There is an "old" saying in corporate IT: "Friends don't let friends downgrade from XP"
Because fixing all the legacy shit that "upgrade" to vista/7 will break will make you pop more anti-depressants then a trophy wife wed to a jealous 90-year old gay.
Because they would make a HUGE loss at that price. The real price is over 15-35 times greater then 0.99. I wouldn't be surprised to see many simply drop their paper subscription completely.
They are charging everyone either 0.99USD if they don't have a paper subscription, or 0USD if they do.
It's an introductory rate designed to "ease" people into subscribing. The real test will come when they start charging the prices advertised after introductory rates are over.
"That's the people like me will pay without thinking twice about it".
Please don't generalise, it makes you look rather foolish, especially when making a point this broad.
Think of modern music. Did copyright infringement get reduced when itunes and such came along? Yes.
Did it go down any further when spotify came? Yes.
Did it vanish? No, it's not even marginal, it's still in very meaningful numbers. And that's the point that people who think like you, who think that "it's okay for me so it's okay for everyone" will keep missing.
Not really, there have been claims of sub-10$ games having up to 90%+ piracy on android (essentially tracking amount of automated log-in attempts from copy of a game without a proper key on some server they used from a game or two).
They still sell enough though, and how many of these are actually "I want to try it before I buy it" is a question thrown in the air. But piracy (or more correctly copyright infringement) isn't going to just vanish because price goes down.
Starcraft 2, hands down. I don't even play traditional multiplayer, and I'm not into single player beyond single play through, but fan made custom maps are absolutely wonderful.
I don't know what problems that will fix, but french revolution will fix the problems caused by that system a couple of decades after.
Re:This is not the logic you are looking for
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
The obviousness of "general term" being incorrect and scientific being a correct one here is pretty huge.
Essentially same thing as "theory". It's a word with very specific definition, but common english mistake is to attach it to things that are called "hypotesis" in science.
Re:This is not the logic you are looking for
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 2
Toxicity is an exact scientific term. It's only semantics to those who have no clue.
Re:This is not the logic you are looking for
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
Thing about toxicity: it's not necessarily linear. Nicotine example is excellent - in low enough amount, it's not toxic, as body is capable of properly metabolising it without toxicity damage.
Problem is, it's also carcinogenic, as are many other substances in tobacco. Which is where much of the long term damage come from. Not from toxicity.
Re:This is not the logic you are looking for
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1, Redundant
It's worth noting that dihydrogen monoxide kills when ingested in sufficient amounts through intoxication:
Intravenous has serious issues in space (controlling drops of blood, air in the tubes, etc).
Suppositories could work, but I'm not closely familiar with them - granted we (as in humanity as a whole) do have expertise in Japan however where they are significantly more popular then in the rest of the world.
Sorry, last time a major change occured (awesomebar), there was no way outside about:config editing to disable the damn thing.
In the end, I ended up just getting an add-on because it was easy.
Before that, we had nice flat menus that for some reason lost 3d effect. Apparently "microsoft's fault". Strange considering no other programs, nor previous versions of firefox had any problems but whatever.
Fixed with an add-on.
Before that...
P.S. Still can't disable personas completely. Ended up removing all personas-related sites from whitelist, but the module still eats memory. Thanks firefox. Fluffy bloat is always appreciated.
So, what reason do I have to upgrade to 4? It adds some nice engine upgrades at a cost of essentially broken UI that I will have to fix (revert to 3.6 one), and will most likely break the crucial (for me) finnish spell checking add-on again (it's always been a bit slow on updates). Sorry, a little bit of speed is just not worth it, espcially since I'm not getting most of it anyway being an XP user.
Sometimes I get a feeling that firefox team really forgets that many of us just want a working, reasonably fast browser with a lot of customizability and slow enough on updates so we don't have to re-customize the entire thing from defaults because of yet another update.
Worth noting that I haven't "missed it", it's just that like many other who mainly want a stable browser where all their add-ons "just work" and a familiar look and feel, upgrading to latest version is an exercise of epic stupidity. Half of your add-ons won't work, there are no well documented ways to remove the new UI crap that firefox people seem to think we all get horny over and so on.
Personally, I'm not even touching FF4 until there is an easy way to revert all UI changes with minimal hassle. Most of my add-ons should work since it's been a while since release, but one look at the UI converted me to "FF UI designers have no clue" camp. And of course, as it is traditional for FF now, there is no way to easily tell browser to go with the old UI. That is possibly the worst part of it. In this regard, FF devs make windows team behind vista look good.
I have 3.6, and it seems I'll be sticking to it until this "my version number is bigger then yours" insanity finally ejaculates and comes back to being a quality release rather then "lookie how fast we can release miniscule updates" like a premature ejaculator competition.
Ignoring the obvious flamebait on racist card, if your children have a mortality rate of near 50%, then yay for births without deaths (hello Sahara). They matter. Also, trends are BASED on facts - aiming to predict future. Numbers behind trends are fact. Interpretation is extrapolation at worst and attempt to correct extrapolation with as many external factors as possible.
Regardless, it was illegal, and it landed him in jail. Making powerful friends while being just a small man easily in reach of those in power you pissed is not a smart move.
Assange is much smarter. He made himself famous enough for fame to act as shield - US doesn't want to martyr him.
And for the record, Russia and China handle their business in very similar way to US, which isn't really surprising as their secret services developed to fight each other, and their method resemble each other very closely. Someone like Manning would land in Ljubljanka (which isn't much worse then what they're doing to him in US - sleep deprivation for months will break almost any psyche in far more irreparable ways then conventional torture would and let's face it - Manning has nothing US wants - they're simply making him into a scary example). Someone like Assange would remain largely untouched until discrediting campaign painted him as evil enough to be removed.
1. You linked the wrong graph. Births mean nothing without deaths. You're looking for population growth: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=24&c=xx&l=en Notably, that one is far closer to my figures once you start going through countries rather then world (i.e. China's 1 child policy being essentially the only reason it came down slightly, with India and entire Africa all but exploding). 2. Trends are not "facts". They are trends.
Of Scandinavian countries, only Norway has hydro option set as well as it does. Finland, sitting only a few hundred kilometers to the east has hydro plants on essentially every available river, and it generates less then 15% of country's consumption.
Darling, just a few hundred kilometers to the east, here in Finland we have hydro power plants on about every available river.
They generated a total of 14.6% of country's electricity in year 2010. Even with 4 nukes, lots of coal, gas, biomass, etc power plants, we still have to buy electricity from Tsernobyl-type reactors at Sosnovy Bor for almost as much (12.0%).
So please, don't talk about things you know nothing about. Thank you.
For what it's worth, most of the reactors themselves are fairly safe, even older ones. Problem is in safety systems (reactor cooling and scramble) and general safety standards.
Both were atrocious at Fukushima, former because of corruption and private sector prioritising profit margin over safety and latter because of Asian culture and fear of losing face by admitting problems even to professionals in the industry whose job is ensuring safety. This was nothing new to people who followed the industry, IAEA warned about possibility of Fukushima over five years ago publicly, after being utterly frustrated that normal corporate under-the-carper talks simply didn't work.
If you combine traditional Western openness and proper oversight over safety standards, and systemic upgrades to emergency systems when reactors are given a rehaul every 30 years or so, reactors are about as safe as they can be.
Slashdot Mirror
There is an "old" saying in corporate IT: "Friends don't let friends downgrade from XP"
Because fixing all the legacy shit that "upgrade" to vista/7 will break will make you pop more anti-depressants then a trophy wife wed to a jealous 90-year old gay.
Because they would make a HUGE loss at that price. The real price is over 15-35 times greater then 0.99. I wouldn't be surprised to see many simply drop their paper subscription completely.
They are charging everyone either 0.99USD if they don't have a paper subscription, or 0USD if they do.
It's an introductory rate designed to "ease" people into subscribing. The real test will come when they start charging the prices advertised after introductory rates are over.
"That's the people like me will pay without thinking twice about it".
Please don't generalise, it makes you look rather foolish, especially when making a point this broad.
Think of modern music. Did copyright infringement get reduced when itunes and such came along? Yes.
Did it go down any further when spotify came? Yes.
Did it vanish? No, it's not even marginal, it's still in very meaningful numbers. And that's the point that people who think like you, who think that "it's okay for me so it's okay for everyone" will keep missing.
Not really, there have been claims of sub-10$ games having up to 90%+ piracy on android (essentially tracking amount of automated log-in attempts from copy of a game without a proper key on some server they used from a game or two).
They still sell enough though, and how many of these are actually "I want to try it before I buy it" is a question thrown in the air. But piracy (or more correctly copyright infringement) isn't going to just vanish because price goes down.
Starcraft 2, hands down. I don't even play traditional multiplayer, and I'm not into single player beyond single play through, but fan made custom maps are absolutely wonderful.
Then there's no need to even talk, we'll be all be wiped out after first encounter.
I don't know what problems that will fix, but french revolution will fix the problems caused by that system a couple of decades after.
The obviousness of "general term" being incorrect and scientific being a correct one here is pretty huge.
Essentially same thing as "theory". It's a word with very specific definition, but common english mistake is to attach it to things that are called "hypotesis" in science.
Toxicity is an exact scientific term. It's only semantics to those who have no clue.
Thing about toxicity: it's not necessarily linear. Nicotine example is excellent - in low enough amount, it's not toxic, as body is capable of properly metabolising it without toxicity damage.
Problem is, it's also carcinogenic, as are many other substances in tobacco. Which is where much of the long term damage come from. Not from toxicity.
It's worth noting that dihydrogen monoxide kills when ingested in sufficient amounts through intoxication:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication
So technically, his argument is correct, and even water can be toxic when ingested in too high amount.
Reads as "poop snoop" to those not too familiar with your messed up language. I love dutch :D.
Intravenous has serious issues in space (controlling drops of blood, air in the tubes, etc).
Suppositories could work, but I'm not closely familiar with them - granted we (as in humanity as a whole) do have expertise in Japan however where they are significantly more popular then in the rest of the world.
Sorry, last time a major change occured (awesomebar), there was no way outside about:config editing to disable the damn thing.
In the end, I ended up just getting an add-on because it was easy.
Before that, we had nice flat menus that for some reason lost 3d effect. Apparently "microsoft's fault". Strange considering no other programs, nor previous versions of firefox had any problems but whatever.
Fixed with an add-on.
Before that...
P.S. Still can't disable personas completely. Ended up removing all personas-related sites from whitelist, but the module still eats memory. Thanks firefox. Fluffy bloat is always appreciated.
So, what reason do I have to upgrade to 4? It adds some nice engine upgrades at a cost of essentially broken UI that I will have to fix (revert to 3.6 one), and will most likely break the crucial (for me) finnish spell checking add-on again (it's always been a bit slow on updates). Sorry, a little bit of speed is just not worth it, espcially since I'm not getting most of it anyway being an XP user.
Sometimes I get a feeling that firefox team really forgets that many of us just want a working, reasonably fast browser with a lot of customizability and slow enough on updates so we don't have to re-customize the entire thing from defaults because of yet another update.
Worth noting that I haven't "missed it", it's just that like many other who mainly want a stable browser where all their add-ons "just work" and a familiar look and feel, upgrading to latest version is an exercise of epic stupidity. Half of your add-ons won't work, there are no well documented ways to remove the new UI crap that firefox people seem to think we all get horny over and so on.
Personally, I'm not even touching FF4 until there is an easy way to revert all UI changes with minimal hassle. Most of my add-ons should work since it's been a while since release, but one look at the UI converted me to "FF UI designers have no clue" camp.
And of course, as it is traditional for FF now, there is no way to easily tell browser to go with the old UI. That is possibly the worst part of it. In this regard, FF devs make windows team behind vista look good.
I have 3.6, and it seems I'll be sticking to it until this "my version number is bigger then yours" insanity finally ejaculates and comes back to being a quality release rather then "lookie how fast we can release miniscule updates" like a premature ejaculator competition.
Ignoring the obvious flamebait on racist card, if your children have a mortality rate of near 50%, then yay for births without deaths (hello Sahara). They matter. Also, trends are BASED on facts - aiming to predict future. Numbers behind trends are fact. Interpretation is extrapolation at worst and attempt to correct extrapolation with as many external factors as possible.
Relevant xkcd: http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/extrapolating.png
Regardless, it was illegal, and it landed him in jail. Making powerful friends while being just a small man easily in reach of those in power you pissed is not a smart move.
Assange is much smarter. He made himself famous enough for fame to act as shield - US doesn't want to martyr him.
And for the record, Russia and China handle their business in very similar way to US, which isn't really surprising as their secret services developed to fight each other, and their method resemble each other very closely. Someone like Manning would land in Ljubljanka (which isn't much worse then what they're doing to him in US - sleep deprivation for months will break almost any psyche in far more irreparable ways then conventional torture would and let's face it - Manning has nothing US wants - they're simply making him into a scary example). Someone like Assange would remain largely untouched until discrediting campaign painted him as evil enough to be removed.
Two points:
1. You linked the wrong graph. Births mean nothing without deaths. You're looking for population growth: http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=24&c=xx&l=en
Notably, that one is far closer to my figures once you start going through countries rather then world (i.e. China's 1 child policy being essentially the only reason it came down slightly, with India and entire Africa all but exploding).
2. Trends are not "facts". They are trends.
Surface radiation on Venus would make you with to be living near Tsernobyl when it burned.
Of Scandinavian countries, only Norway has hydro option set as well as it does. Finland, sitting only a few hundred kilometers to the east has hydro plants on essentially every available river, and it generates less then 15% of country's consumption.
Darling, just a few hundred kilometers to the east, here in Finland we have hydro power plants on about every available river.
They generated a total of 14.6% of country's electricity in year 2010. Even with 4 nukes, lots of coal, gas, biomass, etc power plants, we still have to buy electricity from Tsernobyl-type reactors at Sosnovy Bor for almost as much (12.0%).
So please, don't talk about things you know nothing about. Thank you.
Chernobyl may have been a cause for stupidity as well.
Also, tinfoil hats would have prevented this!
For what it's worth, most of the reactors themselves are fairly safe, even older ones. Problem is in safety systems (reactor cooling and scramble) and general safety standards.
Both were atrocious at Fukushima, former because of corruption and private sector prioritising profit margin over safety and latter because of Asian culture and fear of losing face by admitting problems even to professionals in the industry whose job is ensuring safety. This was nothing new to people who followed the industry, IAEA warned about possibility of Fukushima over five years ago publicly, after being utterly frustrated that normal corporate under-the-carper talks simply didn't work.
If you combine traditional Western openness and proper oversight over safety standards, and systemic upgrades to emergency systems when reactors are given a rehaul every 30 years or so, reactors are about as safe as they can be.