If there's a huge cost in switching to metric, then according to the logic the world has been putting into action in recent years - it should stimulate the economy to switch everything over. It should increase spending, as everyone has to buy new stuff. So, is the lack of switching, a sign of some type of logical fallacy or hypocrisy when it comes to what is believed to be our economic needs?
This isn't news. About 6 months ago, a boy & his father sent an iphone up up and away... it reached the upper atmosphere and the cold finally popped the balloon. The iphone fell... from much further up than just 100 wimpy ft. Here's the vid - http://vimeo.com/15091562 I thought everybody knew about this.
I don't think it's a big deal, 'cause the difference between the two is this:
1. Upgrade IE for security reasons (not upgrading results in old bugs & holes being left open)
2. Upgrade Firefox for browsing reasons
So of course, lots of IE users will upgrade and FF users will too.
Chrome's my main browser. Firefox is my secondary. Opera my thrid ('cause I do web development). I never browse/surf/etc in IE, I just use it for Windows Updates & checking to make sure a website works & looks fine in it.
I would hate to surf the net without being able to see what URL I'm currently at. I'll go back to using Firefox if I have to. I need to see where I am. My personal feelings aside.... If they remove the URL bar and have that as the default, how am I supposed to recommend Chrome to people who know little about internet security? It just wouldn't be good for anyone but phishers. I'm a web developer -- I can't be helping people mess themselves.
Saying "spam in Google's results is less than half what it was five years ago" could be their way of hiding something like "it was 20% then but just 10% now", and if spam has risen at such a rate during this time that 10% now, is greater than 20% then, well... the total spam would be higher even if the percentage itself was cut in half.
And acting like there can't possibly be a problem and that everyone is somehow suddenly perceiving a problem that isn't real, makes me think they
might be losing touch with improving their search algorithms. Since I love Google, that comes across scary. I'd hate to use Bing. Please don't make
me think Bing might be a viable option.
The Post Office & the Bank lines work this way (where I live), and nobody seems to complain that it feels slower. I think if supermarkets designed for it, it wouldn't take long for (most) people to be accept it.
Love geni.com....easy & makes it quick to set things up and share it with other family members. Also, you can export GEDCOM files from it, to use in other genealogy software, or import GEDCOM files you've already got or made.
If this is accurate, it means eBay is going to get sued by every company that wants to make a quick buck. They'll be toast quicker than a p2p music sharer. In fact, this means all auctions will be selling a lot of property illegally, and will be shut down or go out of business. If I want to sell something that I bought which someone else made, does this mean I have to get written permission first and supply it to the auctioneer or pawnshop, etc? This sounds pretty bad for the economy when I think about it...
Facebook wants to take without sharing. If it were a 5 year old kid, they're be forced to share or quit playing with the other kids. It's that simple. Google is actually moving to create an atmosphere of sharing data easily if the user wants to. Facebook's the one with the wall already, and Google's singing Pink Floyd, "tear down the wall!" and I've read multiple stories in the news this week about how this is a bad thing. Can you say FUD?
Oh, this must be why my spam messages went from over 300 per day, down to just around 20-30 in the past couple weeks. Here I thought Gmail improved their spam filters.
Slashdot Mirror
Shouldn't that be "Doctors are creating too much patience"?
If there's a huge cost in switching to metric, then according to the logic the world has been putting into action in recent years - it should stimulate the economy to switch everything over. It should increase spending, as everyone has to buy new stuff. So, is the lack of switching, a sign of some type of logical fallacy or hypocrisy when it comes to what is believed to be our economic needs?
This isn't news. About 6 months ago, a boy & his father sent an iphone up up and away... it reached the upper atmosphere and the cold finally popped the balloon. The iphone fell... from much further up than just 100 wimpy ft. Here's the vid - http://vimeo.com/15091562 I thought everybody knew about this.
I don't think it's a big deal, 'cause the difference between the two is this: 1. Upgrade IE for security reasons (not upgrading results in old bugs & holes being left open) 2. Upgrade Firefox for browsing reasons So of course, lots of IE users will upgrade and FF users will too. Chrome's my main browser. Firefox is my secondary. Opera my thrid ('cause I do web development). I never browse/surf/etc in IE, I just use it for Windows Updates & checking to make sure a website works & looks fine in it.
I would hate to surf the net without being able to see what URL I'm currently at. I'll go back to using Firefox if I have to. I need to see where I am. My personal feelings aside.... If they remove the URL bar and have that as the default, how am I supposed to recommend Chrome to people who know little about internet security? It just wouldn't be good for anyone but phishers. I'm a web developer -- I can't be helping people mess themselves.
Saying "spam in Google's results is less than half what it was five years ago" could be their way of hiding something like "it was 20% then but just 10% now", and if spam has risen at such a rate during this time that 10% now, is greater than 20% then, well... the total spam would be higher even if the percentage itself was cut in half. And acting like there can't possibly be a problem and that everyone is somehow suddenly perceiving a problem that isn't real, makes me think they might be losing touch with improving their search algorithms. Since I love Google, that comes across scary. I'd hate to use Bing. Please don't make me think Bing might be a viable option.
The Post Office & the Bank lines work this way (where I live), and nobody seems to complain that it feels slower. I think if supermarkets designed for it, it wouldn't take long for (most) people to be accept it.
Love geni.com ....easy & makes it quick to set things up and share it with other family members. Also, you can export GEDCOM files from it, to use in other genealogy software, or import GEDCOM files you've already got or made.
If this is accurate, it means eBay is going to get sued by every company that wants to make a quick buck. They'll be toast quicker than a p2p music sharer. In fact, this means all auctions will be selling a lot of property illegally, and will be shut down or go out of business. If I want to sell something that I bought which someone else made, does this mean I have to get written permission first and supply it to the auctioneer or pawnshop, etc? This sounds pretty bad for the economy when I think about it...
Facebook wants to take without sharing. If it were a 5 year old kid, they're be forced to share or quit playing with the other kids. It's that simple. Google is actually moving to create an atmosphere of sharing data easily if the user wants to. Facebook's the one with the wall already, and Google's singing Pink Floyd, "tear down the wall!" and I've read multiple stories in the news this week about how this is a bad thing. Can you say FUD?
Oh, this must be why my spam messages went from over 300 per day, down to just around 20-30 in the past couple weeks. Here I thought Gmail improved their spam filters.