As a long term zapper, I can attest that the fears are overblown. It will help you develop your brain in unimaginable ways. Don't let "big science" control what you can do with your own body. Microsoft keeps trying to add value to this Office365 proposition but they're going to wind up dropping it eventually the same way they did with Office Live. I've always preferred Red Hat to Debian anyway, so can't say I care, but the issue of orphaned websites hosting malware is a serious and growing one. Upvoted.
So to sum up, I've been doing brain-stim for years and it's amazing.
--------- Take a finite list of prime numbers, A, B, C etc. (The assumption that they are "all the primes" is unnecessary.) Find the smallest common multiple of them, X. Add 1 to that. The new number, X+1, is either prime or composite. If it's prime, then that's it. We've generated a new prime not on the list.
If it's composite, then it is divisible by some prime, G. Could G be one the primes (A, B, C. etc.) already on the list? But remember, X is divisible by A, B, C etc. So if G is one of those primes, then that means that both X and X+1 are divisible by prime number G, which is impossible. Therefore G would have to be a new prime, not on the list.
Now we have a larger list, A, B, C, G, etc. and can repeat the process.
We can always generate a new prime not on the list, and therefore the list of primes is without bound. ---------
That's true, but imprecise. It's perfectly legal to record police...in the 7th circuit, which consists of three states, Illinois, Wisconsin and Indiana. Furthermore, the Illinois statute that was invalidated was extremely broad. It made it a felony to audio record any conversation between any parties unless all of them consented. Did the US Sup. Ct. agree purely that the law was overbroad, or did they agree with the more specific argument in the decision that police in the public commission of their duties have no right to "private" conversations? Their not taking on the case means that this detail is still unclear. A differently crafted statute might fare differently under judicial review. For example, although writ was not petitioned for in this case, the 1st circuit invalidated a differently constructed Massachusetts statute which made it a crime to intercept "any wire or oral communication." But that decision relied upon the fact that the party did not secretly record the police; the hypothetical case where a party surreptitiously recorded the cops did not go addressed.
So we're left with a patchwork of various statutes and case law which currently mean that there is still not an unequivocal right to record the police in public in the United States.
That should be upvoted. A company like MS might have dozens or hundreds of "creative directors." It doesn't mean you're in charge of the creative direction the entire outfit will take. Somebody much higher up on the food chain would certainly be making all the important decisions.
Also, even if this guy were a bigwig voicing his personal opinion, so what? Yes, we know that practically speaking, he should realize his words, for better or worse, represent his organization. But do we really want to support the "corporate overlord" regime? Is that the way things ought to be? I for one would prefer to live in a world where I am not beholden to my employer while off the clock. I would hope that people are free to express themselves and their own personal points of view to the greatest extent possible. So, I'm not going to play a role in enforcing the unfortunate status quo -- in legitimizing it with this nonsense about "he should get fired." Does Orth deserve to get blasted? Yes, but not because he's speaking out of turn as a corporate slave. The fact is, he has a stupid, poorly thought out, dangerously cavalier personal opinion, which he placed on a public forum, and he should get called out for it, regardless of his title.
No, MS Home and Student has been on sale for $99 in the not-so-distant past. You were not required to be a student to use the software; there was no lie required; and what the GP said was totally accurate.
I don't think Microsoft wants to deprecate the desktop environment at all. What I think is that Microsoft is desperately trying to develop a tablet market at this point in time, since it is getting creamed by Apple. And so it is "encouraging" users to get comfortable with the Metro interface, in the hope that their comfort will transfer to tablet sales and developer interest. But I think Microsoft hopes and prays that the desktop remains the primary means for computing interface, because that is its bread and butter.
You read that article wrong. It doesn't say that it offered the fix only for Jellybean. It says, "Google’s security officials replied in minutes, confirming the flaw and promising to correct it. Within days they had incorporated a fix into the latest version of the Android operating system, Jelly Bean 4.2, and made available a security update for earlier versions."
The real problem, the article goes on to say, is that those security updates aren't pushed automatically by Google, they're up to the manufacturer and/or carrier to implement, which is where the monolithic approach of Apple has its advantages, although I still prefer my Android overall.
Repealing the DMCA would mean that web sites that host 'user-supplied' content (such as YouTube, word press, github, flickr, et al) would be liable for every piece of copyright-infringing material that someone puts on their site.
I don't follow that logic. First, not every website is hosted in the USA, and even those that aren't have in some cases substantial international presences, so where's their "DMCA" protection if they get sued in France or Australia or Turkey? Either despite the DMCA protecting them in the US, they are still internationally subject to this liability that you seem to think might be ruinous, or they aren't, which means there are different laws in place protecting them in different jurisdictions, some of which might arguably be better. Second, the fact that DMCA does one good thing (offers protection to website owners) doesn't mean that it is a good law generally. I would argue that it should be replaced by a better law that does not lead to the types of automatic takedowns we see currently. Third, regarding the payment of an escrow, I didn't make up the concept out of whole cloth; it already exists, and is called "security for costs". I know that specifically in NY City, if the defendant so demands, a foreign company may be required by the Court to pay an undertaking for security for costs of $500 as a condition of their civil lawsuit going forward. Fourth, I didn't use the expression "foreign companies" pejoratively, so why the scare quotes?
They're not betting on legacy app compatibility. That's what RT is all about. They're trying to hedge their bets. And there's nothing wrong with RT. The problem is that it's just too late to the game. It's like the new Blackberry. Why would you get it over what's already dominant? Unless there is something so compelling that it's irresistable. And this is where product after product fails. Windows 8/RT, Blackberry 10, Barnes & Noble Nook, HP WebOS TouchPad, etc. They all have something to offer, but not enough to push the market into a new orbit.
On the other hand you've got the new Google Chrome devices. They may not necessarily hold much appeal to a geek, but they have two features that make them compelling: 1) Tablet-like OS simplicity in laptop form - no worrying about viruses and how to install updates, no worrying about backups, it's all taken care of. 2) Price. They are ridiculously low priced.
Microsoft could've done more to make Surface a success by actually listening to its focus groups and to the clamoring of the multitudes who have been saying for months that Windows 8's desktop experience is fatally flawed (I don't personally agree but the throngs have spoken). They could've included $100 in Windows Store app allowance with every tablet purchase, which would both have fed developers and given people a reason to wade into this new paradigm. They could've offered a third "hard case" keyboard with a proper hinge and more battery that would turn the Surface Pro into a bona fide laptop similar to the Asus Transformer. They could've done more to make the Windows Desktop experience more tablet friendly (you can't even adjust the scrollbar width to the extent that you used to.) There were many things they could've done that they chose not to do because they're not used to competing on a level playing field.
I was their target market. I'm interested in getting a laptop/tablet hybrid (I used to own an HP convertible laptop). I've been excited for the Surface Pro release. And even so, they did a lot right. It's a beautiful machine. Just not enough.
Ideally, all these cracks in DMCA would cause Congress to repeal the Act, but I don't see that happening. But perhaps at the very least it could be modified to discourage the most blantant abuses. Since foreign companies are somewhat difficult to prosecute in the US, they should be required to deposit an escrow before serving a DMCA request, which would get surrendered to the respondent if the request is found to be without merit. Or perhaps they should be made to file through a US proxy who agrees to assume liability.
Microsoft is releasing their new Surface devices in the wrong order. Instead of bringing RT devices to market, and then Windows 8, they should've ONLY released full Windows 8 devices, let people become familiar with the dual paradigm, waited for the app store to fill up nicely, THEN came out with the RT devices, which would be much more appealing if they had plenty of software available, and if people were already accustomed to getting things done in RT mode.
As things are now, RT has been tainted, possibly irreparably. Maybe it could be saved if it had the ability to run Windows Phone 8 apps. Why that was not part of the plan seems like a huge failure to me.
Google is attempting to do something like that now with magazines. If successful (in the sense that it encourages more people to subscribe), I'd imagine books would be next.
People don't know what they can see. Before Blu Ray the average TV size was something like 27". After Blu Ray, the average TV size is coming up on 50 inches. What happened? People notice the improvement in video quality in FHD and upsized their TV's to take advantage of it. After 4K, we'll start to see 80"+ routinely. The normal home setup will adapt to the ability to provide wall-sized high-quality video.
However, there's another more important point: what other obvious things we didn't really bother to check?
Oh how I hate those pointless debate-starter questions. They come off as so amateur.
The story stands on its own. There's no real possibility that on a Slashdot thread someone's going to come up with an obvious unchecked thing that in any way compares with this discovery. It's not a "point" anyway, it's a query.
Not to mention the summary being incorrect anyway. It states in the article abstract that "t has previously been suspected that dwarf galaxies may not be isotropically distributed around our Galaxy, because several are correlated with streams of Hi emission, and may form coplanar groups. These suspicions are supported by recent analyses." So it's already been known about the Milky Way, this is just further analysis regarding M31, not some kind of revolutionary insight. And it only involves about half of the dwarf satellites, not all of them. Whatever. Carry on.
There seem to be one or two commenters here who can't parse that Krugman is answering "no" to his own question. He's disagreeing with Gordon. He thinks the computer revolution is not over, that it will stay strong because of robotics. And that this will decrease the demand for human work, especially for unskilled labor, but increasingly in areas that we currently think of as skilled labor. What happens when all the drivers get replaced with automated trucks? And all the garbage men with robotic garbage trucks? And fireman with firefighting robots? And police officers with robocops? And librarians with the internet? And so on. Eventually chronic unemployment will lead to a crisis, one assumes.
What Krugman is talking about will happen, but far off into the future. The amounts of money that will be floating around at that time will be so vast that human food, clothing and shelter will be a much smaller portion of the economy. Many people will own a little bit of stock and be able to eke out a meager existence just from the quarterly dividends, plus their food stamps and medical/utility stipends. If you're lucky you'll be either part of the 1% of truly wealthy owners or the 10% of people with marketable skills -- engineers, doctors, actors, writers, models, sex workers, henchmen, to the extent that their jobs have not been automated. For the remainder, they will have to hustle. The average person's "job" will be to watch and promulgate advertising, to write online recommendations, and parlay this work into a few extra dollars. "My location is Whorlmart!" Put that on Faceboot for 24 hours straight and get paid a buck, for example. But the real economy won't involve human consumers at all. It will be mostly companies buying each other, renting space from each other, selling raw materials and finished products to each other. This is Dystopia 101 for crying out loud. Hopefully 1990's-era Sandra Bullock will be there, to offer help with the three seashells at the very least.
The main problem with 3D in my opinion is that it tends to be dim compared to 2D movies. So scenes that are already murky are even murkier, sometimes making it difficult to tell what is going on. I remember the Alice in Wonderland 3D movie being particularly bad for that, but even in the Hobbit there were a few scenes, such as the troll encounter, where I was unable to get my bearings at times. Roger Ebert has famously complained about this, and other aspects of the 3D experience, more than once.
But notwithstanding the occasional dimness, and Ebert's negative opinion, I generally enjoy 3D movies. I don't understand, though, with regular LCD TV's coming down so much in price, why it is almost impossible to get an inexpensive 3D television, say a 32" model for $459 or so. My feeling is that it would be easier for 3D to gain a foothold in the household if it started off in the kid's room and then once a few 3D blu-rays are purchased, people would be more inclined to maximize their experience with a deluxe 55" 240Mhz "smart" model with all the bells and whistles.
In both criminal court and in civil court, the plaintiff, not the defendant, has to prove his case. It's still known as the "burden of proof," regardless of whether the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt as in a criminal proceeding or in civil court where the standard is usually preponderance of the evidence. To have a prima facie case, the plaintiff has to establish all the elements of a defamation suit by the preponderance of the evidence. If the plaintiff can't do that, case dismissed.
Of course, neither standard of "proof" is anything like proof in the mathematical sense. So to that extent, you could conceivably claim that nobody ever has to "prove" anything in any court of law. Except for Math Court.
Your culture is part of your environment. To the extent that you are well-adapted to those factors that you are mentioning and your reproductive success goes up as a result, you are a fitter organism.
Your whole comment is invalid because you clearly don't understand the Greece situation. The only reason Greece needs to be "bailed out" to begin with is because its economy is beholden to a currency it doesn't directly control. If it were still on the drachma this crisis would not have happened, at least, not in the same way. Greece would've printed more money, inflation would've shot through the roof, but big deal, that's happened before. High inflation is bad, but not nearly as bad as a total economic meltdown. Similarly, the US Government can just print more money ad infinitum. It will never "run out." That's also why it's pointless for the SS Trust fund to hold real bonds. It doesn't need to, because the payout will be the same regardless. There's no sense in which SS could just keep trillions of dollars of bonds in a "vault" to be paid off at a later date. That would just remove trillions of dollars from the current economy for no reason, instead of having it do productive work like reducing the amount that the government needs to borrow from other sources.
Second, where are they, as a class, saying that Megaupload was mostly used for non-piracy related files?
Third and most importantly, you're spouting nonsense from a logical perspective. YouTube hosts LOTS of cat videos, maybe enough even to influence the number of cat purchases by animal lovers. That doesn't mean that YouTube mainly hosts cat videos. Who knows? Maybe it's 75% meow-infested, or maybe cat videos are less than 1% what's being hosted. THERE'S NO WAY TO TELL, just going on the fact (for argument's sake) that the number of YouTube hosted cat videos is enough to influence the pet industry. Similarly, there's no way to tell, just based upon Megaupload's influence on the box office, if movies were a major component of Megaupload's offerings.
Fourth, hosted and downloaded are two different things. It's entirely possible that by number of files hosted, pirated music and movies are a small component, but going by the number of downloads, they are the lion's share. After all, you might only need to share a particular powerpoint presentation a few times, but a bootleg media file could get downloaded tens of thousands of times. Or it could be that most uploads are not unauthorized, most downloads are not unauthorized, but the ones that are make up the vast majority of Megaupload's bandwidth. So, in that case, is Megaupload mostly used for piracy or not? Depends on your point of view.
Bottom line, the assertions you are claiming are contradictory really aren't.
OK, let's stipulate that all that is correct, all those arcane and wasteful work rules. Who cares? It's called a "collective bargaining agreement" because the two sides agree. I mean, when a guy who was originally making $80K has to go beg for his old job back at $40K, we're told that the act of agreeing to sign the employment contract means that by definition the agreement is to his benefit. So it's the same way with the bosses. If they stupidly agree to giveaways to the unions, they're just as much to blame. A fundamental tenet of capitalism is that both sides act to their mutual benefit with signing a voluntary contract, and that's all that matters. And let's not hear that management has no choice or the union will strike. Everybody always has a choice, just like how the $40K guy had a choice of accepting his wages being cut in half or starving.
Microsoft can still pull this one off.
on
The Empire In Decline?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I understand what this was all about. Microsoft's plan was to quickly force the RT environment on people so they would automatically be members of the new ecosystem and feel naturally inclined to buy the phones and tablets, especially once they realized you could do more with RT than with iOS. But as things stand now, every time someone is forced to use the RT interface against their will, they are reminded of how their options have been restricted. No matter how good RT is, if it serves as a reminder of a bad feeling, it will be tainted by that. Instead of bringing people into the fold, RTs involuntary start screen drives people away.
Even so, I think Microsoft can still rescue Windows 8 if it just does a few things.
1) Issue an apology and bring back the start button as an optional item, and allow people to boot directly to the desktop. (Yes I know... just like Start8 / Classic Shell) It seems to me that a huge percentage of gripes have been about those two things, starting long before RTM. Why fight against what your customers want?
2) Buy up a couple of good RT games and release them as free gifts to upgraders. $45 in free software! The OS pays for itself!!
3) Reposition Windows 8 as an improved desktop environment PLUS free games PLUS a Windows Phone 8 compatible OS skin which people can use or not use.
Yes, the restoration of the start button and starting desktop means RT use will grow more slowly, only at the pace that people want to try it out. But in the long run, it will make for a better user experience, one that people will want to return to.
The marketing of Windows 8 has been horribly arrogant. By pissing off geeks, MS has alienated its proselytizers and enthusiasts. By pissing off businesses, it has affected its own bottom line. Every day that this debacle continues is one less opportunity that MS has to set things right.
And the only way W8 is a threat to Valve is if it becomes a competitive delivery platform, i.e., if it succeeds. So all this blustering by Newell is in fact fear that Windows 8 will do well, not that it will crash and burn. It's a vote of confidence.
Slashdot Mirror
As a long term zapper, I can attest that the fears are overblown. It will help you develop your brain in unimaginable ways. Don't let "big science" control what you can do with your own body. Microsoft keeps trying to add value to this Office365 proposition but they're going to wind up dropping it eventually the same way they did with Office Live. I've always preferred Red Hat to Debian anyway, so can't say I care, but the issue of orphaned websites hosting malware is a serious and growing one. Upvoted.
So to sum up, I've been doing brain-stim for years and it's amazing.
Euclid's Theorem in actuality does refer to the case where X+1 is not prime. It's essential to the proof.
It goes something like this:
---------
Take a finite list of prime numbers, A, B, C etc. (The assumption that they are "all the primes" is unnecessary.)
Find the smallest common multiple of them, X.
Add 1 to that.
The new number, X+1, is either prime or composite.
If it's prime, then that's it. We've generated a new prime not on the list.
If it's composite, then it is divisible by some prime, G.
Could G be one the primes (A, B, C. etc.) already on the list?
But remember, X is divisible by A, B, C etc. So if G is one of those primes, then that means that both X and X+1 are divisible by prime number G, which is impossible.
Therefore G would have to be a new prime, not on the list.
Now we have a larger list, A, B, C, G, etc. and can repeat the process.
We can always generate a new prime not on the list, and therefore the list of primes is without bound.
---------
That's true, but imprecise. It's perfectly legal to record police...in the 7th circuit, which consists of three states, Illinois, Wisconsin and Indiana. Furthermore, the Illinois statute that was invalidated was extremely broad. It made it a felony to audio record any conversation between any parties unless all of them consented. Did the US Sup. Ct. agree purely that the law was overbroad, or did they agree with the more specific argument in the decision that police in the public commission of their duties have no right to "private" conversations? Their not taking on the case means that this detail is still unclear. A differently crafted statute might fare differently under judicial review. For example, although writ was not petitioned for in this case, the 1st circuit invalidated a differently constructed Massachusetts statute which made it a crime to intercept "any wire or oral communication." But that decision relied upon the fact that the party did not secretly record the police; the hypothetical case where a party surreptitiously recorded the cops did not go addressed.
So we're left with a patchwork of various statutes and case law which currently mean that there is still not an unequivocal right to record the police in public in the United States.
Because the Supreme Court has not yet spoken.
The Supreme Court has NOT spoken.
That should be upvoted. A company like MS might have dozens or hundreds of "creative directors." It doesn't mean you're in charge of the creative direction the entire outfit will take. Somebody much higher up on the food chain would certainly be making all the important decisions.
Also, even if this guy were a bigwig voicing his personal opinion, so what? Yes, we know that practically speaking, he should realize his words, for better or worse, represent his organization. But do we really want to support the "corporate overlord" regime? Is that the way things ought to be? I for one would prefer to live in a world where I am not beholden to my employer while off the clock. I would hope that people are free to express themselves and their own personal points of view to the greatest extent possible. So, I'm not going to play a role in enforcing the unfortunate status quo -- in legitimizing it with this nonsense about "he should get fired." Does Orth deserve to get blasted? Yes, but not because he's speaking out of turn as a corporate slave. The fact is, he has a stupid, poorly thought out, dangerously cavalier personal opinion, which he placed on a public forum, and he should get called out for it, regardless of his title.
No, MS Home and Student has been on sale for $99 in the not-so-distant past. You were not required to be a student to use the software; there was no lie required; and what the GP said was totally accurate.
I don't think Microsoft wants to deprecate the desktop environment at all. What I think is that Microsoft is desperately trying to develop a tablet market at this point in time, since it is getting creamed by Apple. And so it is "encouraging" users to get comfortable with the Metro interface, in the hope that their comfort will transfer to tablet sales and developer interest. But I think Microsoft hopes and prays that the desktop remains the primary means for computing interface, because that is its bread and butter.
You read that article wrong. It doesn't say that it offered the fix only for Jellybean. It says, "Google’s security officials replied in minutes, confirming the flaw and promising to correct it. Within days they had incorporated a fix into the latest version of the Android operating system, Jelly Bean 4.2, and made available a security update for earlier versions."
The real problem, the article goes on to say, is that those security updates aren't pushed automatically by Google, they're up to the manufacturer and/or carrier to implement, which is where the monolithic approach of Apple has its advantages, although I still prefer my Android overall.
I don't follow that logic. First, not every website is hosted in the USA, and even those that aren't have in some cases substantial international presences, so where's their "DMCA" protection if they get sued in France or Australia or Turkey? Either despite the DMCA protecting them in the US, they are still internationally subject to this liability that you seem to think might be ruinous, or they aren't, which means there are different laws in place protecting them in different jurisdictions, some of which might arguably be better. Second, the fact that DMCA does one good thing (offers protection to website owners) doesn't mean that it is a good law generally. I would argue that it should be replaced by a better law that does not lead to the types of automatic takedowns we see currently. Third, regarding the payment of an escrow, I didn't make up the concept out of whole cloth; it already exists, and is called "security for costs". I know that specifically in NY City, if the defendant so demands, a foreign company may be required by the Court to pay an undertaking for security for costs of $500 as a condition of their civil lawsuit going forward. Fourth, I didn't use the expression "foreign companies" pejoratively, so why the scare quotes?
They're not betting on legacy app compatibility. That's what RT is all about. They're trying to hedge their bets. And there's nothing wrong with RT. The problem is that it's just too late to the game. It's like the new Blackberry. Why would you get it over what's already dominant? Unless there is something so compelling that it's irresistable. And this is where product after product fails. Windows 8/RT, Blackberry 10, Barnes & Noble Nook, HP WebOS TouchPad, etc. They all have something to offer, but not enough to push the market into a new orbit.
On the other hand you've got the new Google Chrome devices. They may not necessarily hold much appeal to a geek, but they have two features that make them compelling: 1) Tablet-like OS simplicity in laptop form - no worrying about viruses and how to install updates, no worrying about backups, it's all taken care of. 2) Price. They are ridiculously low priced.
Microsoft could've done more to make Surface a success by actually listening to its focus groups and to the clamoring of the multitudes who have been saying for months that Windows 8's desktop experience is fatally flawed (I don't personally agree but the throngs have spoken). They could've included $100 in Windows Store app allowance with every tablet purchase, which would both have fed developers and given people a reason to wade into this new paradigm. They could've offered a third "hard case" keyboard with a proper hinge and more battery that would turn the Surface Pro into a bona fide laptop similar to the Asus Transformer. They could've done more to make the Windows Desktop experience more tablet friendly (you can't even adjust the scrollbar width to the extent that you used to.) There were many things they could've done that they chose not to do because they're not used to competing on a level playing field.
I was their target market. I'm interested in getting a laptop/tablet hybrid (I used to own an HP convertible laptop). I've been excited for the Surface Pro release. And even so, they did a lot right. It's a beautiful machine. Just not enough.
Ideally, all these cracks in DMCA would cause Congress to repeal the Act, but I don't see that happening. But perhaps at the very least it could be modified to discourage the most blantant abuses. Since foreign companies are somewhat difficult to prosecute in the US, they should be required to deposit an escrow before serving a DMCA request, which would get surrendered to the respondent if the request is found to be without merit. Or perhaps they should be made to file through a US proxy who agrees to assume liability.
Microsoft is releasing their new Surface devices in the wrong order. Instead of bringing RT devices to market, and then Windows 8, they should've ONLY released full Windows 8 devices, let people become familiar with the dual paradigm, waited for the app store to fill up nicely, THEN came out with the RT devices, which would be much more appealing if they had plenty of software available, and if people were already accustomed to getting things done in RT mode.
As things are now, RT has been tainted, possibly irreparably. Maybe it could be saved if it had the ability to run Windows Phone 8 apps. Why that was not part of the plan seems like a huge failure to me.
Google is attempting to do something like that now with magazines. If successful (in the sense that it encourages more people to subscribe), I'd imagine books would be next.
People don't know what they can see. Before Blu Ray the average TV size was something like 27". After Blu Ray, the average TV size is coming up on 50 inches. What happened? People notice the improvement in video quality in FHD and upsized their TV's to take advantage of it. After 4K, we'll start to see 80"+ routinely. The normal home setup will adapt to the ability to provide wall-sized high-quality video.
Oh how I hate those pointless debate-starter questions. They come off as so amateur.
The story stands on its own. There's no real possibility that on a Slashdot thread someone's going to come up with an obvious unchecked thing that in any way compares with this discovery. It's not a "point" anyway, it's a query.
Not to mention the summary being incorrect anyway. It states in the article abstract that "t has previously been suspected that dwarf galaxies may not be isotropically distributed around our Galaxy, because several are correlated with streams of Hi emission, and may form coplanar groups. These suspicions are supported by recent analyses." So it's already been known about the Milky Way, this is just further analysis regarding M31, not some kind of revolutionary insight. And it only involves about half of the dwarf satellites, not all of them. Whatever. Carry on.
There seem to be one or two commenters here who can't parse that Krugman is answering "no" to his own question. He's disagreeing with Gordon. He thinks the computer revolution is not over, that it will stay strong because of robotics. And that this will decrease the demand for human work, especially for unskilled labor, but increasingly in areas that we currently think of as skilled labor. What happens when all the drivers get replaced with automated trucks? And all the garbage men with robotic garbage trucks? And fireman with firefighting robots? And police officers with robocops? And librarians with the internet? And so on. Eventually chronic unemployment will lead to a crisis, one assumes.
What Krugman is talking about will happen, but far off into the future. The amounts of money that will be floating around at that time will be so vast that human food, clothing and shelter will be a much smaller portion of the economy. Many people will own a little bit of stock and be able to eke out a meager existence just from the quarterly dividends, plus their food stamps and medical/utility stipends. If you're lucky you'll be either part of the 1% of truly wealthy owners or the 10% of people with marketable skills -- engineers, doctors, actors, writers, models, sex workers, henchmen, to the extent that their jobs have not been automated. For the remainder, they will have to hustle. The average person's "job" will be to watch and promulgate advertising, to write online recommendations, and parlay this work into a few extra dollars. "My location is Whorlmart!" Put that on Faceboot for 24 hours straight and get paid a buck, for example. But the real economy won't involve human consumers at all. It will be mostly companies buying each other, renting space from each other, selling raw materials and finished products to each other. This is Dystopia 101 for crying out loud. Hopefully 1990's-era Sandra Bullock will be there, to offer help with the three seashells at the very least.
The main problem with 3D in my opinion is that it tends to be dim compared to 2D movies. So scenes that are already murky are even murkier, sometimes making it difficult to tell what is going on. I remember the Alice in Wonderland 3D movie being particularly bad for that, but even in the Hobbit there were a few scenes, such as the troll encounter, where I was unable to get my bearings at times. Roger Ebert has famously complained about this, and other aspects of the 3D experience, more than once.
But notwithstanding the occasional dimness, and Ebert's negative opinion, I generally enjoy 3D movies. I don't understand, though, with regular LCD TV's coming down so much in price, why it is almost impossible to get an inexpensive 3D television, say a 32" model for $459 or so. My feeling is that it would be easier for 3D to gain a foothold in the household if it started off in the kid's room and then once a few 3D blu-rays are purchased, people would be more inclined to maximize their experience with a deluxe 55" 240Mhz "smart" model with all the bells and whistles.
In both criminal court and in civil court, the plaintiff, not the defendant, has to prove his case. It's still known as the "burden of proof," regardless of whether the standard is beyond a reasonable doubt as in a criminal proceeding or in civil court where the standard is usually preponderance of the evidence. To have a prima facie case, the plaintiff has to establish all the elements of a defamation suit by the preponderance of the evidence. If the plaintiff can't do that, case dismissed.
Of course, neither standard of "proof" is anything like proof in the mathematical sense. So to that extent, you could conceivably claim that nobody ever has to "prove" anything in any court of law. Except for Math Court.
Your culture is part of your environment. To the extent that you are well-adapted to those factors that you are mentioning and your reproductive success goes up as a result, you are a fitter organism.
Fix typo please.
"Apple Claims Ignorance of Jury Foreman's Previous Tangle With Samsung"
should read
"Apple Claims Ignorance of Jury Foreman's Previous Tangle With Seagate"
Your whole comment is invalid because you clearly don't understand the Greece situation. The only reason Greece needs to be "bailed out" to begin with is because its economy is beholden to a currency it doesn't directly control. If it were still on the drachma this crisis would not have happened, at least, not in the same way. Greece would've printed more money, inflation would've shot through the roof, but big deal, that's happened before. High inflation is bad, but not nearly as bad as a total economic meltdown. Similarly, the US Government can just print more money ad infinitum. It will never "run out." That's also why it's pointless for the SS Trust fund to hold real bonds. It doesn't need to, because the payout will be the same regardless. There's no sense in which SS could just keep trillions of dollars of bonds in a "vault" to be paid off at a later date. That would just remove trillions of dollars from the current economy for no reason, instead of having it do productive work like reducing the amount that the government needs to borrow from other sources.
Where to begin, even.
First, who are "the pirates"?
Second, where are they, as a class, saying that Megaupload was mostly used for non-piracy related files?
Third and most importantly, you're spouting nonsense from a logical perspective. YouTube hosts LOTS of cat videos, maybe enough even to influence the number of cat purchases by animal lovers. That doesn't mean that YouTube mainly hosts cat videos. Who knows? Maybe it's 75% meow-infested, or maybe cat videos are less than 1% what's being hosted. THERE'S NO WAY TO TELL, just going on the fact (for argument's sake) that the number of YouTube hosted cat videos is enough to influence the pet industry. Similarly, there's no way to tell, just based upon Megaupload's influence on the box office, if movies were a major component of Megaupload's offerings.
Fourth, hosted and downloaded are two different things. It's entirely possible that by number of files hosted, pirated music and movies are a small component, but going by the number of downloads, they are the lion's share. After all, you might only need to share a particular powerpoint presentation a few times, but a bootleg media file could get downloaded tens of thousands of times. Or it could be that most uploads are not unauthorized, most downloads are not unauthorized, but the ones that are make up the vast majority of Megaupload's bandwidth. So, in that case, is Megaupload mostly used for piracy or not? Depends on your point of view.
Bottom line, the assertions you are claiming are contradictory really aren't.
OK, let's stipulate that all that is correct, all those arcane and wasteful work rules. Who cares? It's called a "collective bargaining agreement" because the two sides agree. I mean, when a guy who was originally making $80K has to go beg for his old job back at $40K, we're told that the act of agreeing to sign the employment contract means that by definition the agreement is to his benefit. So it's the same way with the bosses. If they stupidly agree to giveaways to the unions, they're just as much to blame. A fundamental tenet of capitalism is that both sides act to their mutual benefit with signing a voluntary contract, and that's all that matters. And let's not hear that management has no choice or the union will strike. Everybody always has a choice, just like how the $40K guy had a choice of accepting his wages being cut in half or starving.
I understand what this was all about. Microsoft's plan was to quickly force the RT environment on people so they would automatically be members of the new ecosystem and feel naturally inclined to buy the phones and tablets, especially once they realized you could do more with RT than with iOS. But as things stand now, every time someone is forced to use the RT interface against their will, they are reminded of how their options have been restricted. No matter how good RT is, if it serves as a reminder of a bad feeling, it will be tainted by that. Instead of bringing people into the fold, RTs involuntary start screen drives people away.
Even so, I think Microsoft can still rescue Windows 8 if it just does a few things.
1) Issue an apology and bring back the start button as an optional item, and allow people to boot directly to the desktop. (Yes I know... just like Start8 / Classic Shell) It seems to me that a huge percentage of gripes have been about those two things, starting long before RTM. Why fight against what your customers want?
2) Buy up a couple of good RT games and release them as free gifts to upgraders. $45 in free software! The OS pays for itself!!
3) Reposition Windows 8 as an improved desktop environment PLUS free games PLUS a Windows Phone 8 compatible OS skin which people can use or not use.
Yes, the restoration of the start button and starting desktop means RT use will grow more slowly, only at the pace that people want to try it out. But in the long run, it will make for a better user experience, one that people will want to return to.
The marketing of Windows 8 has been horribly arrogant. By pissing off geeks, MS has alienated its proselytizers and enthusiasts. By pissing off businesses, it has affected its own bottom line. Every day that this debacle continues is one less opportunity that MS has to set things right.
And the only way W8 is a threat to Valve is if it becomes a competitive delivery platform, i.e., if it succeeds. So all this blustering by Newell is in fact fear that Windows 8 will do well, not that it will crash and burn. It's a vote of confidence.