Ahh... the dawn of Eternal September, when I lost my virginity, matriculated into college and used Mosaic for the first time. Life was certainly never the same afterwards.
I'm no climate scientist, but as I understand it, there is a lot of data that is showing the climate changing. As I understand well above the 95% confidence level.
The real issue is how much of that is man made.
Well, that is true. However, an increasing number of Americans don't even understand that global warming is occurring at all. In a 2005 Fox News poll, 23% said they didn't believe GW was happening (or perhaps didn't know). In a 2010 Virginia Commonwealth University poll it had risen to 29%. And 49% of respondents to the VCU poll think "many scientists have serious doubts about [the evidence for Global Warming].
A CBS poll (same link as above) also shows a trend of Americans thinking GW won't have a serious impact, from 19% in Feb '09 to 24% in April '10 (thought the margin of error is 3 points). Further down on that same page is a Gallup poll. In 1997, 9% of respondents thought GW would "never" be a problem. In 2010 it's up to 19%.
There is a serious effort to portray this as a non-issue. People are being lead to believe that it's not even happening naturally, and that is really dangerous. Man-made or not, global warming/climate change is real. Even the conservative Heartland Institute cites a poll of climate scientists where 82% said that GW/CC is real.
It's important to have a serious scientific debate about the human impact on the environment and the climate. It's doubly important that this debate not be political, which is what it has become.
I'm very interested to see what HBO does with Game of Thrones. When I saw the first previews, I wasn't very enthused, but I recently unpacked all my boxes of books and came across the first book, which I had never read. I'm about 2/3 of the way through it and am really enjoying it. Though, to be honest, the story is more of a political thriller than fantasy (I never watched The Tudors; perhaps this will be somewhat similar in tone?). HBO has shown that they can handle political soap operas very well, so I have high hopes for GoT.
Another poster made the point that a single network can't support itself purely on SF/Fantasy, and there is probably some truth to that. It would be interesting to see HBO take a stab at a SF series. Perhaps the future of quality SF series is through avenues such as HBO (i.e. premium subscription service, high production values, etc.).
My supermarket has paid me hundreds of dollars in exchange for letting them get a little data about my shopping habits.
No they didn't. They raised their prices, then offered you a "discount" back to the original price on select items and at select times in exchange for tracking your purchases of every item all the time*.
Assuming you still use the card/enter your phone number when you're purchasing only items not on special.
I'd be very surprised is a courthouse's wi-fi network is accessible only for a fee. Though, in these days of failing government budgets I guess I shouldn't be.
I have a Blacklist List on Facebook I use for just such situations. All my privacy settings are set to Friends Only Except Blacklist. If I don't want someone to see things, I just add them to the Blacklist. It would work well for FB game friends, but I don't play those. I just wish there was a way to do the reverse - block status updates from some people, but allow them to see mine (and also keep the ability to see their profile, pics, etc.).
Better to have the option to pay for something if you want it, than not to be able to have it at all.
But are you saying that there is no differentiation between the paid mobile subscription and the free web service? That is pretty lame, though if mobile music is worth it to you, then I suppose you'll pay for it. I don't think Pandora works that way.
Yes. Please find an example of an ISP trying to charge content providers for "preferential" access.
I hear this argument a lot, and I've supplied examples to other anti-NNers in the past. Here, others have already beaten me to it. It seems that, like those who claim that Global Warming/Climate Change (man-made or otherwise) is not occurring, people who think ISPs don't want to or won't charge for priority traffic will continue to cling to this belief despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.
It's only slightly less silly than the "NN is not needed - the market will sort it out" argument.
So last.fm will force you to remove the app from your iPhone, or make their service incompatible with it? And that's Apple's fault? They aren't remotely asking for something like that.
What? If last.fm can't (or won't) sell their subscription service through the App Store because of the 30%, and that results in people leaving because last.fm is their killer app, then that's a loss for Apple. It doesn't matter where you assign the blame.
But, if it turns out that a user can get the last.fm service on my Android or Windows phone and not on my iPhone, then it's pretty clear where the problem lays.
Some P/E ratios: Apple = 20 IBM = 14.19 Microsoft = 11.53 Google = 23.77 Cisco = 14.15 GE = 18.66 Ford = 9.54 Exxon 13.5 Chevron = 10.25 Wal-Mart = 13.63
I'd say Apple and Google are overpriced relative to other large tech companies and industrial (and retail) companies.
- Health issues should be private, kept private and not trivialized by news media. - Respect the privacy of others, too many people in the media don't.
So the health of the President should be kept private? It's not newsworthy? Obviously POTUS and SJ are important on different orders of magnitude, but in the realm of the Consumer Electronics and Computer industries, Jobs is about an important player as there is.
Think about it. Would Woz, in a similar situation, be facing the same privacy problems as Jobs? How about Paul Allen?
Good point, though the general public doesn't know who they are, so there wouldn't be nearly the media coverage. A better analogy would be Gates. He doesn't have anything to do with the day-to-day at MS, so the public doesn't have a right to knowledge about his health, and by my view would be entitled to all the privacy most people are asking us to give Jobs. But Jobs' has shown that without him Apple falters, and with him it soars. The likelihood of his being involved in the day to day operations is paramount to the investing decisions of millions of people.
Stockholders. Jobs, love him or hate him, is more important to Apple than probably any CEO has been to his/her respective company ever.
The company has a duty to be forthcoming about their knowledge of his health, and what that means for the future profitability of Apple. If he wanted privacy, he shouldn't have filed an IPO.
Actually nearly all our oil comes from Canada and South America now, so that one is a myth.
Nearly all? Not quite. The Persian Gulf region supplied 18% of the US's crude in 2009. Angola and Nigeria provided another 13.6%, and Russia 2.5%. Yes, Canada, Mexico and Venezuela account 44.2%, but that is hardly "nearly all."
Paid apps can be open source. And iOS is not still trouncing over everyone else. It's current lead doesn't even cover the margin of error of the Nielson analysis. And when you look at new buyers in the last 6 months, the results indicate that Android is, not surprisingly, going to be the leading smart phone OS sometime this year.
Of course, I wouldn't lay this squarely on the shoulders of free or OSS apps, though I'm sure that plays a part. The dominant factor I think is the range of devices and carriers available. It's possible, I suppose, that the Verizon bump iOS will receive may slow down Android's gains, but I'll wager that Android will be the clear leader by the fall or sooner.
As a shareholder of Microsoft, I expect it to do everything in its power to generate profit. I expect its CEO to spread FUD against FOSS at every chance, because that's part of his job description.
I kind of agree with you in spirit, but I think some of this is strategically short-sighted. It's probably in MS's best interest to work against open OSs, but it's very conceivable that fostering the open source community for applications for it's OSs (like Windows Phone) is the best way to maximize profits. Windows Phone will not succeed without a vibrant app ecosystem, regardless of how many phones Nokia manufactures. Actively working against developers in that space is probably a bad idea.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh... the dawn of Eternal September, when I lost my virginity, matriculated into college and used Mosaic for the first time. Life was certainly never the same afterwards.
I'm no climate scientist, but as I understand it, there is a lot of data that is showing the climate changing. As I understand well above the 95% confidence level.
The real issue is how much of that is man made.
Well, that is true. However, an increasing number of Americans don't even understand that global warming is occurring at all. In a 2005 Fox News poll, 23% said they didn't believe GW was happening (or perhaps didn't know). In a 2010 Virginia Commonwealth University poll it had risen to 29%. And 49% of respondents to the VCU poll think "many scientists have serious doubts about [the evidence for Global Warming].
A CBS poll (same link as above) also shows a trend of Americans thinking GW won't have a serious impact, from 19% in Feb '09 to 24% in April '10 (thought the margin of error is 3 points). Further down on that same page is a Gallup poll. In 1997, 9% of respondents thought GW would "never" be a problem. In 2010 it's up to 19%.
There is a serious effort to portray this as a non-issue. People are being lead to believe that it's not even happening naturally, and that is really dangerous. Man-made or not, global warming/climate change is real. Even the conservative Heartland Institute cites a poll of climate scientists where 82% said that GW/CC is real.
It's important to have a serious scientific debate about the human impact on the environment and the climate. It's doubly important that this debate not be political, which is what it has become.
The net amount of water on the planet will pretty much always be the same, thanks to the law of conservation of matter.
I think it probably has more to do with the law of gravity.
I'm very interested to see what HBO does with Game of Thrones. When I saw the first previews, I wasn't very enthused, but I recently unpacked all my boxes of books and came across the first book, which I had never read. I'm about 2/3 of the way through it and am really enjoying it. Though, to be honest, the story is more of a political thriller than fantasy (I never watched The Tudors; perhaps this will be somewhat similar in tone?). HBO has shown that they can handle political soap operas very well, so I have high hopes for GoT.
Another poster made the point that a single network can't support itself purely on SF/Fantasy, and there is probably some truth to that. It would be interesting to see HBO take a stab at a SF series. Perhaps the future of quality SF series is through avenues such as HBO (i.e. premium subscription service, high production values, etc.).
My supermarket has paid me hundreds of dollars in exchange for letting them get a little data about my shopping habits.
No they didn't. They raised their prices, then offered you a "discount" back to the original price on select items and at select times in exchange for tracking your purchases of every item all the time*.
Assuming you still use the card/enter your phone number when you're purchasing only items not on special.
I had the same experience after looking at Surround Sound systems.
I'd be very surprised is a courthouse's wi-fi network is accessible only for a fee. Though, in these days of failing government budgets I guess I shouldn't be.
I have a Blacklist List on Facebook I use for just such situations. All my privacy settings are set to Friends Only Except Blacklist. If I don't want someone to see things, I just add them to the Blacklist. It would work well for FB game friends, but I don't play those. I just wish there was a way to do the reverse - block status updates from some people, but allow them to see mine (and also keep the ability to see their profile, pics, etc.).
Better to have the option to pay for something if you want it, than not to be able to have it at all.
But are you saying that there is no differentiation between the paid mobile subscription and the free web service? That is pretty lame, though if mobile music is worth it to you, then I suppose you'll pay for it. I don't think Pandora works that way.
Yes. Please find an example of an ISP trying to charge content providers for "preferential" access.
I hear this argument a lot, and I've supplied examples to other anti-NNers in the past. Here, others have already beaten me to it. It seems that, like those who claim that Global Warming/Climate Change (man-made or otherwise) is not occurring, people who think ISPs don't want to or won't charge for priority traffic will continue to cling to this belief despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.
It's only slightly less silly than the "NN is not needed - the market will sort it out" argument.
So last.fm will force you to remove the app from your iPhone, or make their service incompatible with it? And that's Apple's fault? They aren't remotely asking for something like that.
What? If last.fm can't (or won't) sell their subscription service through the App Store because of the 30%, and that results in people leaving because last.fm is their killer app, then that's a loss for Apple. It doesn't matter where you assign the blame.
But, if it turns out that a user can get the last.fm service on my Android or Windows phone and not on my iPhone, then it's pretty clear where the problem lays.
Some P/E ratios:
Apple = 20
IBM = 14.19
Microsoft = 11.53
Google = 23.77
Cisco = 14.15
GE = 18.66
Ford = 9.54
Exxon 13.5
Chevron = 10.25
Wal-Mart = 13.63
I'd say Apple and Google are overpriced relative to other large tech companies and industrial (and retail) companies.
and the reasons are multiple...
- Health issues should be private, kept private and not trivialized by news media.
- Respect the privacy of others, too many people in the media don't.
So the health of the President should be kept private? It's not newsworthy? Obviously POTUS and SJ are important on different orders of magnitude, but in the realm of the Consumer Electronics and Computer industries, Jobs is about an important player as there is.
No. I also do not include the possibility of any number of other extremely low probability events.
Think about it. Would Woz, in a similar situation, be facing the same privacy problems as Jobs? How about Paul Allen?
Good point, though the general public doesn't know who they are, so there wouldn't be nearly the media coverage. A better analogy would be Gates. He doesn't have anything to do with the day-to-day at MS, so the public doesn't have a right to knowledge about his health, and by my view would be entitled to all the privacy most people are asking us to give Jobs. But Jobs' has shown that without him Apple falters, and with him it soars. The likelihood of his being involved in the day to day operations is paramount to the investing decisions of millions of people.
Obama better hope he doesn't need a organ transplant. *ducks*
Stockholders. Jobs, love him or hate him, is more important to Apple than probably any CEO has been to his/her respective company ever.
The company has a duty to be forthcoming about their knowledge of his health, and what that means for the future profitability of Apple. If he wanted privacy, he shouldn't have filed an IPO.
Actually nearly all our oil comes from Canada and South America now, so that one is a myth.
Nearly all? Not quite. The Persian Gulf region supplied 18% of the US's crude in 2009. Angola and Nigeria provided another 13.6%, and Russia 2.5%. Yes, Canada, Mexico and Venezuela account 44.2%, but that is hardly "nearly all."
What make you think they have the right to a redress of grievances?
Paid apps can be open source. And iOS is not still trouncing over everyone else. It's current lead doesn't even cover the margin of error of the Nielson analysis. And when you look at new buyers in the last 6 months, the results indicate that Android is, not surprisingly, going to be the leading smart phone OS sometime this year.
Of course, I wouldn't lay this squarely on the shoulders of free or OSS apps, though I'm sure that plays a part. The dominant factor I think is the range of devices and carriers available. It's possible, I suppose, that the Verizon bump iOS will receive may slow down Android's gains, but I'll wager that Android will be the clear leader by the fall or sooner.
As a shareholder of Microsoft, I expect it to do everything in its power to generate profit. I expect its CEO to spread FUD against FOSS at every chance, because that's part of his job description.
I kind of agree with you in spirit, but I think some of this is strategically short-sighted. It's probably in MS's best interest to work against open OSs, but it's very conceivable that fostering the open source community for applications for it's OSs (like Windows Phone) is the best way to maximize profits. Windows Phone will not succeed without a vibrant app ecosystem, regardless of how many phones Nokia manufactures. Actively working against developers in that space is probably a bad idea.
most of them are kids doing it for the lulz,
Maybe the ones volunteering their connection to DDOS sites are kids in it for lulz. The ones who pulled off the HBGary hack were not.
SQL injections and rainbow tables
unfortunately the truth of this statement will be entirely missed by the greater public.
The greater public probably think SQL injections and rainbow tables are some bizarre gay fetish activity.
And they don't even identify themselves. Why would anyone consider electing them to the BoD without knowing who they are?
I never played FF, but if I had mod points you'd get one.