat around (I.E. power plants will oftentimes have a network of pipes set up that they can sell of the steam to local residences and businesses that is essentially a waste product.
Ahh... but a dimmer means the bulb is not running at it's most efficient point, and so you use more electricity per lumen.
Which gets us to the real reason light bulbs don't have drastically longer lives... tuning a light bulb so it has a longer life means that it has significantly lower energy efficiency. Those "long life" light bulbs you see in the supermarket usually end up costing you more in the long run. They do make some sense to use them in a situation where they are difficult or even dangerous to replace, but then you would be wise to consider compact flourescent as they last VASTLY longer and use significantly less energy. And that "bad light" and "flicker that makes people sick" is pretty much an artifact of the past. Newer tubes and bulbs have much cleaner light.
I know a few people over 30 who have Myspace accounts. Eventually they will convince other people over 30 to get accounts. Hey, there is just about no penalty for simply creating an account. I haven't recieved any spam in my email account due to myspace. It's wierd, as you sit on it more and more people that you used to know start showing up. And then you find that they are already friends with people that you used to hang out with. It's a pretty vicious circle.
I could imagine a significant proportion of elderly people running Firefox. For a while the elderly were the stereotypical victims of many confidence scams, so people getting old take precautions to watch out for the usual signs. Throw that on with many news sources talking about hackers and the like, and you form a healthy dose of paranoia. They start doing a little research on what to do to secure your system, or they ask their tech support/IT professional grandkids what to do to be more secure. In some cases, grandma just wants to be able to email, send photos, find recipes and, well, purchase yarn. They know very little about computers, so again the grandkids are called in to set up the computer, and the grandkids set it up in such a way that they hope will lead to less visits to fix the computer (installing Firefox and removing the IE shortcuts.)
Or how about just putting on a condom?
I just love how several of the ingredients are poppy. Sure, they may not be using parts that have quite the concentration of opiods, but they're still there.
Where exactly did China and India get the chance to choose to be poor rather than rich?
I don't know about India, but China did have a choice. It was a choice they called the cultural revolution.
As a social networking site, the only reason that Myspace is popular is... because it is popular. Almost everybody knows a few people on it, and it therefore becomes a way to communicate between those people you know that are on it are already on it.
But hasn't the best medical care been available primarilly for the most affluent anyways? I'm not saying that's right, I'm not saying that's wrong, it's just the way it is.