Here in Silicon Valley, the SJ Mercury News recently put out a report on the "improving economy", as measured by the declining unemployment rate.
In other news, the unemployment rate in this area is declining because IT workers have given up trying to find work, and are leaving Santa Clara County in droves.
Thereby reinforcing the finding that 90% of statistics are worthless.
The honeybees only survived because the aliens took them off the planet during the extinction, then brought them back about the time they built the pyramids.
Wouldn't it be more useful to provide statistics on the percentage of *each environment* that suffered breaches -- e.g., 17% of Linux machines suffered breaches, 28% of Windows machines, 19% of OS X machines?
Unless I've misread the article (which is possible), the numbers they provide don't seem to take into account the *prevalence* of each environment.
I feel compelled to point out that one month's income in the US in the 1980s was still above poverty level, and left most people room to buy cars, music, cable TV, etc.
Let's not forget that we're talking about the 3rd world here. They worry about food, water and medication, not what they're getting for Christmas.
The point being that one month's rent for us in the 1980s was still a lower price point, because we had more disposable income.
Umm... no. You imply that at this price point, desire is the only remaining factor in determining whether a person should buy a computer.
I suggest that you don't know what it means to be truly poor. It doesn't mean deciding whether or not to splurge on a bigger hard drive, or whether to get your kid a radio or a bike for Christmas. It means choosing between food and medication.
My point isn't that these computers aren't CHEAPER than what's currently available. Of course they are. I just don't think they'll be nearly as accessible as the article suggests they are.
Read the article again. It refers to the machines TWICE as "low-cost". A month's income is not low-cost.
Within the realm of possiblity? Sure. Equatable to the early prices that we paid for PCs in the U.S.? OK. But low cost? Not by a long shot.
Even in the U.S., there are people living out of hotels because they can't afford the first and last month's rent deposit on an apartment. You think they'd be able to afford a computer? You think it's gonna be any easier for people in the third world?
This is a computer being sold in the third world. It is NOT, as the article claims, a low-cost solution.
$249 is cheap here, but does it qualify as a "budget" machine in the target markets (India, Russia, China, Mexico and Brazil)? According to this site, the average income in Brazil's largest metropolitan areas is less than $300 a month!
Swedish scientist...
on
Saving Huygens
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Meh. I'm feeling pretty neutral about this article.
"The fact that you can get the data with some other tool does not remove all fault on Google... The Desktop search do make it a lot easier to get and present it in a way that it can be easily understood."
By that line of reasoning, we should get all pissy at Microsoft for including Windows Explorer with their OS. After all, Explorer makes it "lot easier to get and present it in a way that it can be easily understood."
And the Recycle Bin makes documents accessible "even if they are DELETED"!
Bottom line: you're wrong. Google has provided a useful tool for INDIVIDUAL users. Now the burden of enforcing that is on system administrators. Period.
It wasn't meant to be funny at all. The OP selected the first sentence from each candidate's response and extrapolated meaning while completely ignoring the rest. I was merely illustrating the complete and utter IDIOCY of that type of reasoning.
You know, it kind of reminds me of grade school, where if you said "asinine", the kids would all go, "Ooooh! You said ASS!!!" I guess some people never grew up, huh?
I don't know how this comment was modded insightful. If I followed the same type of reasoning, I would take the first sentence of the parent post, and ignore the rest:
"Just for the record, let's get it straight."
Sounds like a personal problem! Should've been modded off-topic!
Segway has announced a revolutionary new balance system. Code-named "kickstand", this invention is expected to revolutionize the parking process for light-weight transportation vehicles in major cities worldwide. Patent pending.
I'm not up to speed on the terminology (yes, I've been living under a rock, and it's very cozy under here). Is it really a "worm" if it requires the user to execute it?
Slashdot Mirror
Here in Silicon Valley, the SJ Mercury News recently put out a report on the "improving economy", as measured by the declining unemployment rate.
In other news, the unemployment rate in this area is declining because IT workers have given up trying to find work, and are leaving Santa Clara County in droves.
Thereby reinforcing the finding that 90% of statistics are worthless.
The honeybees only survived because the aliens took them off the planet during the extinction, then brought them back about the time they built the pyramids.
$265 to play a video game a few days early.
Surely an undersexed geek can think of a better way to blow $265????
If you liked this book, you may also like...
Wouldn't it be more useful to provide statistics on the percentage of *each environment* that suffered breaches -- e.g., 17% of Linux machines suffered breaches, 28% of Windows machines, 19% of OS X machines?
Unless I've misread the article (which is possible), the numbers they provide don't seem to take into account the *prevalence* of each environment.
Isn't it amazing how technology simplifies our lives?
LTFA
(lighten the f*** up)
Somebody wanna clue me in? ;)
Thanks for posting this. I, too, feel sorry for those poor, confused souls who couldn't make it through all 3 sentences of the news item. :(
I feel compelled to point out that one month's income in the US in the 1980s was still above poverty level, and left most people room to buy cars, music, cable TV, etc.
Let's not forget that we're talking about the 3rd world here. They worry about food, water and medication, not what they're getting for Christmas.
The point being that one month's rent for us in the 1980s was still a lower price point, because we had more disposable income.
Whether or not a computer can be built cheaper is irrelevant to whether individuals in the target markets will be able to afford them.
"affordable to those who want one"
Umm... no. You imply that at this price point, desire is the only remaining factor in determining whether a person should buy a computer.
I suggest that you don't know what it means to be truly poor. It doesn't mean deciding whether or not to splurge on a bigger hard drive, or whether to get your kid a radio or a bike for Christmas. It means choosing between food and medication.
My point isn't that these computers aren't CHEAPER than what's currently available. Of course they are. I just don't think they'll be nearly as accessible as the article suggests they are.
Read the article again. It refers to the machines TWICE as "low-cost". A month's income is not low-cost.
Within the realm of possiblity? Sure. Equatable to the early prices that we paid for PCs in the U.S.? OK. But low cost? Not by a long shot.
Even in the U.S., there are people living out of hotels because they can't afford the first and last month's rent deposit on an apartment. You think they'd be able to afford a computer? You think it's gonna be any easier for people in the third world?
This is a computer being sold in the third world. It is NOT, as the article claims, a low-cost solution.
$249 is cheap here, but does it qualify as a "budget" machine in the target markets (India, Russia, China, Mexico and Brazil)? According to this site, the average income in Brazil's largest metropolitan areas is less than $300 a month!
Meh. I'm feeling pretty neutral about this article.
"The fact that you can get the data with some other tool does not remove all fault on Google... The Desktop search do make it a lot easier to get and present it in a way that it can be easily understood."
By that line of reasoning, we should get all pissy at Microsoft for including Windows Explorer with their OS. After all, Explorer makes it "lot easier to get and present it in a way that it can be easily understood."
And the Recycle Bin makes documents accessible "even if they are DELETED"!
Bottom line: you're wrong. Google has provided a useful tool for INDIVIDUAL users. Now the burden of enforcing that is on system administrators. Period.
"their goal is to produce the C-SPAN ... of science"
Sure-fire recipe for success!
It wasn't meant to be funny at all. The OP selected the first sentence from each candidate's response and extrapolated meaning while completely ignoring the rest. I was merely illustrating the complete and utter IDIOCY of that type of reasoning.
You know, it kind of reminds me of grade school, where if you said "asinine", the kids would all go, "Ooooh! You said ASS!!!" I guess some people never grew up, huh?
I don't know how this comment was modded insightful. If I followed the same type of reasoning, I would take the first sentence of the parent post, and ignore the rest:
"Just for the record, let's get it straight."
Sounds like a personal problem! Should've been modded off-topic!
Seriously. Now that I know both Kerry and Nader have made mistakes, I couldn't possibly vote for either of them!
That's a good thing?
Kind of like a scooter?
Segway has announced a revolutionary new balance system. Code-named "kickstand", this invention is expected to revolutionize the parking process for light-weight transportation vehicles in major cities worldwide. Patent pending.
I have some Windows software I need reviewed. What would be the best place to ask? Oh, I know... Slashdot! Of course!
I'm not up to speed on the terminology (yes, I've been living under a rock, and it's very cozy under here). Is it really a "worm" if it requires the user to execute it?