I believe he is graphing quantity(profit or skill), not profit(skill). Of course he is probably assuming profit ~= skill which in my experience is a poor assumption.
Transmission daemon with remote control via transdroid app is nice: install transmission-daemon, set up transmission RPC, proxy pass https via apache.
Set up dynamic dns/port forwards and you can remote control your torrents from anywhere over https on your mobile. httb == http below (why no pre tags??)
RPC address is httb://server/transmission/rpc
#/etc/apache2/sites-available/ssl.conf ...
SSLEngine on
SSLProxyEngine on
ProxyPass/transmission httb://localhost:9091/transmission
ProxyPassReverse httb://localhost:9091/transmission/transmission keepalive=on ...
That's 1% of w3schools.com viewers which isn't representative of the wider internet. It basically says that web developers don't use ie which is pretty obvious and also kind of useless (and misleading).
Reductio ad absurdum. Substitute a relatively normal well adjusted teenage girl for a mental patient being held against their will.
Guns don't kill people:
Angry people with guns kill people,
Crazy people with guns kill people,
Scared people with guns kill people,
Ignorant people with guns kill people,
etc,
etc.
Insulting you isn't making an emotional argument. The argument was completely separate. You're trying to make a technical argument where 1 ~= 3 without any regard to what those numbers represent. Which is absolutely wrong. If the error is +/- 10 then fine 1 and 3 are the same. If the error is 0.001 (which is what we are actually talking about here) then they are not the same at all. Also, if we were talking about some subjective thing like "satisfaction with job" then 1 vs 3 may not be a big deal. When talking about thousands of deaths, a factor of 3 is significant. Please by all means point out where my argument is wrong.
Guns are a major cause of premature death. Cars, which also cause a lot of premature death, have extremely strict regulations that get stricter all the time. A lot of money is spent making them safer. Guns just continue to kill lots of people, because that is what they are for.
The purpose of a car is to get a person from point A to B. Death due to misuse is an unfortunate side affect. The purpose of a gun is to kill (normally humans). Not causing death is misuse. Big difference. The fact guns are sometimes used for other things isn't really relevant. A car can be a weapon too. That's not it's primary purpose. Thinking that guns and death have some coincidental relationship is absolute stupidity.
So... you are comparing 3000 dead people to 3000 grains of sand. Fair comparison. For an illogical gun toting moron. We're not talking about orders of magnitude of dead people. We're talking about 3 times as many dead people. Only a psychopath would argue that's not significant.
Russia has some of the strictest gun laws on earth
Wrong. http://www.youtube.com/fpsrussia
Countries with strict gun laws don't allow random civilians to compile military arsenals. Perhaps all the gun murdering has something to do with the fact that both countries manufacture insane amounts of guns.
Do you think that a person with a gun is more likely to shoot someone than a person without a gun? Hint: a person without a gun can't actually shoot anyone!
1.3 to 4.8 IN 100,000 are virtually the same number.
No they aren't. 4.8 is approximately 3 times as many dead people. If you compare a random selection of yearly figures from small populations, you could say it's roughly the same. But if you're comparing annual sets of millions, and one is always 3 times the other, it's not the same number at all. Which means you're wrong.
You're assuming the rate of population growth exceeds the rate of gold growth (mining). That may or may not be a sound assumption. Also economic output is not linear with population growth.
I normally agree with most of your posts but this one is completely without substance. His suggestion seems reasonable to me. On what grounds do you disagree?
actually... yes. DNT - default and DNT - user choice is a valid distinction. Still the whole thing is stupid because it relies on third parties "doing the right thing" which is foolish. Just build and use browsers/plugins that actively disrupt the tracking process - then you don't need to trust anyone (well except the author of the browser/plugin). I think this approach is also superior to enacting laws - outlawing something that can be solved with good design is a sub-optimal solution.
I kind of agree with you that in principle it would be better to default to privacy - only this approach makes tracking completely impossible, because who is going to enable tracking? Answer - Noone - which mean none of the interested parties will want to conform to it.
With the default set the other way the companies can keep tracking people and keep their profits whilst simultaneously claming the high ground. The people who want privacy can enable the setting and the ignorant/apathetic can continue with the status quo. If you want a voluntary system this is the only possible way it could work. The only alternative is to outlaw tracking, which is fine, but that still doesn't guarantee you won't be tracked.
You seem to have neglected to read this bit, so I'll repeat it for you
They didn't follow the standard, again
Anyway it's a pointless standard so the argument is moot. A voluntary standard that gets in the way of profits is a standard that will never be followed.
Well I like weird, so I see that a positive and I've always thought most of the characters are the antithesis of cliche! The female leads are a bit weak admittedly and it loses something when they get too much screen time. It almost lost me too at the beginning of season 3 I think, but I'm glad I stuck with it. The interplay between Walt and Jessie is the heart of the show and the way they become enemies as much as friends parallels nicely with all the other underworld relationships they develop. I like that is has season-wide story arcs. It's not just a bunch of episodes, it's like a novel in 12 parts. And each season gets better and better. Plus as a fellow beaten down nerd Walter White is my hero:)
I want it to succeed. Why? More options = better. If they open it up, I want it to succeed even more.
Sure. You want say 10-15% of other people to buy it. Small enough to market share to prevent MS from engaging in their usual tricks, but big enough to create some competition. But you aren't interested in it yourself. You wouldn't actually recommend it to your friends or family. So who the hell is going to buy actually buy it?
Slashdot Mirror
I believe he is graphing quantity(profit or skill), not profit(skill). Of course he is probably assuming profit ~= skill which in my experience is a poor assumption.
Transmission daemon with remote control via transdroid app is nice: install transmission-daemon, set up transmission RPC, proxy pass https via apache.
... /transmission httb://localhost:9091/transmission /transmission keepalive=on
...
...
...
Set up dynamic dns/port forwards and you can remote control your torrents from anywhere over https on your mobile. httb == http below (why no pre tags??)
RPC address is httb://server/transmission/rpc
#/etc/apache2/sites-available/ssl.conf
SSLEngine on
SSLProxyEngine on
ProxyPass
ProxyPassReverse httb://localhost:9091/transmission
#/etc/transmission-daemon/settings.json:
"rpc-authentication-required": true,
"rpc-bind-address": "0.0.0.0",
"rpc-enabled": true,
"rpc-password": "restart-daemon-to-hash-me",
"rpc-port": 9091,
"rpc-url": "/transmission/",
"rpc-username": "transmission",
"rpc-whitelist": "127.0.0.1",
"rpc-whitelist-enabled": true,
+1 insightful
Maybe they will donate it to children with cancer?
instant +5 Funny
Apparently it's actually insightful, which adds weight to my hypothesis that people are idiots.
That's 1% of w3schools.com viewers which isn't representative of the wider internet. It basically says that web developers don't use ie which is pretty obvious and also kind of useless (and misleading).
Reductio ad absurdum. Substitute a relatively normal well adjusted teenage girl for a mental patient being held against their will. Guns don't kill people: Angry people with guns kill people, Crazy people with guns kill people, Scared people with guns kill people, Ignorant people with guns kill people, etc, etc.
Insulting you isn't making an emotional argument. The argument was completely separate. You're trying to make a technical argument where 1 ~= 3 without any regard to what those numbers represent. Which is absolutely wrong. If the error is +/- 10 then fine 1 and 3 are the same. If the error is 0.001 (which is what we are actually talking about here) then they are not the same at all. Also, if we were talking about some subjective thing like "satisfaction with job" then 1 vs 3 may not be a big deal. When talking about thousands of deaths, a factor of 3 is significant. Please by all means point out where my argument is wrong.
Guns are a major cause of premature death. Cars, which also cause a lot of premature death, have extremely strict regulations that get stricter all the time. A lot of money is spent making them safer. Guns just continue to kill lots of people, because that is what they are for.
The purpose of a car is to get a person from point A to B. Death due to misuse is an unfortunate side affect. The purpose of a gun is to kill (normally humans). Not causing death is misuse. Big difference. The fact guns are sometimes used for other things isn't really relevant. A car can be a weapon too. That's not it's primary purpose. Thinking that guns and death have some coincidental relationship is absolute stupidity.
So... you are comparing 3000 dead people to 3000 grains of sand. Fair comparison. For an illogical gun toting moron. We're not talking about orders of magnitude of dead people. We're talking about 3 times as many dead people. Only a psychopath would argue that's not significant.
Russia has some of the strictest gun laws on earth
Wrong. http://www.youtube.com/fpsrussia Countries with strict gun laws don't allow random civilians to compile military arsenals. Perhaps all the gun murdering has something to do with the fact that both countries manufacture insane amounts of guns.
Do you think that a person with a gun is more likely to shoot someone than a person without a gun? Hint: a person without a gun can't actually shoot anyone!
1.3 to 4.8 IN 100,000 are virtually the same number.
No they aren't. 4.8 is approximately 3 times as many dead people. If you compare a random selection of yearly figures from small populations, you could say it's roughly the same. But if you're comparing annual sets of millions, and one is always 3 times the other, it's not the same number at all. Which means you're wrong.
actually in civilised countries it's made of plastic :)
British must suck at education
That would certainly explain the USA!
You're assuming the rate of population growth exceeds the rate of gold growth (mining). That may or may not be a sound assumption. Also economic output is not linear with population growth.
I normally agree with most of your posts but this one is completely without substance. His suggestion seems reasonable to me. On what grounds do you disagree?
actually... yes. DNT - default and DNT - user choice is a valid distinction. Still the whole thing is stupid because it relies on third parties "doing the right thing" which is foolish. Just build and use browsers/plugins that actively disrupt the tracking process - then you don't need to trust anyone (well except the author of the browser/plugin). I think this approach is also superior to enacting laws - outlawing something that can be solved with good design is a sub-optimal solution.
I kind of agree with you that in principle it would be better to default to privacy - only this approach makes tracking completely impossible, because who is going to enable tracking? Answer - Noone - which mean none of the interested parties will want to conform to it.
With the default set the other way the companies can keep tracking people and keep their profits whilst simultaneously claming the high ground. The people who want privacy can enable the setting and the ignorant/apathetic can continue with the status quo. If you want a voluntary system this is the only possible way it could work. The only alternative is to outlaw tracking, which is fine, but that still doesn't guarantee you won't be tracked.
They didn't follow the standard, again
Anyway it's a pointless standard so the argument is moot. A voluntary standard that gets in the way of profits is a standard that will never be followed.
For one thing it keeps the money in our country, moron.
Well I like weird, so I see that a positive and I've always thought most of the characters are the antithesis of cliche! The female leads are a bit weak admittedly and it loses something when they get too much screen time. It almost lost me too at the beginning of season 3 I think, but I'm glad I stuck with it. The interplay between Walt and Jessie is the heart of the show and the way they become enemies as much as friends parallels nicely with all the other underworld relationships they develop. I like that is has season-wide story arcs. It's not just a bunch of episodes, it's like a novel in 12 parts. And each season gets better and better. Plus as a fellow beaten down nerd Walter White is my hero :)
I weep for the future of this country.
If you're referring to the USA, me too. Fortunately I live in Australia :)
Wait, you said "TV shows"--I take it back.
wtf?
And if you don't think Breaking Bad is brilliant, I'm guessing you probably haven't watched it. So do yourself a favour and watch the first episode.
I can't speak about the other two, but Breaking bad is one of the greatest TV shows of all time.
I want it to succeed. Why? More options = better. If they open it up, I want it to succeed even more.
Sure. You want say 10-15% of other people to buy it. Small enough to market share to prevent MS from engaging in their usual tricks, but big enough to create some competition. But you aren't interested in it yourself. You wouldn't actually recommend it to your friends or family. So who the hell is going to buy actually buy it?