I expect (based on your info) we'll be seeing a massive influx of manufacturing from Apple, Dell, HP, et al.
How exactly to you reach that sarcastic conclusion based on what GP wrote? His/her point was that the non-material cost differential (I'm assuming this is including shipping the unit from Asia to the US) was about $17 per unit. Obviously when you'r selling tens of millions of units a quarter, this is not an insignificant sum.
But, that cost increase would not cause Apple to up prices 300% and be unprofitable, which was baseless assertion you made.
But if the state is going to subsidize speech or expression by providing Internet terminals, then b the First Ammendment it shouldn't decide which speech is permissible (with certain exceptions, none which apply here). You wouldn't want th government to filter Green Party websites, or Al Jazeera, or art blogs featuring nudes, would you?
I use Netflix Streaming several hours a week. My kids use it even more. There are no ads, no unskippable bits, and no bonus material. On some titles there is a distributor logo at the head (5 seconds), but that's it. We use it mostly to watch recent television series that we missed (e.g. Arrested Development, Breaking Bad for my wife and I, Power Rangers, Fireman Sam for the kids). Occasionally we'll find a movie we want to watch, but the selection is . . . eclectic, to put it kindly. And sometimes the licensing deal expires when you're halfway through a series, which is annoying.
Best of all, it's convenient. It's fairly quick to start up on my Sony IPTV and my Roku - probably 30-45 seconds from the time the tv is turned on to when the show starts queueing the stream, and about another 10-20 seconds to start the stream.
Very occasionally we get "content errors" and it doesn't play, but repeated tries will work after about 5 minutes. I've also seen a message 2 or 3 times telling me that I'm streaming on another device, and our account is only allowed one simultaneous stream, but most of the time one kid is watching on the iPad, the other on the TV, and we don't have problems.
However, there are times where I suspect Time Warner is throttling my internet connection, but that's probably just paranoia from hanging out on/. too much.
Overall, I give Netflix streaming a big thumbs up. Cheapest (legal) video entertainment around.
This is not a substance argument, it is a FORM argument, and thus attacking me with "but it really is dangerous!" is completely beside the point, because that's not what I was arguing. I knew 2,3,4-T was harmful, the point was that the article doesn't establish WHY it is harmful in its own right.
I don't disagree with you, but going into that level of chemistry is probably going to make even NPR listeners/readers glaze over. Using the AO shortcut might not be the best way to present the argument from a scientific point, but since they're presenting to a popular audience I don't personally have a huge issue with it.
BestBuy/Target/OfficeMax dictate to the store manager where things go.
I'm not sure about your examples, but that's not the case for Costco, at least for food.
I used to work for a food manufacturer who's biggest customer was Costco. On of the constant drumbeats for our merchandisers was to push the store manager (the manager of that section of the store, not the GM) for more/better shelf space. "Did we get the End Cap? Are they giving us more space for the salads?" Some of this was dictated from higher levels (and the company would exert what pressure they could on the Costco Buyer and regional managers), but the individual store managers did have a degree of discretion.
This may not have been the case in other areas of the store with longer shelf life items (e.g. electronics, dry goods), or in other chains. We dealt with perishable products, so that may have been the deciding factor - the store needed to be more nimble to deal with items that spoils in 7 days.
Because free speech is a natural right that all human beings are born with. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with "western values" (whatever the hell those are). The fact is that all human beings have the ability to engage in free speech; Governments or individuals may punish you for exercising that ability but the ability is still there. It's the same with the 2nd Amendment really -- you can regulate weapons all you want but people can still obtain and use them. Doubt this? Ask the guy who just got shanked in prison if the person who stabbed him didn't keep and bear arms.
I should probably read up a bit on Natural Rights, but.....
Where do you draw the line? All human beings have the ability to hit a child. Does that mean that hitting children is a Natural Right? Realistically, I agree that Speech is a Natural Right, but philosophically I have an issue with how you present the case. I don't necessarily agree that because a prisoner can get access to a weapon that all Men have a Natural Right to bear arms. Likewise for "drugs". While I would argue that most, if not all drugs should be legal, I'm not sure that we have a Natural Right to drug possession or use. Perhaps I'm being a bit too strict though, as my thoughts are that there are times when it is necessary to restrict the right of drug/weapon possession or use. But likewise, there are times when it is appropriate to restrict speech rights, and I would agree that it is a Natural Right, so it appears that Natural Rights can and should (imo) be abridged in some cases. Interesting stuff....
Oh, he's still funny. But the grammatical structure of the original post is irrelevant. It stilled conveyed meaning. GGP (and about 4 moderators) knew exactly what the GGGP was getting at, enough to make a meta-meme joke.
I know wikipedia is broad, but if the trial in question has it's own wikipedia page, then it's probably interesting enough for me to want to be on the jury.
I've been called twice, and served once. When I served, it was as the 2nd of 2 alternates on a personal injury case (rear-ended on the freeway). It was a boring case of she said-she said, and it took the jury all of 10 minutes to come back with a ruling of no-fault/no-damages (the plaintiff was the one who rear-ended the defendant). The case was boring, and it sucked having to sit through all of it and not getting to at least be part of the deliberations, but it was very interesting to observe the operations of the court. I guess I'm kind of a law geek.
The second time was a murder case with hate-crime attachment, and I missed selection by a wide margin. It happened the week before Yom Kippur, so a lot of the Jewish people were trying to get out of it for that reason. The Judge finally said, "Anyone can be excused for religious cause, but you have to go back downstairs and get re-assigned to a different week." Some people who had sufficiently high numbers* rolled the dice and ended up not getting selected.
*We were number 1-50, with 1-12 starting in the box. Throughout voir-dire some would get excused and the next would take their place. I was in the low 40s, and didn't come close to getting picked.
Slashdot Mirror
I expect (based on your info) we'll be seeing a massive influx of manufacturing from Apple, Dell, HP, et al.
How exactly to you reach that sarcastic conclusion based on what GP wrote? His/her point was that the non-material cost differential (I'm assuming this is including shipping the unit from Asia to the US) was about $17 per unit. Obviously when you'r selling tens of millions of units a quarter, this is not an insignificant sum.
But, that cost increase would not cause Apple to up prices 300% and be unprofitable, which was baseless assertion you made.
award money to pull a currently project gutenberg free public domain book up to current standards.
How much to update Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica?
Quite a lot of people used them to donate to the Haiti Earthquake relief effort.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/HaitiEarthquake/haiti-earthquake-donations-haiti-relief-efforts-text-message/story?id=9551199#.TzAdM8XQInE
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/charity/haiti.asp
But if the state is going to subsidize speech or expression by providing Internet terminals, then b the First Ammendment it shouldn't decide which speech is permissible (with certain exceptions, none which apply here). You wouldn't want th government to filter Green Party websites, or Al Jazeera, or art blogs featuring nudes, would you?
Each of those wars would have happened had a Republican been in office.
All you did is flip a coin 4 times and get heads 4 times.
I use Netflix Streaming several hours a week. My kids use it even more. There are no ads, no unskippable bits, and no bonus material. On some titles there is a distributor logo at the head (5 seconds), but that's it. We use it mostly to watch recent television series that we missed (e.g. Arrested Development, Breaking Bad for my wife and I, Power Rangers, Fireman Sam for the kids). Occasionally we'll find a movie we want to watch, but the selection is . . . eclectic, to put it kindly. And sometimes the licensing deal expires when you're halfway through a series, which is annoying.
Best of all, it's convenient. It's fairly quick to start up on my Sony IPTV and my Roku - probably 30-45 seconds from the time the tv is turned on to when the show starts queueing the stream, and about another 10-20 seconds to start the stream.
Very occasionally we get "content errors" and it doesn't play, but repeated tries will work after about 5 minutes. I've also seen a message 2 or 3 times telling me that I'm streaming on another device, and our account is only allowed one simultaneous stream, but most of the time one kid is watching on the iPad, the other on the TV, and we don't have problems.
However, there are times where I suspect Time Warner is throttling my internet connection, but that's probably just paranoia from hanging out on /. too much.
Overall, I give Netflix streaming a big thumbs up. Cheapest (legal) video entertainment around.
"That's quite a diction, but it's not as nice as your dad's."
A modicum of facts [wikipedia.org]
A salute you for the diction of your hypertext.
This is not a substance argument, it is a FORM argument, and thus attacking me with "but it really is dangerous!" is completely beside the point, because that's not what I was arguing. I knew 2,3,4-T was harmful, the point was that the article doesn't establish WHY it is harmful in its own right.
I don't disagree with you, but going into that level of chemistry is probably going to make even NPR listeners/readers glaze over. Using the AO shortcut might not be the best way to present the argument from a scientific point, but since they're presenting to a popular audience I don't personally have a huge issue with it.
Most top tier NCAA football games have more attendance. Aren't the stadiums at Michigan and Penn State the largest, and consistently sold out?
BestBuy/Target/OfficeMax dictate to the store manager where things go.
I'm not sure about your examples, but that's not the case for Costco, at least for food.
I used to work for a food manufacturer who's biggest customer was Costco. On of the constant drumbeats for our merchandisers was to push the store manager (the manager of that section of the store, not the GM) for more/better shelf space. "Did we get the End Cap? Are they giving us more space for the salads?" Some of this was dictated from higher levels (and the company would exert what pressure they could on the Costco Buyer and regional managers), but the individual store managers did have a degree of discretion.
This may not have been the case in other areas of the store with longer shelf life items (e.g. electronics, dry goods), or in other chains. We dealt with perishable products, so that may have been the deciding factor - the store needed to be more nimble to deal with items that spoils in 7 days.
To be fair, that flaw exists under the current model too. Hell, it exists under *any* model.
Perhaps the algorithm thought you were using a Brian Eno album as the soundtrack.
UMG had a 2010 EBITA of 471 million euros (about $622 million USD).
Double Malware
[Ottoman's voice]
"You know that malware.... that's like....Double Malware??"
Actually, you could do it with uuencode,
Man, you just brought back memories of sitting in my dorm room, cruising alt.binaries and stitching my porn together by hand.
Because free speech is a natural right that all human beings are born with. It has absolutely nothing at all to do with "western values" (whatever the hell those are). The fact is that all human beings have the ability to engage in free speech; Governments or individuals may punish you for exercising that ability but the ability is still there. It's the same with the 2nd Amendment really -- you can regulate weapons all you want but people can still obtain and use them. Doubt this? Ask the guy who just got shanked in prison if the person who stabbed him didn't keep and bear arms.
I should probably read up a bit on Natural Rights, but.....
Where do you draw the line? All human beings have the ability to hit a child. Does that mean that hitting children is a Natural Right? Realistically, I agree that Speech is a Natural Right, but philosophically I have an issue with how you present the case. I don't necessarily agree that because a prisoner can get access to a weapon that all Men have a Natural Right to bear arms. Likewise for "drugs". While I would argue that most, if not all drugs should be legal, I'm not sure that we have a Natural Right to drug possession or use. Perhaps I'm being a bit too strict though, as my thoughts are that there are times when it is necessary to restrict the right of drug/weapon possession or use. But likewise, there are times when it is appropriate to restrict speech rights, and I would agree that it is a Natural Right, so it appears that Natural Rights can and should (imo) be abridged in some cases. Interesting stuff....
Actually, one is a scarily accurate copy. He has the same double-crown cowlick, is extremely shy and moody, and loves Star Wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P_versus_NP_problem
Ow.
Sorry, not doing your research for you.
(after all, I do not copy a lot of physical objects).
My wife and I made two little copies of me.
TSA also recently started set up some checkpoints along interstates.
Citation needed. I saw that claimed in an earlier comment thread and it was debunked then.
Oh, he's still funny. But the grammatical structure of the original post is irrelevant. It stilled conveyed meaning. GGP (and about 4 moderators) knew exactly what the GGGP was getting at, enough to make a meta-meme joke.
You can't have contact after the trial? Seems a bit much.
now it means not to read wikipedia
I know wikipedia is broad, but if the trial in question has it's own wikipedia page, then it's probably interesting enough for me to want to be on the jury.
I've been called twice, and served once. When I served, it was as the 2nd of 2 alternates on a personal injury case (rear-ended on the freeway). It was a boring case of she said-she said, and it took the jury all of 10 minutes to come back with a ruling of no-fault/no-damages (the plaintiff was the one who rear-ended the defendant). The case was boring, and it sucked having to sit through all of it and not getting to at least be part of the deliberations, but it was very interesting to observe the operations of the court. I guess I'm kind of a law geek.
The second time was a murder case with hate-crime attachment, and I missed selection by a wide margin. It happened the week before Yom Kippur, so a lot of the Jewish people were trying to get out of it for that reason. The Judge finally said, "Anyone can be excused for religious cause, but you have to go back downstairs and get re-assigned to a different week." Some people who had sufficiently high numbers* rolled the dice and ended up not getting selected.
*We were number 1-50, with 1-12 starting in the box. Throughout voir-dire some would get excused and the next would take their place. I was in the low 40s, and didn't come close to getting picked.