Not to that we apparently have been accepting military personel that are unfit for duty. One big problem we have in the military is that in order to keep all these officers employed we have to keep recruiting, even if those recruits are not going to be able to perform. We have to supply the training camps with youngsters, even if those youngsters are just going to take money from the taxpayer without giving anything in return.
Furthermore, why are we paying these kids for the first four months. The reduction in pay over others already indicates that they are of little value. Why not just give them room, board, and stipend? If someone really wants the opportunity to serve their country, they should be willing to do so without compensation. I mean a teacher does not get paid to get certification, in fact has to pay for it. Yet a recruit get paid to eat food provided by the taxpayer.
What is even more distressing is we are accepting all these recruits, many unhealthy, and we working taxpayers are going to be on the hook for their medical care for their entire life. We pay for stroke, heart attack, even diabetes because the veteran knows the tax payer is at risk, not the veteran. This is not me talking, this is what all the conservatives say. Government health care just makes people sicker. And in 2009 the income restrictions on this care were reduced to let even more veterans, many who could afford private insurance, get this tax payer funding windfall.
The pentagon, just like any other corporation, is bloated with middle manager officers who only concern is spending a budget so they can justify their own positions, many of which could be eliminated. Which would eliminate their budget. And 40 years of funding the health care of the unhealthy.
No, the thief's are motivated by the high resale value of Apple products. At a pawn shop an old iPod Touch with max ram get get well over $100. And old iPhone almost $100. Steal one device a day and you are doing better than minimum wage, tax free. Hell, $100 a day, even three days a week, is almost 1600 a year. Unless you are into expensive drugs that is a living.
For the iPhone, it might be a simple deal. A police report is filed, the serial number is reported to Apple, and Apple reports the fact to the carriers who then refuse to activate and confiscate the phone. This obviousy would kill the market for stolen phones, and damage the market for used phones enough to significantly kill Apples share of the market. I suspect that many can afford to upgrade to new apple phones because they can sell the old ones.
Which is why a political solution is necessary. Level the playing field. Make a federal law that says the carriers must maintain a list of phones reported stolen,refuse to activate those phones that are stolen, and confiscate if possible. Create a penalty for falsely reports of stolen phones. This can also be done with tablets and netbooks with cellular service. But it is one of those cases where regulation is the only way to create a level playing field. One would be crazy to take a unilateral approach.
OTOH, non cellular devices would be a different matter. The only thing that can be done here is for Apple to brick devices reported stolen when connected to the Apple servers. This be risky, as it would, as stated, put Apple at a competitive disadvantage.
It is easy to say that x% of work is unnecessary. What is hard to identify, before the fact, is which of this work is unnecessary. Take flu vaccine. A few percent of recipients will experience some reaction, some severe. Many probably do not require the vaccine. Yet we do not say that "30% of the money spent on flu vaccine is wasted."
OTOH, some treatments and testing is found to be ineffective or unnecessary in most cases. Lawsuits and the revenue generated from the procedures can provide resistance to the elimination of these procedures. Treatment of some slow growing cancers is one of these. Pap smears and mammograms is another.
Then there is the whole pharmacy industry that depends on people solving problems through drugs rather than discipline and life style changes..
Overall I think it is good for doctors to look at procedures they might be overusing, and a legal framework that allows and encourages them to modify their behavior. Not necessarily because it will save money, but because it can increase safety and allow us to focus on effectiveness.
Since this is a politician, I assume that the bill is aimed at posts that provide unflattering information about politicians, or other public figures, say that they went to foreign country on the governments dime to meet a mistress/mister.
So here is how I see this going down. Some public figure get pissed off because some anonymous person has said they enjoy going to parties where they pretend to be a cow and get milked. The public figure uses the law to squash the anonymous posts. The person who posted it doesn't care. The public figure has taken the bait, and the information which would have remained hidden, and likely disputed on a small board, isn now national news. The poster does nothing, the post is deleted, but every search of this public figure now includes the allegation/fact that he pretends to be a cow at sex parties. What was a silly statement is a credible accusation. Why else would he take the trouble to have it removed?
The fact is that many politicians do understand the internet. One thing Obama did right is to let the birther allegations do their work on the internet until they just extinguished themselves. For most of the controversy he stayed out. Many are not so wise, engaging with the people who are just trying to get attention. Can you imagine how happy Trump would have been if the president actually acknowledged him? Ofttimes on life and online the best strategy is just to walk away.
And the Nobel prize is more likely to reward science, rather than what passes for 'medical research'. Don't get me wrong, I know some life scientist, and read some life science, that conducts good rigorous work, but is that the exception rather then the rule?
Most of the so-called innovative ideas are really just a way to filter those easy to educate into cheaper platform. Some of these, like Kahn academy are harmless. Other, such as charter schools, can be more of leech on the educational dollars. High stakes testing is simply a method to transfer money from the tax payer to Pearsons.
For the online college courses, the issue is really cost. If the courses are pay for service, then we need to educate high school counselors and kids that they are likely not as effective as a community college situation where they are set up to help challenging students. If it free, there is no harm done except a students wasted time, which sometimes is the best learning experience.
This seems to be a very confused book that, from the review, has basic misunderstandings of How Things Work.
First, when finding a utilizing an algorithm the goal should be find a problem similar to the one you are working, then see what kind of solutions that were used to solve that problem. If you can't find a similar problem, then you can probably still find parts of the problem that are similar to other. For instance,many problems require sorting, and the sorting algorithms are pretty much there and working.
It is true that one a problem is solved, refinement and review are necessary. But this is not just done for the sake of change or to get what might be a small improvement on a proven solution. It is done because the problem changes. For instance, consumer may not longer be receptive to a certain ingredient, or an indigent may not be affordable, so the solutions must be reworked to accomodate that change.
Second a Chef does not only create innovative dishes. The primary goal is management of the kitchen, which means ordering, managing, and most critically, designing a process so that the various components of a plate get to the plate quickly and in an ordered manner over a short time period. So yes, knowing exactly who has to be where at what time is critical. This is not a matter of cooking, it is an algorithm that cannot be constantly changed. It is a production machine, and one does not test on a production machine.
Now, the Commis does cook, but they do not get to be creative with the dishes. That is the job of Chef de Cuisine, who plans the processes in the kitchen. The Sous-Chef then implements those processes and makes sure the kitchen is clean.
Of course there is a role for creativity, and the ability to create dishes is important. But the creation of dishes would be worthless without the ability to reduce these dishes to an algorithm that can be followed by a trained cook. Anyone who has done non trivial cooking knows, that like in coding, the ability to access standard algorithms are critical. If one wants to make a soufflé or empanadas or chocolate covered fruit or mayonaise the results are disastrous if you ignore the basics. Sure, variation is good, but if you do not clean the steel bowl before beating the white, no amount of creativity is going to save you.
I wish I had such videos when I was a kid so I could learn how to do things better. All I had was a betty crocker cook book in a three ring binder. I knew how to read and follow instructions, so it took me a long way, but still, watching a pro would have been a blessing.
BTW, if you want to do creative cooking,on a budget and entertaining book is An Everlasting Meal. A particularly good line is pounds meat from a tougher part of a happily raised animal and Though it’s easy to forget, leaves and stalks are parts of a vegetable, not obstacles to it.
If a CEO cannot, does not, Google the name of the company, this is a severe lack of due diligence. I do not see how they got funding without looking at branding and the indirect competition the branding might cause.
Look at the Apple Store situation. Think about SEO and how difficult it is going to be to get a the top of a page.The security company that is 30 years old isn't on the top of the page in my browser. And the snake is on the second page. Again, who is going to invest with SEO challenges like that?
Unless they planned to put forth the cash to decimate the indirect competition.
The majority of voters over 45 voted for Romney. The populous has spoken. Older workers want to be fired and replaced with more efficient and cheaper workers.
My understanding is that current cosmology thought, to compensate for the non uniformity of the universe, supposes a rapid inflation in the instant of the Big Bang, more or less. This theory can also lead to the continual and never ending inflation of the universe. Under this scenario the universe dies with energy spreading so thinly that time itself stops, or something like that. There was a great description of this in a popular science magazine a long time ago.
But depending on the shape and certain cosmological constants it is also possible that the expansion will end and the universe will contract. It is open to debate wether this scenario also requires the reversal of time which means that we will be required to live life in reverse. Red Dwarf is clearly on the side that this will happen. I don't know how we would tell.
In any case this finding is interesting because it implies that neither scenario will have the opportunity to come to pass. A quantum fluctuation will end the universe first. The only question is, under the expansion model, if there are parts of the universe that one day might expand at the speed of light, so the fluctuation might never arrive at the edge. Given current values, that might happen when the universe is 100 billion years old. So if the universe only has 10 or 20 billion years left, that will not happen. The universe will just end faster if it is in contraction.
Maybe we can look at it this way. Life on Earth can end by orbital decay, the sun exploding, a meteor hitting it, or man made climate change. Unless we are launching huge number of gravity assist space craft, or figure out how to keep the sun from exploding, the most likely scenario is still that a meteor wipes us out because we are not likely to survive enough to see anything else. Which is what this is saying. We no longer have to worry about whether the universe it to end in heat of cold death. It is simply going to be annihilated.
I am working my way through this book but so far it makes a pretty good case that human development is a combination between genetics and natural resources. For instance, it talks of one genetically identical group, separated over a long period of time to two disimilar environments, and when they met again one slaughtered the other.
He talks of certain events happening repeated in different groups and at different times. For instance, the development of crops and the different rates of adoption of those crops, even by neighbors who can be assumed to genetically similar.
This really has nothing to do with fear, anymore than saying that a light bulb is turned on by a human flipping a switch and not a human praying to a god who then allows the flip to be switched. It has to do with a long line of research that shows simplifying variation amount humans is problematic, and mostly a result of forcing generalities. For instance, asian people are short and thin is a genetic disposition. But when fed an western diet, many become tall and fatter.
We all know that economist are basically are free to say whatever they want, because really, they make no testable conclusions. Cutting income does increase the amount of stuff we can buy, because, really,, how can we say that it is the conclusion that is incorrect and not just that we are too stupid to apply it. OTOH, if a geneticist says something, and it later proved false, the gentisist is not free to go around and say that her failure is caused by the lame media, and not bad science.
I really wonder how much Google makes from these sites. It seems to me as powerful as google is, they could significantly disable these sites simply by not accepted revenue, modifying the search results to demote them, and punish sites who link to these sites.
For many searches, I still get results that put link and ad farms at the top, while those that are more likely to give original information are demoted.
To me this looks like Google is trying to make sure that if it can't make money on something, no one can. I don't see why it has the right to go out and strong arm other private companies. if something is illegal, let the law take care of it. If Google wants to make the world a better place, start by trying to do so good, instead of just avoiding evil.
2) it is plausible they are cherry picking data so they can sue on behalf of people who get sick
3) did they have an objective epidemiologist on the team. If they just went through the databases without one, they can easily find whatever patterns they are looking for.
4) Did they have an objective statition on the team. Again, it is easy to find patterns.
This advice cannot be overstated. The benefits cannot be overstated. When I travel, and am going to be there a week, I try to get a bit of local honey. It really helps with my allergies. It also provides an unique local flavor. Yes it does cost more and many will complain that the flavor is inconsistent, but do we really want to live in a world where everything is made to minimize cost and maximize consistency. I am sure that many do. For those who don't, local honey is one way to make the world a less banal place.
In the current model, each state gets and equal say in the senate and two extra votes in the electoral college, no matter if anyone actually lives in the state. The upshot in the senate less than two percent of the population controls over 10% of the votes. In the electoral college these same 2% control almost 4% fo the votes.
Yet this does not quite completely indicate the problem. The number of states with few residents is increasing, In 2000 Bush was elected partially because the small states banded together and used there excessive influence to elect a person that was not the clear popular choice. Today policies that are the clear popular choice for the vast majority of americans are being usurped for the benefit of small states.
We are a federalist government, so states even with no people have a valid claim to power. But if we rationed power by people, then the US would be a very different place.
If contractors knew that they projects would be cancelled, and maybe even be sued for breech of contract, we may not be wasting money like we are. In my state I see roads being built, software being delivered, all the time on budget and on time. it may not be the best but it is adequate. But it seems to be ok to spec the project inadequately, provide minimal funding knowing that more can be asked for later, just to con the tax payers into accepting a worthless or expensive project.
We see this all the time in the military. A low estimate is given on a minimally speced out project. Then as the project money is spent, the agencies go back to the congress and ask for more money, saying we already spent this money, and it won' really work the way we need it to. Instead of firing the con artists, and suing the contractors, and accepting the money as lost, we fund it more thus encouraging the fraudulent behavior.
This might make sense if it was an Android tablet. MS could include this as part of licensing and gain revenue from every tablet that a firm owns. More likely, however, it would be a rear guard action, insuring that users continue to use the MS products as they do more editing on mobile devices.
As far as iPad goes, MS Office for iPad would just be a profit center for Apple(30%? of sale price goes to Apple) and would solidify the iPad as The Tablet, something that MS clearly does not want to happen given the Great Surface Hope.
Honestly Pages, Keynote and Numbers pretty much do everything I need to do, for a price of around $100, not connected to a single machine, not subscriber, not subject to MS coming in and auditing my machines if they feel they need more cash. Google Docs is working better on mobile, and of course there is always the open Office Applications. All of these deal with most files better than MS.
Which leads to people who need Outlook, Project, OneNote, and other stuff. Both iOS and Android seem to not have a problem with Outlook email and calendar, so that is not so much an issue. The other stuff is what most people think when they think MS Office. So I would think MS needs to get MS Windows 8 up and running and try to move MS Office to Surface. They are going to have enough trouble moving to a single machine/subscriber model when the rest of the consumer world is moving to free or much more open licensing.
My take away from the NYT story is that if you are driving around, doing whatever it is you do, and not watching you battery consumption, then there is a fair chance that you are going to get stuck. This is also true to a gasoline powered car, but there are more gas stations around, so people are used to not thinking about power consumption.
It also takes an hour to recharge, so you much make plans for that if you are going to be traveling more than a couple hundred miles at a time.
As far as CNN, I don't know what to think about them anymore. I happened to be out and the TV was tuned to CNN and the cruise ship story. The whole gist was about how Carnival was doing all it could, focusing on the size of the ship, and the currents, never talking about how emergencies happen and a responsible firms have contingency plans that don't result in people living for a week in filth. Then they talked about the staff, who even though they earn very little, no one cares because the cruise ship is a party at sea, 24/7, so everyone is having so much fun anyone who could would work for free. In any case most come from very poor country, so the exchange rate is so favorable they are almost being over paid.
The point is that when I am buying something, i almost would rather have a story over the worst case scenario, which is the NYT, than the best case, rosy, mythical scenario, which is what CNN seems to be pushing. It is like a review of a laptop. I want to know if you can't even get through a feature movie before the battery runs out, if the data plan is excessive, if it so fragile that it cannot be carried. It doesn't mean I am not going to buy the machine, or the car, or go on the cruise, but at least I know what to expect
And honestly, a review that really is realistic is pretty rare. Everyone is losing advertisers ro getting sued, like Consumer Reports by the death trap Suziki. Of couse few people own a Suziki, but that did not limit the damage of the courts placing the interests of a corporation above those of the media to provide reasonable, if biased, reviews.
Or he just wanted a few hundred million dollars. Pretty much, as far as I can tell, the guy is not connected to the company anymore. He evidently put a couple hundred thousand dollars int he company way back when, ran the company for a while, and that is about it. All that can be said is he does not think RIM is as good as an investment as some other companies. And not really that since we don't know if he is just needs money.
I can see how my name and email would be sent to developers on the Google Store. It is not like iTunes where Apple controls everything. However, why my adress? When I download something, there has to be an adress associated with my credit card, but I assume that information is not kept on file. When I use a credit card at a random brick and mortar merchant, they make check my ID, but there is not expectation that the sales person is memorizing my personal information and writing it down as I leave.
I am not delusional to think I am so important or attractive that someone having my address will lead to stalking or criminal activity, but most of us do not broadcast our address in this manner. It is one big advantage of not having a land line.
It is just another example of Google being a bit too free with personal information.
People are scared of kids. They criminalize things kids do. Look at the war on drugs. A few kids started using, and all hell broke lose. Social status plays an issue. Middle class parents don't like their kids offing themselves, but don't have resources to stop it. Politicians are especially afraid of lower class urban kids, so they put in place things like the excessive penalties for crack.
Of course when these laws effect someone who is a 'good kid', like a normal looking kid from a good school, then people start thinking maybe it isn't fair. But really, getting into trouble is often a choice. Growing up on a place where the choices were hard and the consequences could be great, I can tell you the choice is often not clear, even in those circumstances. But the solution is to look at why we want to criminalize so much behavior, not focusing on an unfortunate person who may be a victim.
Although I understand and support Apple's dock connector(historically USB was unreliable and slow, so a combined USB firewire port was great for many of us) USB is sufficient now, and the proprietary connector seems a bit outdated. I would hope that Apple would put a simple micro USB. It wold be a good mass storage device.
I did not want to kill all those people, i have to play the hand I was dealt. It is not like I have the ability to just walk away from the table and not interact with agencies I don't agree with. I don't want to gamble, I have to. The government makes me.
Ron Paul is a free individual. He has a choice. No one forces us to do anything. For example, no one has to pay taxes, one just has to have the willingness to live in a way that no taxes or owed, or are willing to do what it takes to avoid it. All of us have choices. The choices may be hard. The only people who say 'we have to play the cards we are dealt' are those that don't want to take responsibility for their choices.
Slashdot Mirror
Furthermore, why are we paying these kids for the first four months. The reduction in pay over others already indicates that they are of little value. Why not just give them room, board, and stipend? If someone really wants the opportunity to serve their country, they should be willing to do so without compensation. I mean a teacher does not get paid to get certification, in fact has to pay for it. Yet a recruit get paid to eat food provided by the taxpayer.
What is even more distressing is we are accepting all these recruits, many unhealthy, and we working taxpayers are going to be on the hook for their medical care for their entire life. We pay for stroke, heart attack, even diabetes because the veteran knows the tax payer is at risk, not the veteran. This is not me talking, this is what all the conservatives say. Government health care just makes people sicker. And in 2009 the income restrictions on this care were reduced to let even more veterans, many who could afford private insurance, get this tax payer funding windfall.
The pentagon, just like any other corporation, is bloated with middle manager officers who only concern is spending a budget so they can justify their own positions, many of which could be eliminated. Which would eliminate their budget. And 40 years of funding the health care of the unhealthy.
For the iPhone, it might be a simple deal. A police report is filed, the serial number is reported to Apple, and Apple reports the fact to the carriers who then refuse to activate and confiscate the phone. This obviousy would kill the market for stolen phones, and damage the market for used phones enough to significantly kill Apples share of the market. I suspect that many can afford to upgrade to new apple phones because they can sell the old ones.
Which is why a political solution is necessary. Level the playing field. Make a federal law that says the carriers must maintain a list of phones reported stolen,refuse to activate those phones that are stolen, and confiscate if possible. Create a penalty for falsely reports of stolen phones. This can also be done with tablets and netbooks with cellular service. But it is one of those cases where regulation is the only way to create a level playing field. One would be crazy to take a unilateral approach.
OTOH, non cellular devices would be a different matter. The only thing that can be done here is for Apple to brick devices reported stolen when connected to the Apple servers. This be risky, as it would, as stated, put Apple at a competitive disadvantage.
OTOH, some treatments and testing is found to be ineffective or unnecessary in most cases. Lawsuits and the revenue generated from the procedures can provide resistance to the elimination of these procedures. Treatment of some slow growing cancers is one of these. Pap smears and mammograms is another.
Then there is the whole pharmacy industry that depends on people solving problems through drugs rather than discipline and life style changes..
Overall I think it is good for doctors to look at procedures they might be overusing, and a legal framework that allows and encourages them to modify their behavior. Not necessarily because it will save money, but because it can increase safety and allow us to focus on effectiveness.
So here is how I see this going down. Some public figure get pissed off because some anonymous person has said they enjoy going to parties where they pretend to be a cow and get milked. The public figure uses the law to squash the anonymous posts. The person who posted it doesn't care. The public figure has taken the bait, and the information which would have remained hidden, and likely disputed on a small board, isn now national news. The poster does nothing, the post is deleted, but every search of this public figure now includes the allegation/fact that he pretends to be a cow at sex parties. What was a silly statement is a credible accusation. Why else would he take the trouble to have it removed?
The fact is that many politicians do understand the internet. One thing Obama did right is to let the birther allegations do their work on the internet until they just extinguished themselves. For most of the controversy he stayed out. Many are not so wise, engaging with the people who are just trying to get attention. Can you imagine how happy Trump would have been if the president actually acknowledged him? Ofttimes on life and online the best strategy is just to walk away.
And the Nobel prize is more likely to reward science, rather than what passes for 'medical research'. Don't get me wrong, I know some life scientist, and read some life science, that conducts good rigorous work, but is that the exception rather then the rule?
For the online college courses, the issue is really cost. If the courses are pay for service, then we need to educate high school counselors and kids that they are likely not as effective as a community college situation where they are set up to help challenging students. If it free, there is no harm done except a students wasted time, which sometimes is the best learning experience.
First, when finding a utilizing an algorithm the goal should be find a problem similar to the one you are working, then see what kind of solutions that were used to solve that problem. If you can't find a similar problem, then you can probably still find parts of the problem that are similar to other. For instance,many problems require sorting, and the sorting algorithms are pretty much there and working.
It is true that one a problem is solved, refinement and review are necessary. But this is not just done for the sake of change or to get what might be a small improvement on a proven solution. It is done because the problem changes. For instance, consumer may not longer be receptive to a certain ingredient, or an indigent may not be affordable, so the solutions must be reworked to accomodate that change.
Second a Chef does not only create innovative dishes. The primary goal is management of the kitchen, which means ordering, managing, and most critically, designing a process so that the various components of a plate get to the plate quickly and in an ordered manner over a short time period. So yes, knowing exactly who has to be where at what time is critical. This is not a matter of cooking, it is an algorithm that cannot be constantly changed. It is a production machine, and one does not test on a production machine.
Now, the Commis does cook, but they do not get to be creative with the dishes. That is the job of Chef de Cuisine, who plans the processes in the kitchen. The Sous-Chef then implements those processes and makes sure the kitchen is clean.
Of course there is a role for creativity, and the ability to create dishes is important. But the creation of dishes would be worthless without the ability to reduce these dishes to an algorithm that can be followed by a trained cook. Anyone who has done non trivial cooking knows, that like in coding, the ability to access standard algorithms are critical. If one wants to make a soufflé or empanadas or chocolate covered fruit or mayonaise the results are disastrous if you ignore the basics. Sure, variation is good, but if you do not clean the steel bowl before beating the white, no amount of creativity is going to save you.
I wish I had such videos when I was a kid so I could learn how to do things better. All I had was a betty crocker cook book in a three ring binder. I knew how to read and follow instructions, so it took me a long way, but still, watching a pro would have been a blessing.
BTW, if you want to do creative cooking,on a budget and entertaining book is An Everlasting Meal. A particularly good line is pounds meat from a tougher part of a happily raised animal and Though it’s easy to forget, leaves and stalks are parts of a vegetable, not obstacles to it.
It is the scarlet letter.
Look at the Apple Store situation. Think about SEO and how difficult it is going to be to get a the top of a page.The security company that is 30 years old isn't on the top of the page in my browser. And the snake is on the second page. Again, who is going to invest with SEO challenges like that?
Unless they planned to put forth the cash to decimate the indirect competition.
The majority of voters over 45 voted for Romney. The populous has spoken. Older workers want to be fired and replaced with more efficient and cheaper workers.
But depending on the shape and certain cosmological constants it is also possible that the expansion will end and the universe will contract. It is open to debate wether this scenario also requires the reversal of time which means that we will be required to live life in reverse. Red Dwarf is clearly on the side that this will happen. I don't know how we would tell.
In any case this finding is interesting because it implies that neither scenario will have the opportunity to come to pass. A quantum fluctuation will end the universe first. The only question is, under the expansion model, if there are parts of the universe that one day might expand at the speed of light, so the fluctuation might never arrive at the edge. Given current values, that might happen when the universe is 100 billion years old. So if the universe only has 10 or 20 billion years left, that will not happen. The universe will just end faster if it is in contraction.
Maybe we can look at it this way. Life on Earth can end by orbital decay, the sun exploding, a meteor hitting it, or man made climate change. Unless we are launching huge number of gravity assist space craft, or figure out how to keep the sun from exploding, the most likely scenario is still that a meteor wipes us out because we are not likely to survive enough to see anything else. Which is what this is saying. We no longer have to worry about whether the universe it to end in heat of cold death. It is simply going to be annihilated.
What is that, once an orbit? Does this mean they lost routing from other stations, and can only communicate when over US receivers?
He talks of certain events happening repeated in different groups and at different times. For instance, the development of crops and the different rates of adoption of those crops, even by neighbors who can be assumed to genetically similar.
This really has nothing to do with fear, anymore than saying that a light bulb is turned on by a human flipping a switch and not a human praying to a god who then allows the flip to be switched. It has to do with a long line of research that shows simplifying variation amount humans is problematic, and mostly a result of forcing generalities. For instance, asian people are short and thin is a genetic disposition. But when fed an western diet, many become tall and fatter.
We all know that economist are basically are free to say whatever they want, because really, they make no testable conclusions. Cutting income does increase the amount of stuff we can buy, because, really,, how can we say that it is the conclusion that is incorrect and not just that we are too stupid to apply it. OTOH, if a geneticist says something, and it later proved false, the gentisist is not free to go around and say that her failure is caused by the lame media, and not bad science.
For many searches, I still get results that put link and ad farms at the top, while those that are more likely to give original information are demoted.
To me this looks like Google is trying to make sure that if it can't make money on something, no one can. I don't see why it has the right to go out and strong arm other private companies. if something is illegal, let the law take care of it. If Google wants to make the world a better place, start by trying to do so good, instead of just avoiding evil.
2) it is plausible they are cherry picking data so they can sue on behalf of people who get sick
3) did they have an objective epidemiologist on the team. If they just went through the databases without one, they can easily find whatever patterns they are looking for.
4) Did they have an objective statition on the team. Again, it is easy to find patterns.
This advice cannot be overstated. The benefits cannot be overstated. When I travel, and am going to be there a week, I try to get a bit of local honey. It really helps with my allergies. It also provides an unique local flavor. Yes it does cost more and many will complain that the flavor is inconsistent, but do we really want to live in a world where everything is made to minimize cost and maximize consistency. I am sure that many do. For those who don't, local honey is one way to make the world a less banal place.
Yet this does not quite completely indicate the problem. The number of states with few residents is increasing, In 2000 Bush was elected partially because the small states banded together and used there excessive influence to elect a person that was not the clear popular choice. Today policies that are the clear popular choice for the vast majority of americans are being usurped for the benefit of small states.
We are a federalist government, so states even with no people have a valid claim to power. But if we rationed power by people, then the US would be a very different place.
We see this all the time in the military. A low estimate is given on a minimally speced out project. Then as the project money is spent, the agencies go back to the congress and ask for more money, saying we already spent this money, and it won' really work the way we need it to. Instead of firing the con artists, and suing the contractors, and accepting the money as lost, we fund it more thus encouraging the fraudulent behavior.
As far as iPad goes, MS Office for iPad would just be a profit center for Apple(30%? of sale price goes to Apple) and would solidify the iPad as The Tablet, something that MS clearly does not want to happen given the Great Surface Hope.
Honestly Pages, Keynote and Numbers pretty much do everything I need to do, for a price of around $100, not connected to a single machine, not subscriber, not subject to MS coming in and auditing my machines if they feel they need more cash. Google Docs is working better on mobile, and of course there is always the open Office Applications. All of these deal with most files better than MS.
Which leads to people who need Outlook, Project, OneNote, and other stuff. Both iOS and Android seem to not have a problem with Outlook email and calendar, so that is not so much an issue. The other stuff is what most people think when they think MS Office. So I would think MS needs to get MS Windows 8 up and running and try to move MS Office to Surface. They are going to have enough trouble moving to a single machine/subscriber model when the rest of the consumer world is moving to free or much more open licensing.
It also takes an hour to recharge, so you much make plans for that if you are going to be traveling more than a couple hundred miles at a time.
As far as CNN, I don't know what to think about them anymore. I happened to be out and the TV was tuned to CNN and the cruise ship story. The whole gist was about how Carnival was doing all it could, focusing on the size of the ship, and the currents, never talking about how emergencies happen and a responsible firms have contingency plans that don't result in people living for a week in filth. Then they talked about the staff, who even though they earn very little, no one cares because the cruise ship is a party at sea, 24/7, so everyone is having so much fun anyone who could would work for free. In any case most come from very poor country, so the exchange rate is so favorable they are almost being over paid.
The point is that when I am buying something, i almost would rather have a story over the worst case scenario, which is the NYT, than the best case, rosy, mythical scenario, which is what CNN seems to be pushing. It is like a review of a laptop. I want to know if you can't even get through a feature movie before the battery runs out, if the data plan is excessive, if it so fragile that it cannot be carried. It doesn't mean I am not going to buy the machine, or the car, or go on the cruise, but at least I know what to expect
And honestly, a review that really is realistic is pretty rare. Everyone is losing advertisers ro getting sued, like Consumer Reports by the death trap Suziki. Of couse few people own a Suziki, but that did not limit the damage of the courts placing the interests of a corporation above those of the media to provide reasonable, if biased, reviews.
Or he just wanted a few hundred million dollars. Pretty much, as far as I can tell, the guy is not connected to the company anymore. He evidently put a couple hundred thousand dollars int he company way back when, ran the company for a while, and that is about it. All that can be said is he does not think RIM is as good as an investment as some other companies. And not really that since we don't know if he is just needs money.
I am not delusional to think I am so important or attractive that someone having my address will lead to stalking or criminal activity, but most of us do not broadcast our address in this manner. It is one big advantage of not having a land line.
It is just another example of Google being a bit too free with personal information.
Of course when these laws effect someone who is a 'good kid', like a normal looking kid from a good school, then people start thinking maybe it isn't fair. But really, getting into trouble is often a choice. Growing up on a place where the choices were hard and the consequences could be great, I can tell you the choice is often not clear, even in those circumstances. But the solution is to look at why we want to criminalize so much behavior, not focusing on an unfortunate person who may be a victim.
Although I understand and support Apple's dock connector(historically USB was unreliable and slow, so a combined USB firewire port was great for many of us) USB is sufficient now, and the proprietary connector seems a bit outdated. I would hope that Apple would put a simple micro USB. It wold be a good mass storage device.
Ron Paul is a free individual. He has a choice. No one forces us to do anything. For example, no one has to pay taxes, one just has to have the willingness to live in a way that no taxes or owed, or are willing to do what it takes to avoid it. All of us have choices. The choices may be hard. The only people who say 'we have to play the cards we are dealt' are those that don't want to take responsibility for their choices.