The money that goes into scientific research in general, never mind climatology, from governments is a rounding error. You are a wackadoo if you think that there's some sort of global conspiracy to tax people to do science.
The only thing I fail to understand is why anybody thinks Microsoft, after failing to deliver good products in this market for over a decade, will finally get it right.
Competition is great! Everybody benefits. But Microsoft is just going to bring more fail.
Hey man, whatever floats your boat. Me? I've been happy with the customer service and product quality I've gotten from Apple over the years. You think that makes me a fanboy, well, that's up to you.
I don't much care what Jobs says, I just hope his engineers keep doing good work. Which, by and large, they do.
Again, the real world impact is reportedly trivial. Does it drop calls? Yes. Does it get better reception than comparable phones? Apparently, in a lot of cases, yes. Is there a particular thing you can do that weakens the reception? Yes. Are there ways to mitigate that thing? Yes.
I understand the schadenfreude ("Look! This thing I don't like is dumb! Hahaha!") but...come on. Get over it.
No, what Jobs said is, "This is the state of the art of modern radio technology. Ya canna change the laws of physics, Captain."
Maybe the iPhone is slightly more susceptible than other designs to this measurable signal attenuation. What's the real-world impact? Anecdotally, it seems pretty trivial.
So what's the problem? Don't like it? Don't buy it.
You mean they actually wanted to charge you more than the cost of the parts to execute a repair? SHOCKING! You can repair things yourself for less than repair people want to charge you? OH, THE HUMANITY! They didn't jump you to the front of the line of other people that were waiting for help? Whatever shall you do?
Right, and people two months from now will be able to decide for themselves whether they think the antenna issue is a big deal.
I haven't bought a new iPhone, but I still think it's the right purchase for me. I'm making the decision with my eyes open, which is the right way to do it.
...okay, still trying to figure out what you mean by "cheaper" in your language. You bought your contraption for $250, and a subsidized phone for $199, and that's cheaper than the subsidized iPhone?
It's funny how infrequently people respond when they get served like that. Me? I'm often gracious enough to throw up an "I stand corrected! Thanks for setting me straight."
Um, it looks like your Sony thingy retails for $280. I can get a 4G iPhone in two weeks for $199. On what planet is that cheaper? You let me know if you find that intersection, OK?
So you're saying that it's only OK to be nice to people if it hurts me to do so? That doesn't make any sense.
I'm not advocating altruism. (I don't think there's any such thing.) I'm saying that even if I derive benefit from treating people kindly, I'm still treating people kindly.
What part of your job requires you to call people "you whiny little bitch"? How is that required for you to do whatever it is you do?
I'm saying that your competence is not related to your ability to work within a team, and if you can't work in a team, you aren't valuable to the organization, regardless of your competence.
This is true except for heroically high levels of competence.
I think that this particular policy is silly. However, I think that if the doctors have a history of abusing the people they need to get work out of, then it might be prudent for the doctors to at least take a look at their own attitudes.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering the numbers involved, no, no it really doesn't.
Do you know how much fuel those tactical jets use when flying supersonic? If you want to make it across the ocean, do not do that.
And you might want to have an aerial refueling tanker to meet you, even if you're cruising at 500kts.
Operationally. The program overall never covered its costs. Developing airplanes costs a lot of money.
The money that goes into scientific research in general, never mind climatology, from governments is a rounding error. You are a wackadoo if you think that there's some sort of global conspiracy to tax people to do science.
Article of faith? No. Analysis of track record.
I hope there are lots of viable competitors to the iPad. I don't happen to believe Microsoft will come up with one.
You're right. When these traders crash the economy, the taxpayers pay them for crashing the economy. It's every bit as rational as you pretend it is!
Next thing you're going to tell me is that A is A.
The only thing I fail to understand is why anybody thinks Microsoft, after failing to deliver good products in this market for over a decade, will finally get it right.
Competition is great! Everybody benefits. But Microsoft is just going to bring more fail.
Hey man, whatever floats your boat. Me? I've been happy with the customer service and product quality I've gotten from Apple over the years. You think that makes me a fanboy, well, that's up to you.
I don't much care what Jobs says, I just hope his engineers keep doing good work. Which, by and large, they do.
Again, the real world impact is reportedly trivial. Does it drop calls? Yes. Does it get better reception than comparable phones? Apparently, in a lot of cases, yes. Is there a particular thing you can do that weakens the reception? Yes. Are there ways to mitigate that thing? Yes.
I understand the schadenfreude ("Look! This thing I don't like is dumb! Hahaha!") but...come on. Get over it.
No, what Jobs said is, "This is the state of the art of modern radio technology. Ya canna change the laws of physics, Captain."
Maybe the iPhone is slightly more susceptible than other designs to this measurable signal attenuation. What's the real-world impact? Anecdotally, it seems pretty trivial.
So what's the problem? Don't like it? Don't buy it.
You mean they actually wanted to charge you more than the cost of the parts to execute a repair? SHOCKING!
You can repair things yourself for less than repair people want to charge you? OH, THE HUMANITY!
They didn't jump you to the front of the line of other people that were waiting for help? Whatever shall you do?
Come on.
Well, they're in luck! Apple's taking care of them!
What's the problem again?
Right, and people two months from now will be able to decide for themselves whether they think the antenna issue is a big deal.
I haven't bought a new iPhone, but I still think it's the right purchase for me. I'm making the decision with my eyes open, which is the right way to do it.
There are companies driven by the Engineering Division in 2010?
Where?
The fact that you had to own a Treo in order to make it work, and it could do basically nothing on its own.
I'd get things that meant something to me personally, rather than putting it up for some kind of vote.
But what the heck do I know? I'm just some jackass on the internet.
Ares 1 was not designed to go to the moon. Ares 5 does not exist. Your argument seems to ignore that distinction.
...okay, still trying to figure out what you mean by "cheaper" in your language. You bought your contraption for $250, and a subsidized phone for $199, and that's cheaper than the subsidized iPhone?
It's funny how infrequently people respond when they get served like that. Me? I'm often gracious enough to throw up an "I stand corrected! Thanks for setting me straight."
But I'm a weirdo.
So, Internet high-five. *
Um, it looks like your Sony thingy retails for $280. I can get a 4G iPhone in two weeks for $199. On what planet is that cheaper? You let me know if you find that intersection, OK?
I guess my point is, my behavior doesn't need to be altruistic in order to be genuine.
So you're saying that it's only OK to be nice to people if it hurts me to do so? That doesn't make any sense.
I'm not advocating altruism. (I don't think there's any such thing.) I'm saying that even if I derive benefit from treating people kindly, I'm still treating people kindly.
It's not a zero sum.
What part of your job requires you to call people "you whiny little bitch"? How is that required for you to do whatever it is you do?
I'm saying that your competence is not related to your ability to work within a team, and if you can't work in a team, you aren't valuable to the organization, regardless of your competence.
This is true except for heroically high levels of competence.
I think that this particular policy is silly. However, I think that if the doctors have a history of abusing the people they need to get work out of, then it might be prudent for the doctors to at least take a look at their own attitudes.
Physician, heal thyself, and all that.
I'm not going to keep track of the misanthropes. If you don't like common courtesy, tough on you.
You can not control the world, but you can control the way you treat people.
I don't think that people are a bunch of bastards, because they don't act like that around me, because I treat them like people, not bastards.
It's not that complicated.