I agree with having i586/Pentium as the baseline. Microsoft did that with XP and nobody cared, and most stuff isn't compiled for i386 anyway. Not to mention that even a Pentium is pretty useless for almost anything these days.
To be fair, he makes a hell of a salesman. People would buy anything advertised by him Windows 1.0 style, not because they're convinced, but because they'll never get that off their minds.
Hmm, think we can induce that black hole and leverage it against the UN? A quick estimate tells me we'd still have enough bureaucracy to start over again in Brussels/Strasbourg and still be able to regulate the packaging of oil and vinegar in restaurants.
Where are the damned bureaucrats when we need them? You can definitely count on the EU, we even gathered our best bureacrats and placed them in one spot to concentrate their paperwork-producing powers.
Having a phone on your desk can be crucial if you have to pretend you're doing serious work when someone important walks by. Cell phones or IM aren't as convincing, even if you are working. There's something about text that makes it inherently less efficient than a simple call, and once you start using IM, you tend not to use video or audio.
None of this means you need a phone system, just a phone that uses your cell phone for handling the calls.
We're looking at two different things: treatment and statistical analysis of the vaccine's side-effects. It's quite possible to report that the issues developed shortly after taking the vaccine, but treat it like it wasn't caused by it (the data is there, so it makes sense in some cases to try a different treatment).
It's always good not to accept what anyone says without further thought. I think you get the wrong impression, though. The science isn't thin, it's just based on statistics, which tend to be equated with uncertainty. Proof is that some vaccines (don't ask me which ones, though) were replaced after years either because a new formula was developed or because there was some weird side-effect. What is also frequently done is restricting vaccines with a tendency for side-effects to high-risk groups. The flu shot comes to mind - it's recommended for high-risk groups only. Others, like yellow fever, are only administered to people travelling somewhere where there is a risk of catching it. In the end, it all boils down to risk vs. reward, it's just that we often don't realize just how many deadly diseases we're vaccinated against.
The FDA does some very weird shit. I'm not familiar with their handling of the HPV vaccine, but I do know its effectiveness is greatest when taken before any sexual contact, therefore the focus on kids. Everything carries risks, so why risk a vaccine that is barely effective?
As for your daughter, a mild form of the disease is a common side-effect from some vaccines. It's been statistically documented and is known. You imply your daughter was fine after the admittedly unpleasant side-effects. The amount of vaccines doesn't imply a higher risk either. Some vaccines are mostly devoid of side-effects, and some have more. Whenever more than one vaccine is administered at once, it means the combination has been studied and shown not to be a problem.
It's weird that you're dismissing the statistical analysis that is done for vaccines, yet start drawing conclusions from a sample size of one. If you're going to criticize generally-held medical opinions, you might want to learn medicine first. You wouldn't claim that General Relativity is BS without actually studying it, would you? It's a similar thing - seemingly counter-intuitive, yet proven right.
Unlike most people think, "sparing" one's immune system from having to deal with all sorts of crap does not make it better. Quite the contrary. The earlier the better, too, since it promotes the development of an immune system and reduces the risk of some freakish infection.
Essentially, if it's been proven safe at ~6 months (somewhat random choice, but the logic holds), there's no point risking waiting any longer, especially because there are no positive side effects from waiting.
I understand your point of view. Please consider the following:
I could list a couple of deadly diseases that can almost certainly be avoided by a vaccine, which is almost certainly safe. It's a high risk of death vs. a small risk of some weird side effect, which will most likely be very minor (especially when compared to something as debilitating as death).
Wi-Fi causes rashes, Cell Phones cause Cancer, Vaccines cause autism.
Be sure to get those three straight, or else you'll irritate some idiot who firmly believes he's right because you got his moronic beliefs slightly mixed-up. It's not about convincing them, they're pretty much incurable, but if they're not annoyed they tend to spread their bullshit around a bit less often.
Then please, instead of hurling insults around, explain to us how something which makes no sense at all works? Magic or Placebo Effect don't count as explanations (well, the placebo effect does, but you don't need expensive crap for that).
Not entirely, however, the non-original Wii models (the quietely released smaller model and this new mini) are, since they don't play GameCube games (the regular Wii does, unlike the Wii U)
Some things, while superficially very different, require mostly the same methods to control. While you're checking for drugs, you might as well take a quick look to check for counterfeit items. Why duplicate agencies, if you can add another task to an existing one, thereby saving paperwork and cash?
Slashdot Mirror
I'd say it was a success, since it survived more than what it was designed to survive.
It's only extremely small while Windows 8 + touch screens don't get more common
Same here. Same monitor, different monitor, doesn't even work across windows.
Probably their method of carrying tabs to and from active windows.
Exposing it to web pages is something quite weird to allow, though.
I'm relatively sure they dropped i486 with Windows XP (and thus Server 2003), and I think that's the baseline for Windows NT 6.x
I agree with having i586/Pentium as the baseline. Microsoft did that with XP and nobody cared, and most stuff isn't compiled for i386 anyway. Not to mention that even a Pentium is pretty useless for almost anything these days.
To be fair, he makes a hell of a salesman. People would buy anything advertised by him Windows 1.0 style, not because they're convinced, but because they'll never get that off their minds.
Hmm, think we can induce that black hole and leverage it against the UN? A quick estimate tells me we'd still have enough bureaucracy to start over again in Brussels/Strasbourg and still be able to regulate the packaging of oil and vinegar in restaurants.
Where are the damned bureaucrats when we need them? You can definitely count on the EU, we even gathered our best bureacrats and placed them in one spot to concentrate their paperwork-producing powers.
I don't really care, EU law makes such contracts illegal.
If you don't want to be at the mercy of corporations, elect someone who shares your point of view.
Definitely old news, at least a few months old. Nothing new to see here...
Having a phone on your desk can be crucial if you have to pretend you're doing serious work when someone important walks by. Cell phones or IM aren't as convincing, even if you are working.
There's something about text that makes it inherently less efficient than a simple call, and once you start using IM, you tend not to use video or audio.
None of this means you need a phone system, just a phone that uses your cell phone for handling the calls.
We're looking at two different things: treatment and statistical analysis of the vaccine's side-effects. It's quite possible to report that the issues developed shortly after taking the vaccine, but treat it like it wasn't caused by it (the data is there, so it makes sense in some cases to try a different treatment).
It's always good not to accept what anyone says without further thought. I think you get the wrong impression, though. The science isn't thin, it's just based on statistics, which tend to be equated with uncertainty. Proof is that some vaccines (don't ask me which ones, though) were replaced after years either because a new formula was developed or because there was some weird side-effect.
What is also frequently done is restricting vaccines with a tendency for side-effects to high-risk groups. The flu shot comes to mind - it's recommended for high-risk groups only. Others, like yellow fever, are only administered to people travelling somewhere where there is a risk of catching it.
In the end, it all boils down to risk vs. reward, it's just that we often don't realize just how many deadly diseases we're vaccinated against.
Let's see...
The FDA does some very weird shit. I'm not familiar with their handling of the HPV vaccine, but I do know its effectiveness is greatest when taken before any sexual contact, therefore the focus on kids. Everything carries risks, so why risk a vaccine that is barely effective?
As for your daughter, a mild form of the disease is a common side-effect from some vaccines. It's been statistically documented and is known. You imply your daughter was fine after the admittedly unpleasant side-effects. The amount of vaccines doesn't imply a higher risk either. Some vaccines are mostly devoid of side-effects, and some have more. Whenever more than one vaccine is administered at once, it means the combination has been studied and shown not to be a problem.
It's weird that you're dismissing the statistical analysis that is done for vaccines, yet start drawing conclusions from a sample size of one. If you're going to criticize generally-held medical opinions, you might want to learn medicine first. You wouldn't claim that General Relativity is BS without actually studying it, would you? It's a similar thing - seemingly counter-intuitive, yet proven right.
Unlike most people think, "sparing" one's immune system from having to deal with all sorts of crap does not make it better. Quite the contrary. The earlier the better, too, since it promotes the development of an immune system and reduces the risk of some freakish infection.
Essentially, if it's been proven safe at ~6 months (somewhat random choice, but the logic holds), there's no point risking waiting any longer, especially because there are no positive side effects from waiting.
I understand your point of view. Please consider the following:
I could list a couple of deadly diseases that can almost certainly be avoided by a vaccine, which is almost certainly safe. It's a high risk of death vs. a small risk of some weird side effect, which will most likely be very minor (especially when compared to something as debilitating as death).
Can we just form lynch mobs and get rid of them?
Let me correct you. Idiots only harm themselves. That guy is complete asshole.
You haven't read about it, apparently.
Wi-Fi causes rashes, Cell Phones cause Cancer, Vaccines cause autism.
Be sure to get those three straight, or else you'll irritate some idiot who firmly believes he's right because you got his moronic beliefs slightly mixed-up. It's not about convincing them, they're pretty much incurable, but if they're not annoyed they tend to spread their bullshit around a bit less often.
"intensive purposes" is capable of inducing intensive pain in my eyes.
Then please, instead of hurling insults around, explain to us how something which makes no sense at all works? Magic or Placebo Effect don't count as explanations (well, the placebo effect does, but you don't need expensive crap for that).
Not entirely, however, the non-original Wii models (the quietely released smaller model and this new mini) are, since they don't play GameCube games (the regular Wii does, unlike the Wii U)
Some things, while superficially very different, require mostly the same methods to control. While you're checking for drugs, you might as well take a quick look to check for counterfeit items. Why duplicate agencies, if you can add another task to an existing one, thereby saving paperwork and cash?
Here's how it works:
1a) Con artist invents "cure"
or
1b) Person with no knowledge creates "cure"
2) Said person sells ineffective product to sick person
3) Person dies, so they can't tell their story of how painful the whole thing was, especially seeing the people with proper treatment get better.