Along the same line of thought, have you noticed that after years of believing we're superior to all animals, we still can teach a dog to respond to english, but have little to no idea what they mean when they bark a certain way?
I know the difference between my dog's "somebody I don't know is in the yard", "Mommy is home!", and her "I have to pee!" barks.
One of the leading causes of identity theft is when people leave their computer at the curbside for pickup with the hard drive unwiped. Not only does that broadcast to all who see the box on the curbside "COME AND GET IT!", but there is the (Oh my Gaia!) greater offense of POLLUTION!
Oddly enough, the laptop I use on trips I got in that exact way. And, no, they hadn't done anything to the hard drive when I picked it up, either...
The 99% margin of error on this study is about 5.5% (e.g. there is a 99% chance that the real percentages are within 5.5 points of the reported percentages). If the sample size were 1000, we would see a margin of error of 4%, and a we'd need a sample size of 10,000 to give us a 1.2% margin of error.
This assumes that the cases taken were representative of all cases in the United States, and were randomly selected out of the pool of available cases. Considering that the Secret Service only gets involved in certain cases of identity theft, this is probably an incorrect assumption.
Okay, so it didn't turn out as exciting as dozens of Hollywood movies would have you believe. The reason the rovers, the Viking probes... hell, every space mission that's landed somewhere... is important is because xenogeology needs up-close and personal data, rather than just spectrometer readings.
Think about all the stuff we don't know about every other planet out there - we can figure out the mass from watching things orbit it, and we can figure out the composition of the surface... but what about two inches down?
If people are willing to pay $10,000 for a ticket, then by definition, that's the value of the ticket. That's not an artificial inflated value, that's the actual value.
If the club wants to sell their tickets below market price, it's totally within their rights to do so. If they want to prevent resale of a ticket (which isn't a physical good so much as rent on a very tiny piece of real estate for a very short period of time), it's totally within their rights to do so.
If the patriots are angry about this, then what they ought to do is charge more for their tickets. This is a professional sporting event, not a government function where they need to maintain the fiction of fairness.
The reason ticket prices are set as they are is for the club to reward long-term fans. When the Pats were a shit team, many of the current season ticket holders were still season ticket holder. When they become a shit team again, many of the current season ticket holders will still be season ticket holders. If the price adjusted on a year-by-year basis of who is going to the playoffs, long-term fans would be less willing to buy the season tickets, the jerseys, and all the other stuff.
Before gametime, a ticket is less a piece of real property than a liscense to attend an event. If the event owner wants to sell tickets for a dollar, but not allow people to re-sell them, isn't that within their rights?
Course, I realize that makes the Pats look like the RIAA, which explains why this decision is pretty unpopular here...
If that's true, then law enforcement should be getting the list of names, not an NFL team. Are the Patriots now a law enforcement agency? Also, why do they need the list of people buying tickets?
If the ticket is listed as non-transferable (you can buy ten, but only if you plan on going with nine of your friends... or you can buy them, and do what you want, but you can't re-sell them for a profit), then isn't it a contract issue and not so much a criminal law issue?
(Unless, of course, your state has specific laws forbidding the breaking of this type of contract.)
That depends on how you're doing it by remote. A thick enough layer of compromised systems (or even a single system, if, for instance, you compromise a wireless access point) could make it impossible to trace.
However, this guy came up a bit short on that account.
Now, they find themselves at the mercy of foreign markets (eg China) and absolutely no ability to take back any of their core businesses. They've gutted themselves, they just haven't figured out it was a fatal wound yet.
I don't think it's that they can't recover at this point. They would just have to put long-term thinking first for a few years. And that's not going to happen until investors start pushing for long-term over short-term.
It's not a fatal wound - it's just infected, and taking the time out to get it treated is apparently too much effort.
The music industry has an even worse problem coming up. The music player industry will probably be eaten by the phone industry. Most newer phones have some music player capability.
As convienent as a all-in-one device is, sometimes I don't want to bring something that expensive with me. If I'm going to work out, all I want is the music player. I don't want to get interrupted, and I don't want to risk damaging a much more expensive piece of equipment. There's always going to be a market for an mp3 player without all the extras.
But no one should be making a profit on the backs of our children anyhow.
My immediate thought - just make it illegal for a minor to purchase anything without a parent present. No loopholes, no first (or any) amendment concerns. That will make him happy, right?
The answer to the question of if EBay is doing "the right thing" with regard to advertising varies in a polar manner depending on what you're looking at. From the stockholder perspective, the question is simply, does it result in increased income, and surely the answer will be yes.
But there's two different shareholders perspectives. The long-term & the short-term. While putting more ads might make them more money this quarter, if it truly does alienate users, in the long run, it's going to kill their profits. The new users might not know what it used to be like, but if it doesn't result in sales, it's not going to get used.
No, in practice it seems to mean not anyone, but people with a darker skin complexion in posession of this type material.
Or people with non-mainstream religious beliefs. Or people with an unusual interest in firearms. Ooops, idolizing certain subversive figures, and using quotes ("Those who choose a little security...") from great historical figures out of context. Being too interested in the job the police are doing - someone is watching the watchers, don't worry... but it's not going to be you, citizen.
But this gets back to the other problem of accesibility. I like being able to check my email from home, work, or anywhere. I don't necessarily trust it enough to include, say, medical information there...
And, yes, it's a good guess that anything with 'citizen' in it is probably a joke.
Slashdot Mirror
When they're out in the middle of the Pacific doing exercises. Why not have them pick up some astronauts on their way?
You should be buying many, many Xboxs, but no games, since they're still not making any money off the hardware.
Think about all the stuff we don't know about every other planet out there - we can figure out the mass from watching things orbit it, and we can figure out the composition of the surface... but what about two inches down?
IBM seems to get that technical support is a better way to make money than bundling software.
Course, I realize that makes the Pats look like the RIAA, which explains why this decision is pretty unpopular here...
(Unless, of course, your state has specific laws forbidding the breaking of this type of contract.)
Apparently people have these ideas in there head:
1.)Torturing people who are willing to suicide-bomb themselves is going to provide truthful info
2.)The US routinuely catches 1 terrorist from a cell while having no info on the other members
3.) The rest of the cell doesn't change their plans if one member is captured
And, 4.) Finding out 'where teh boom is hidin' will save 100 brazilian lives
Generally, I won't kill (or assist in killing) anything smarter than a dog, unless necessary to protect my (or my wife's) life.
However, this guy came up a bit short on that account.
Gaff knew who the replicants were, and he marked Deckard as such. I don't see the need for having somebody come out and say it...
It's not a fatal wound - it's just infected, and taking the time out to get it treated is apparently too much effort.
My immediate thought - just make it illegal for a minor to purchase anything without a parent present. No loopholes, no first (or any) amendment concerns. That will make him happy, right?
When the Iraqi interim government was writing their constitution, Robin Williams comment to the affect of "take ours, we're not using it anymore"...
Is there some kind of race going on between the major democratic republics of the world to see who can reach 'police state' status first?
Or people with non-mainstream religious beliefs. Or people with an unusual interest in firearms. Ooops, idolizing certain subversive figures, and using quotes ("Those who choose a little security...") from great historical figures out of context. Being too interested in the job the police are doing - someone is watching the watchers, don't worry... but it's not going to be you, citizen.
And the list goes on...
It's almost like children should have some kind of guardian who is responsible for making decisions for them until they're of a certain age.
And, yes, it's a good guess that anything with 'citizen' in it is probably a joke.
Umm... yeah, I've got nothing outside the topic.