I'm certainly not an expert but surrender seems to be in all the basic strategy tables that I've seen. Perhaps you're thinking of insurance? (Which, as I recall, is as you say; never take it except in conjunction with some fairly advanced counting schemes.)
And the 5:4 vs. 3:2 is especially bad for the player because the blackjack payout is a "freebie"--i.e. the player doesn't need to make the correct move in order to get it. (Unlike surrender, for example, which is also pretty scarce in Vegas these days.)
Although it's not the traditional way of doing it, I always make it using a blender. I've always had it come out fine.
1/2 cup (1 stick) butter 3 egg yolks 2 tbs. lemon juice 1/4 tsp. salt Pinch of Cayenne Pepper
In a small saucepan, heat butter to bubbling but do not allow it to brown (or melt in microwave). Put egg yolks, lemon juice, salt, and cayenne into a blender. Cover and turn motor to high. Immediately remove cover and quickly add the hot butter in a thin but steady stream. Once all the butter has been added, stop the motor. (It should have thickened sufficiently; if not, give it a little more blending but not too much.) Makes 3/4 cup of Hollandaise Sauce, sufficient for about four servings. For larger quantities, use 4 egg yolks, 1 cup of butter, and 4 tablespoons of lemon juice.
Serve immediately or keep warm over, but not touching, boiling water.
I asked Eben Moglen basically this question at the conference today. It isn't GPLv3's intention to treat software delivered as a hosted service as "propagating" or "distributing" the software. (If the service is delivered as a hardware/software bundle, that's something different, but a website hosting a database (or CRM application) isn't considered to be distributing the software.
Using "Intel Inside" sticker isn't a requirement for anyone. However, if you choose to use the sticker, you can get co-op marketing dollars from Intel for doing so, so there's often a sizable financial incentive to use it. (There are also a fair number of restructions on how the dollars can be used--basically only for advertising/marketing products or product lines that are 100% Intel.)
>Actually, most of the public is.... haven't you been listening? (and it's not their fault... since most of peoples' educations around computers comes from bone-headed media such as movies, the "news", etc.)
> The DMCA is having very far-reaching effects, all of which I'm sure were not contemplated or foreseen by the people who drafted the DMCA.
And it's made worse by the fact that we don't even REALLY know what the effects of the DMCA are. The headline implies that the DMCA is preventing Adobe from supporting Nikon's format. In fact, Adobe is saying that it doesn't really know whether it would be a DMCA violation or not. But it doesn't want to chance it.
To be sure, a lot of things in copyright law, such as fair use, are often ambiguous and dependent on how the specific facts of a specific case get interpreted. However, the DMCA provisions around decryption aren't even resolved at the level of "fair use". (i.e. fair use in a given case may not be clear, but the factors that are weighed to determine whether there's a violation or not are at least understood.)
In addition, you have to wonder what ended up counted as "spam" in the survey. There's lots of bulk email that's legitimate insofar as the recipient checked a box (and didn't uncheck one) once upon a time. One wonders if some recipients counted those too. Between the false positives and the false negatives I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in the survey numbers. But 10% having responded at one time or another to something they referred to as spam doesn't seem totoally out of line to me.
The article summary is misleading. Transmeta already outsources manufacturing. I believe they've used both IBM and TSMC in the past--not sure who they're using at the moment. The article says that Transmeta is considering getting out of the chip design business and just license their IP. This is presumably patents, etc. around code morphing and other techniques that they've developed. It would presumably also represent a significant scaling back of the company.
The problem is that there's likely a steady stream of greedy folks lining up to pay for sending out the next batch of spam promoting the latest "get rich" products. It's worked for years with distribution pyramids like Herbalife. Why should spam and the internet be any different?
>According with the pareto rule the 80% of the people will use only 20% of the included features.
The (frequently stated) problem with this observation is that which 20% varies from user to user. You see that in this discussion. Lots of people don't know what a Pivot Table is; quite a few others think it one of the most useful features of Excel. In my case, I imagine many people don't use the Reviewing features (change bars and the like) much if at all; I use them extensively.
Unfortunately, as noted in the review, these "specialty" features tend not to be that great in OpenOffice. But specialty shouldn't be confused with unimportant; they're very important to whoever uses them and lots of people use at least one specialty feature, just not all the same one.
Paypal's CEO, Peter Thiel, once said "There's a trade-off between privacy, security, and convenience, you can have any two at 100 percent, but the third will be almost nonexistent." Convenience is closely related to usability.
This is obviously a simplification, however there's a lot of truth to it. For example, at some level, any form of authentication is going to degrade privacy at some level.
Materials can be strong (which I take to mean high yield strength in this context) and brittle (low deformation before fracture). In other words, it can take a fair bit of force to cause any damage at all, but when you pass a certain point, it just breaks rather than deforming plastically.
Of course, "strong" isn't a very precise term when talking about materials and different types of strength are better suited for different tasks.
Actually Microsoft's doing more than anti-OO FUD. Has anyone else noticed how prevalent the Office 2003 Student and Teacher edition is in the stores? While it's not new that this heavily discounted version is available, it is new to Office 2003 that it's available so widely and so prominently. Basically it's a rather clever way to offer a significantly discounted version for the most price-sensitive parts of the market without slashing proces across the board--including to their large enterprise buyers.
FWIW, from my own usage of the two products, I find Microsoft Office is better at doing some things--such as revision marking which I use extensively--but for most users Open Office (or Star Office) are more than adequate.
Yes they have procedures, but it still costs money. And there have been any number of documented cases of companies losing their domains because they forgot to renew, notices weren't sent out, paperwork got snafued, etc. This isn't a service for an individual or a small business, but IMO makes a lot of sense for a large company. The financial downside of doing it is almost trivial in the scheme of things compared to some of the potential (however low probability) downsides of messing up a renewal.
Is it a good deal for the issuer as well? Hell, yes. Pre-pays are great--the longer the better. You lock in the customer and, for any of a variety of reasons, you may never need to provide the service (the customer goes out of business, you go out of business). Or registration costs could drop so far that this is the world's most expensive domain registration in 10 years.
I would be very surprised if Network Solutions can report this as lump-sum revenue in the quarter received. Like any subscription, I would assume that it has to be spread out over the length of the registration. If so, they're actually potentially giving up some nearer-term revenue for this (because there's a discount involved)--even though they're getting cash in hand.
The submitter makes valid points. On the other hand, for a large company, we're really talking about very little money here and the internal administrative costs of dealing with a renewal are probably fairly significant. So , for a Ford or GM or whatever, it may well make sense to pay the few thousand dollars for their various primary domains and then not have to worry about it.
Hate to break it to you, but you don't need to bother with a business license. There are already sites that you can run a check with just a SS# for no reason at all (e.g. www.rapsheets.com). BTW, You don't even need the SS# for a geographically constrained search.
True. But there is in practice a huge difference in how widely used and disseminated information will be depending upon whether it can be gotten with a few clicks or by trudging around dusty court houses.
We 're in this situation where there's a lot of "public" information that was originally made public at a time when there was a certain privacy through obscurity/effort/cost. If you really wanted to get the information you probably could but you had to work at it which meant (hopefully) that you had some compelling interest and right to it. Now the laws about what is public and what is not or the same and all those old practical, but not legal, barriers are falling. Maybe most of the information should be public anyway (e.g. felony convictions), but we can't depend any longer on this sort of loosy-goosy "technically public but hard to get to" in-between ground.
This sort of data (as I understand this product) is already being explicitly marketed to consumers. See, for example, http://www.rapsheets.com/. And, yes, I'm simulataneously rather disturbed by how easily one can run a background check on their neighbor just for the hell of it while I appreciate the legitimate uses. (For example, rapsheets markets their product to kids' sports leagues so that they can run checks on coaches -- which seems a legitimate enough interest.)
Because "Windows Me is terrible" is one of those pieces of folk wisdom that everyone repeats.
I've had Me installed on a couple of systems for quite a while. Anecdotally, it's never seemed to be any less stable or more problem-prone than Windows 98 was -- which is to say not nearly as good as Windows XP or Windows 2000 but usable enough. (The systems I still have it running on are "light duty" and it's just never been worth the money/trouble to upgrade.) And, no, I can't upgrade them to Linux because they're running applications that aren't available on Linux.
As I recall, Windows Me did have some bugs and such when it first came out which gave it a bad reputation. However, I suspect the biggest issue that a lot of people had with it was that it WAS just Windows 98 with a new paint job--i.e. it wasn't really any better.
You don't have to get permission (although people generally do), but you do need to pay royalties. (See http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_324b.html)
Well it's lumped under "RAID" for terminology's sake but not really accurately from a technical perspective as the (R)edundant is not only missing but actually negative. Again, I'm not disputing that RAID 0 is a widely used term but that it's not really appropriate.
BYW, this is the problem of totally hiding the RAID structure, RAID 0? Well it's great performance but you decrease reliability. RAID 5? Well you improve reliability but drastically decrease transactional write performance. I could go on but you get the idea.
Chopsticks were certainly NOT invented in the U.S. (See http://www.cuisinenet.com/digest/region/china/chop sticks.shtml for just one reference.) And Michaelangelo was commissioned to paint, among other things, the Sistine Chapel during his lifetime.
It's worth it unless there are better and cheaper alternatives. For personal use, I'd probably not pay this. But on business travel I'll hook into whatever wireless alternatives are available. If they're $10/hour I'll carefully moderate my use, but I'll use it. At this point I find T-Mobile/Starbucks a useful service though I'll certainly keep my eye open for other cheaper and equally ubiquitous alternatives.
For business use, time=money. If Starbucks/T-Mobile is essentially ubiquitous that's a big advantage over random and hard-to-find free locations.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm certainly not an expert but surrender seems to be in all the basic strategy tables that I've seen. Perhaps you're thinking of insurance? (Which, as I recall, is as you say; never take it except in conjunction with some fairly advanced counting schemes.)
And the 5:4 vs. 3:2 is especially bad for the player because the blackjack payout is a "freebie"--i.e. the player doesn't need to make the correct move in order to get it. (Unlike surrender, for example, which is also pretty scarce in Vegas these days.)
Although it's not the traditional way of doing it, I always make it using a blender. I've always had it come out fine.
1/2 cup (1 stick) butter
3 egg yolks
2 tbs. lemon juice
1/4 tsp. salt
Pinch of Cayenne Pepper
In a small saucepan, heat butter to bubbling but do not allow it to brown (or melt in microwave). Put egg yolks, lemon juice, salt, and cayenne into a blender. Cover and turn motor to high. Immediately remove cover and quickly add the hot butter in a thin but steady stream. Once all the
butter has been added, stop the motor. (It should have thickened sufficiently; if not, give it a little more blending but not too much.) Makes 3/4 cup of Hollandaise Sauce, sufficient for about four servings. For larger quantities, use 4 egg yolks, 1 cup of butter, and 4 tablespoons of lemon juice.
Serve immediately or keep warm over, but not touching, boiling water.
I asked Eben Moglen basically this question at the conference today. It isn't GPLv3's intention to treat software delivered as a hosted service as "propagating" or "distributing" the software. (If the service is delivered as a hardware/software bundle, that's something different, but a website hosting a database (or CRM application) isn't considered to be distributing the software.
Using "Intel Inside" sticker isn't a requirement for anyone. However, if you choose to use the sticker, you can get co-op marketing dollars from Intel for doing so, so there's often a sizable financial incentive to use it. (There are also a fair number of restructions on how the dollars can be used--basically only for advertising/marketing products or product lines that are 100% Intel.)
>Actually, most of the public is.... haven't you been listening? (and it's not their fault... since most of peoples' educations around computers comes from bone-headed media such as movies, the "news", etc.)
Or because most of the public... doesn't care?
> The DMCA is having very far-reaching effects, all of which I'm sure were not contemplated or foreseen by the people who drafted the DMCA.
And it's made worse by the fact that we don't even REALLY know what the effects of the DMCA are. The headline implies that the DMCA is preventing Adobe from supporting Nikon's format. In fact, Adobe is saying that it doesn't really know whether it would be a DMCA violation or not. But it doesn't want to chance it.
To be sure, a lot of things in copyright law, such as fair use, are often ambiguous and dependent on how the specific facts of a specific case get interpreted. However, the DMCA provisions around decryption aren't even resolved at the level of "fair use". (i.e. fair use in a given case may not be clear, but the factors that are weighed to determine whether there's a violation or not are at least understood.)
In addition, you have to wonder what ended up counted as "spam" in the survey. There's lots of bulk email that's legitimate insofar as the recipient checked a box (and didn't uncheck one) once upon a time. One wonders if some recipients counted those too. Between the false positives and the false negatives I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in the survey numbers. But 10% having responded at one time or another to something they referred to as spam doesn't seem totoally out of line to me.
The article summary is misleading. Transmeta already outsources manufacturing. I believe they've used both IBM and TSMC in the past--not sure who they're using at the moment. The article says that Transmeta is considering getting out of the chip design business and just license their IP. This is presumably patents, etc. around code morphing and other techniques that they've developed. It would presumably also represent a significant scaling back of the company.
The problem is that there's likely a steady stream of greedy folks lining up to pay for sending out the next batch of spam promoting the latest "get rich" products. It's worked for years with distribution pyramids like Herbalife. Why should spam and the internet be any different?
>According with the pareto rule the 80% of the people will use only 20% of the included features.
The (frequently stated) problem with this observation is that which 20% varies from user to user. You see that in this discussion. Lots of people don't know what a Pivot Table is; quite a few others think it one of the most useful features of Excel. In my case, I imagine many people don't use the Reviewing features (change bars and the like) much if at all; I use them extensively.
Unfortunately, as noted in the review, these "specialty" features tend not to be that great in OpenOffice. But specialty shouldn't be confused with unimportant; they're very important to whoever uses them and lots of people use at least one specialty feature, just not all the same one.
Paypal's CEO, Peter Thiel, once said "There's a trade-off between privacy, security, and convenience, you can have any two at 100 percent, but the third will be almost nonexistent." Convenience is closely related to usability.
This is obviously a simplification, however there's a lot of truth to it. For example, at some level, any form of authentication is going to degrade privacy at some level.
Materials can be strong (which I take to mean high yield strength in this context) and brittle (low deformation before fracture). In other words, it can take a fair bit of force to cause any damage at all, but when you pass a certain point, it just breaks rather than deforming plastically.
Of course, "strong" isn't a very precise term when talking about materials and different types of strength are better suited for different tasks.
Actually Microsoft's doing more than anti-OO FUD. Has anyone else noticed how prevalent the Office 2003 Student and Teacher edition is in the stores? While it's not new that this heavily discounted version is available, it is new to Office 2003 that it's available so widely and so prominently. Basically it's a rather clever way to offer a significantly discounted version for the most price-sensitive parts of the market without slashing proces across the board--including to their large enterprise buyers.
FWIW, from my own usage of the two products, I find Microsoft Office is better at doing some things--such as revision marking which I use extensively--but for most users Open Office (or Star Office) are more than adequate.
Yes they have procedures, but it still costs money. And there have been any number of documented cases of companies losing their domains because they forgot to renew, notices weren't sent out, paperwork got snafued, etc. This isn't a service for an individual or a small business, but IMO makes a lot of sense for a large company. The financial downside of doing it is almost trivial in the scheme of things compared to some of the potential (however low probability) downsides of messing up a renewal.
Is it a good deal for the issuer as well? Hell, yes. Pre-pays are great--the longer the better. You lock in the customer and, for any of a variety of reasons, you may never need to provide the service (the customer goes out of business, you go out of business). Or registration costs could drop so far that this is the world's most expensive domain registration in 10 years.
I would be very surprised if Network Solutions can report this as lump-sum revenue in the quarter received. Like any subscription, I would assume that it has to be spread out over the length of the registration. If so, they're actually potentially giving up some nearer-term revenue for this (because there's a discount involved)--even though they're getting cash in hand.
The submitter makes valid points. On the other hand, for a large company, we're really talking about very little money here and the internal administrative costs of dealing with a renewal are probably fairly significant. So , for a Ford or GM or whatever, it may well make sense to pay the few thousand dollars for their various primary domains and then not have to worry about it.
Hate to break it to you, but you don't need to bother with a business license. There are already sites that you can run a check with just a SS# for no reason at all (e.g. www.rapsheets.com). BTW, You don't even need the SS# for a geographically constrained search.
True. But there is in practice a huge difference in how widely used and disseminated information will be depending upon whether it can be gotten with a few clicks or by trudging around dusty court houses.
We 're in this situation where there's a lot of "public" information that was originally made public at a time when there was a certain privacy through obscurity/effort/cost. If you really wanted to get the information you probably could but you had to work at it which meant (hopefully) that you had some compelling interest and right to it. Now the laws about what is public and what is not or the same and all those old practical, but not legal, barriers are falling. Maybe most of the information should be public anyway (e.g. felony convictions), but we can't depend any longer on this sort of loosy-goosy "technically public but hard to get to" in-between ground.
This sort of data (as I understand this product) is already being explicitly marketed to consumers. See, for example, http://www.rapsheets.com/. And, yes, I'm simulataneously rather disturbed by how easily one can run a background check on their neighbor just for the hell of it while I appreciate the legitimate uses. (For example, rapsheets markets their product to kids' sports leagues so that they can run checks on coaches -- which seems a legitimate enough interest.)
Because "Windows Me is terrible" is one of those pieces of folk wisdom that everyone repeats.
I've had Me installed on a couple of systems for quite a while. Anecdotally, it's never seemed to be any less stable or more problem-prone than Windows 98 was -- which is to say not nearly as good as Windows XP or Windows 2000 but usable enough. (The systems I still have it running on are "light duty" and it's just never been worth the money/trouble to upgrade.) And, no, I can't upgrade them to Linux because they're running applications that aren't available on Linux.
As I recall, Windows Me did have some bugs and such when it first came out which gave it a bad reputation. However, I suspect the biggest issue that a lot of people had with it was that it WAS just Windows 98 with a new paint job--i.e. it wasn't really any better.
You don't have to get permission (although people generally do), but you do need to pay royalties. (See http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_324b.html)
Well it's lumped under "RAID" for terminology's sake but not really accurately from a technical perspective as the (R)edundant is not only missing but actually negative. Again, I'm not disputing that RAID 0 is a widely used term but that it's not really appropriate.
BYW, this is the problem of totally hiding the RAID structure, RAID 0? Well it's great performance but you decrease reliability. RAID 5? Well you improve reliability but drastically decrease transactional write performance. I could go on but you get the idea.
How did this get modded up?
p sticks.shtml for just one reference.) And Michaelangelo was commissioned to paint, among other things, the Sistine Chapel during his lifetime.
Chopsticks were certainly NOT invented in the U.S. (See http://www.cuisinenet.com/digest/region/china/cho
It's worth it unless there are better and cheaper alternatives. For personal use, I'd probably not pay this. But on business travel I'll hook into whatever wireless alternatives are available. If they're $10/hour I'll carefully moderate my use, but I'll use it. At this point I find T-Mobile/Starbucks a useful service though I'll certainly keep my eye open for other cheaper and equally ubiquitous alternatives.
For business use, time=money. If Starbucks/T-Mobile is essentially ubiquitous that's a big advantage over random and hard-to-find free locations.