Total bollocks. Do the maths before posting nonsense.
They want to maximise their minimum expected gain from either outcome. In a simple 2-choice scenario the expected gain is a fairly simple curved surface, and that minimum will be where the expected gain from both outcomes is the same. (And were it not for various frictions, and lack of perfect information, that gain would be precisely zero.)
So yes, they're looking for balance, but that balance doesn't necessarily occur at the 50/50 point you claim. (Which was patently absurd, as each member of the population was being weighted equally in your statement, no matter what their stake was.)
It's true to say that bookmakers, if doing their job correctly, shouldn't care who wins.
I'm not sure if new paradigms are what are needed.
The ribbon was a paradigm shift, and, even after being very impressed after seeing a great long presentation about how MS were doing all the right things when it came to usability testing and the ribbon, I finally sat in front of a machine with it. And immediately started drooling. And I now realise why people press space to get to the correct column on the next line. Almost none of the core *semantic* functionality was anywhere to be seen. I managed to change to a funky font and change the colours, and then embed a youtube video, sure, and then mail that out to everyone in my contacts list, but wasn't able to create a clear structured document.
Going back to basics is what's needed.
MS did their research well, and made the most often *used* functionality easier to hand, but not the most *useful* functionality. There's been an evolutionary race where the fitness function is on the companies' side slickness, and on the users' side coolness. We've ended up with 8-legged toy poodles with giraffes' necks and elephants' trunks.
Best WYSINWYG (but there's print preview, so the "N" doesn't matter) WP I've ever used? I'm pretty sure it's MS Word 2.0. And I'm a died-in-the-wool linuxtard.
Star Office, sorry Open Office, sorry OoO, sorry LibreOffice, sorry whatever they're gonna call it by the time I realise there's another name, is shit. It has to have bug-for-bug compatibility with MS Office, for a start. Nothing that attempts to mimic, including retaining the functional flaws, can be considered superior to the original.
(Don't get me wrong, the last 10 versions of MS Office have been shit too. The last office package from MS I had any respect for was MS Word 2.0.)
Maybe people should start learning how to communicate again, rather than getting wizards to create bullshit for them. Every day our office receives documents in the latest.doc-like formats where the authors have used the tab key or the space bar to align text in columns, even across lines. These people, whose jobs are to propagate information, would probably produce a better result if they used vi.
Having said that, if you look at the CSS, it contains elements that are only interpreted by individual browser families, seemingly 3 different ones. So the CSS itself is a 3-language polyglot already.
Any pretence of any kind of portability in the modern web should be ditched. We really have done nothing but go backwards. In several different incompatible ways...
I hate to admitting to reading the fine article (Haakon's ALA article, that is), but as I read it I realised what regions seem to be. They're making HTML a polyglot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyglot_%28computing%29 It's something which appears to have some kind of structure one way (so that search engines can scan it), yet it also has a different structure for parsing a different way (for your browser to render it). Worst of all, it's almost a 3-language polyglot, as the version visible to the browser then shuffles everything so that in theory the human eye sees the right things in the right order (which it doesn't if you use a not-sufficiently-CSS-current browser), which may be completely different from the order in which it sees them
I really don't see this as progress.
Web 5.0 will be a gopher client running under javascript.
GIven that neanderthals were the pale-skinned ones, that's probably a good bet. We can only hope that he does all he can to prevent his own shameful neanderthal genes from being propagated to future generations.
Alas very few of the people who host websites have any.
The problem with a decade ago was tag soup and very questionable semantic integrity.
Now the problem is CSS selector soup instead and html that contains nothing but <div class="whatever"> which contains even less semantic worth than what it replaced.
My mantra is: If your webpage looks shit in lynx, links, and w3m, then you've got a shit webpage.
Disclaimer: I've got a shit webpage that looks shit in every browser, but that's because I don't give a fuck about it. After having one for over 20 years, they kinda get a bit passé.
When it came to local time, you had to conform to it. Time is a purely abstract quantity which can be labelled arbitrarily, there is no surefire way of knowing if a time given to you with the assertion "this is now" is right or wrong. However, you have freedom over which application you wish to render your map data. If you consistently chose a program which renders things in a way which is not in your interest, then perhaps OSM is not the problem, but you yourself are. Nobody is imposing a map on you when you have that freedom. If somebody gives you a localmap and asserts "you are here", and it doesn't appear to correspond to reality, then the best thing to come to your aid is - guess what - Open Street Map, with your own preferred front end.
What you view as a weakness is in fact one of its strengths.
Google maps or whoever do not solve your apparent problem. If the same guy gave you the same localmap and he'd photoshopped "Google" at the bottom, you'd not be in any better position. If anything you might be in a worse position, as you were trusting his data as being from google.
So the US ought to be training Saudis how to fly planes? Look how well that worked out last time.
Knowing whether the people you are teaching are genuinely grateful and thankful, to the extent that they show favour to you later, when they might be able to have some influence, is the hard part.
(Note: the Saudis weren't the pilots, they were the grunts, I know that, but it was easier to say "Saudis" than to remember precisely where the rest of them came from.)
Total bollocks. If the 1% control both of the only two parties that have any chance of getting in, thanks to Duverger's Law having kicked in over a century back, then all it takes is for an election to take place, and that 1% retains control.
I'm curious - which of the two main US parties to you believe is not just a glove-puppet?
It's almost as if the 1% may be aware of this situation, and have encouraged it, for the last century or so...
> Intelligence is critical to allowing governments to have the knowledge to avert wars.
So-called "intelligence" was critical to allowing certain governments to have the knowledge to *start* wars. Is your memory so short? Of course, that "intelligence" was a thin tissue of lies, but who cares, that was the label applied to it at the time by the aggressor.
You expect cars to die eventually, certainly. So yes, you eventually lost that. Unless you sell them before they get to that state, in which case you end up with less money than you bought it for, so have lost.
And how does that relate to my previous posts, you're not being very coherent? The fact that you've completely ignored half of my comparison implies that you've not even been bothered to address the comparison, you've just typed something randomly without understanding what you are responding too.
Well, this would have been my source: http://www.theguardian.com/info/2014/jan/27/1 But they pulled it, as apparently it's not the case any more. Things must have changed several times in the last few years, as I've heard of costs higher than 75c/unit historically.
Presumably they get all the money just from (advertisers who want) users using their services.
Total bollocks. Let's take a random CISCO (nexus 7000, the absolute first technical spec that popped out of a "10gbit phy buffer" google search):
"Port buffers: 1 MB plus 65 MB per port on ingress and 80 MB per port on egress for dedicated mode operation 1 MB per port plus 65 MB shared per 4-port group on ingress and 80 MB per 4-port group on egress in shared mode"
That's higher than several other ones I've seen, and even if you're buying a 32-port switch only to use 8 of the ports, you're still nearly an order of magnitude out. Wanna use all 32, and you're a factor of nearly 30 out.
Samsung were much smaller at the time. They are now pretty much dominant, with a good name, and plenty of marketting muscle.
One of the benefits of Tizen is that it does run on both low end devices and high end ones, so they've got plenty of pots to dip their paws into. It's lower maintenance than Android, as there's much more standard upstream packages, less specific to the platform, and it's way-way-way more open than any other platform. (Though not quite as much as I would have liked.) Will it succeed? I'd like to see it do so, but think it might require a little bit of good fortune.
Disclaimer: last job was working on Tizen for Samsung, parted not on the best of terms, but no grudges borne in either direction.
Those who type a sizeable amount of text, but don't want to carry a laptop around with them. Such as me. I'm perfectly happy with my Nokia N900 with its slide-out keyboard.
By "time" do you mean the time in "a lot of time, after which you lose a lot", or "a small amount of time, after which you lose a little"?
As I'm failing to see how your question and either a yes or no answer to it relates to my point.
Anyway, the answer is yes, so I will quite happily foe people who I consider are illogical idiots, so that I don't have to waste my valuable time reading their crap.
OK, cool; but don't mention his name 3 times, or he may appear... I don't want him on my subthreads, as my time is too valuable to waste even reading his jabberings. He stalked me for a while, and I think was mod-stalking me too (as that happened within days of him starting to stalk me).
Slashdot Mirror
> Even God showed us it was okay to take the day off once in a while.
But he also showed us it was okay to cause earthquakes, volcanic eruptions or whatever.
Why is our goal to merely predict such things, when clearly we get closer to godliness if we cause such things?
Total bollocks. Do the maths before posting nonsense.
They want to maximise their minimum expected gain from either outcome. In a simple 2-choice scenario the expected gain is a fairly simple curved surface, and that minimum will be where the expected gain from both outcomes is the same. (And were it not for various frictions, and lack of perfect information, that gain would be precisely zero.)
So yes, they're looking for balance, but that balance doesn't necessarily occur at the 50/50 point you claim. (Which was patently absurd, as each member of the population was being weighted equally in your statement, no matter what their stake was.)
It's true to say that bookmakers, if doing their job correctly, shouldn't care who wins.
Unfortunately the ultrasonics cause a Karman vortex street, which has been known to induce panic, particularly in snow hikers.
> Turns out determined human with car and mobile beats PODF every time.
Not *every* time. Not the time when PODF is working fine but you've got no mobile coverage.
I'm not sure if new paradigms are what are needed.
The ribbon was a paradigm shift, and, even after being very impressed after seeing a great long presentation about how MS were doing all the right things when it came to usability testing and the ribbon, I finally sat in front of a machine with it. And immediately started drooling. And I now realise why people press space to get to the correct column on the next line. Almost none of the core *semantic* functionality was anywhere to be seen. I managed to change to a funky font and change the colours, and then embed a youtube video, sure, and then mail that out to everyone in my contacts list, but wasn't able to create a clear structured document.
Going back to basics is what's needed.
MS did their research well, and made the most often *used* functionality easier to hand, but not the most *useful* functionality. There's been an evolutionary race where the fitness function is on the companies' side slickness, and on the users' side coolness. We've ended up with 8-legged toy poodles with giraffes' necks and elephants' trunks.
Best WYSINWYG (but there's print preview, so the "N" doesn't matter) WP I've ever used? I'm pretty sure it's MS Word 2.0. And I'm a died-in-the-wool linuxtard.
Star Office, sorry Open Office, sorry OoO, sorry LibreOffice, sorry whatever they're gonna call it by the time I realise there's another name, is shit. It has to have bug-for-bug compatibility with MS Office, for a start. Nothing that attempts to mimic, including retaining the functional flaws, can be considered superior to the original.
.doc-like formats where the authors have used the tab key or the space bar to align text in columns, even across lines. These people, whose jobs are to propagate information, would probably produce a better result if they used vi.
(Don't get me wrong, the last 10 versions of MS Office have been shit too. The last office package from MS I had any respect for was MS Word 2.0.)
Maybe people should start learning how to communicate again, rather than getting wizards to create bullshit for them. Every day our office receives documents in the latest
Having said that, if you look at the CSS, it contains elements that are only interpreted by individual browser families, seemingly 3 different ones. So the CSS itself is a 3-language polyglot already.
Any pretence of any kind of portability in the modern web should be ditched. We really have done nothing but go backwards. In several different incompatible ways...
I hate to admitting to reading the fine article (Haakon's ALA article, that is), but as I read it I realised what regions seem to be.
They're making HTML a polyglot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyglot_%28computing%29
It's something which appears to have some kind of structure one way (so that search engines can scan it), yet it also has a different structure for parsing a different way (for your browser to render it).
Worst of all, it's almost a 3-language polyglot, as the version visible to the browser then shuffles everything so that in theory the human eye sees the right things in the right order (which it doesn't if you use a not-sufficiently-CSS-current browser), which may be completely different from the order in which it sees them
I really don't see this as progress.
Web 5.0 will be a gopher client running under javascript.
GIven that neanderthals were the pale-skinned ones, that's probably a good bet. We can only hope that he does all he can to prevent his own shameful neanderthal genes from being propagated to future generations.
And thank you for following Skitt's Law.
Sense.
Alas very few of the people who host websites have any.
The problem with a decade ago was tag soup and very questionable semantic integrity.
Now the problem is CSS selector soup instead and html that contains nothing but <div class="whatever"> which contains even less semantic worth than what it replaced.
My mantra is:
If your webpage looks shit in lynx, links, and w3m, then you've got a shit webpage.
Disclaimer: I've got a shit webpage that looks shit in every browser, but that's because I don't give a fuck about it. After having one for over 20 years, they kinda get a bit passé.
No similarity at all.
When it came to local time, you had to conform to it. Time is a purely abstract quantity which can be labelled arbitrarily, there is no surefire way of knowing if a time given to you with the assertion "this is now" is right or wrong.
However, you have freedom over which application you wish to render your map data. If you consistently chose a program which renders things in a way which is not in your interest, then perhaps OSM is not the problem, but you yourself are. Nobody is imposing a map on you when you have that freedom. If somebody gives you a localmap and asserts "you are here", and it doesn't appear to correspond to reality, then the best thing to come to your aid is - guess what - Open Street Map, with your own preferred front end.
What you view as a weakness is in fact one of its strengths.
Google maps or whoever do not solve your apparent problem. If the same guy gave you the same localmap and he'd photoshopped "Google" at the bottom, you'd not be in any better position. If anything you might be in a worse position, as you were trusting his data as being from google.
So the US ought to be training Saudis how to fly planes? Look how well that worked out last time.
Knowing whether the people you are teaching are genuinely grateful and thankful, to the extent that they show favour to you later, when they might be able to have some influence, is the hard part.
(Note: the Saudis weren't the pilots, they were the grunts, I know that, but it was easier to say "Saudis" than to remember precisely where the rest of them came from.)
Total bollocks. If the 1% control both of the only two parties that have any chance of getting in, thanks to Duverger's Law having kicked in over a century back, then all it takes is for an election to take place, and that 1% retains control.
I'm curious - which of the two main US parties to you believe is not just a glove-puppet?
It's almost as if the 1% may be aware of this situation, and have encouraged it, for the last century or so...
> Intelligence is critical to allowing governments to have the knowledge to avert wars.
So-called "intelligence" was critical to allowing certain governments to have the knowledge to *start* wars. Is your memory so short? Of course, that "intelligence" was a thin tissue of lies, but who cares, that was the label applied to it at the time by the aggressor.
You expect cars to die eventually, certainly. So yes, you eventually lost that. Unless you sell them before they get to that state, in which case you end up with less money than you bought it for, so have lost.
And how does that relate to my previous posts, you're not being very coherent? The fact that you've completely ignored half of my comparison implies that you've not even been bothered to address the comparison, you've just typed something randomly without understanding what you are responding too.
Me: Compare A to B
You: But A is like C!
Well, this would have been my source:
http://www.theguardian.com/info/2014/jan/27/1
But they pulled it, as apparently it's not the case any more. Things must have changed several times in the last few years, as I've heard of costs higher than 75c/unit historically.
Presumably they get all the money just from (advertisers who want) users using their services.
It can. They pay Google to ship Android on their devices.
Well, they enterred it in 1997, and then left it? Maybe the divorce was painful.
Total bollocks. Let's take a random CISCO (nexus 7000, the absolute first technical spec that popped out of a "10gbit phy buffer" google search):
"Port buffers:
1 MB plus 65 MB per port on ingress and 80 MB per port on egress for dedicated mode operation
1 MB per port plus 65 MB shared per 4-port group on ingress and 80 MB per 4-port group on egress in shared mode"
That's higher than several other ones I've seen, and even if you're buying a 32-port switch only to use 8 of the ports, you're still nearly an order of magnitude out. Wanna use all 32, and you're a factor of nearly 30 out.
Samsung were much smaller at the time. They are now pretty much dominant, with a good name, and plenty of marketting muscle.
One of the benefits of Tizen is that it does run on both low end devices and high end ones, so they've got plenty of pots to dip their paws into. It's lower maintenance than Android, as there's much more standard upstream packages, less specific to the platform, and it's way-way-way more open than any other platform. (Though not quite as much as I would have liked.) Will it succeed? I'd like to see it do so, but think it might require a little bit of good fortune.
Disclaimer: last job was working on Tizen for Samsung, parted not on the best of terms, but no grudges borne in either direction.
Those who type a sizeable amount of text, but don't want to carry a laptop around with them. Such as me. I'm perfectly happy with my Nokia N900 with its slide-out keyboard.
You, sir, have won this thread. Personally I've have made it +5 insightful, but +5 funny's better than nothing.
By "time" do you mean the time in "a lot of time, after which you lose a lot", or "a small amount of time, after which you lose a little"?
As I'm failing to see how your question and either a yes or no answer to it relates to my point.
Anyway, the answer is yes, so I will quite happily foe people who I consider are illogical idiots, so that I don't have to waste my valuable time reading their crap.
Torrents, motherfucker, do you seed it?
OK, cool; but don't mention his name 3 times, or he may appear... I don't want him on my subthreads, as my time is too valuable to waste even reading his jabberings. He stalked me for a while, and I think was mod-stalking me too (as that happened within days of him starting to stalk me).