Actually, Bill gates doesn't mind a little piracy. "Although the world's largest software maker spends millions of dollars annually to combat illegal copying and distribution of its products, critics allege -- and Microsoft acknowledges -- that piracy sometimes helps the company establish itself in emerging markets and fend off threats from free open-source programs."
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/apr/09/business/fi-micropiracy9
This revolves around the 1:1 sale value idea where 1 download = 1 license value. Of course it's going to be hypothetical because some people may download once to a flash drive and then use that to install OO on all their systems or they might have failed downloads and have to try multiple times. This whole article is interesting but doesn't really say much about anything relevant.
When they blame firearms they fail to note that cars, knives, and blunt trauma are still valid and highly common causes of death in the U.S.
Cars kill just as many people as guns.
Stabbings and being beaten to death occur more often than deaths from firearms.
(I don't know the exact figures off the top of my head. Sorry.)
Give me a fully-functional, fully-OPEN, miniature computer in the format of a phone, not tied to FUCKING Google, Apple, Microsoft, or any other multinational company of liars.
I believe what you're referring to is a dumb phone.
Apple didn't lose half their share. The market's absolute size increased, with Android being the main player in that growth, thus Apple's part of the pie shrank even if in absolute numbers it didn't
100% of the market share is everyone who owns a smart phone. In order for apple to have maintained its share of the market, they would have had to make an appropriate number of sales in relation to the number of android sales. They obviously didn't other android would not have surged up to 72%. Therefore off all the smartphones owners on the market, apple has lost shares. It doesn't matter if they have the same number of users or not, in the grand scheme of things they have lost shares.
Sorry I didn't cover this in the first reply. Im a posting this at work. Anyway, with gravitational forces you have to factor in quite a few things. Orbital velocity, Mass, and all other gravitational interactions. While it's true that objects with mass pull each other closer, obviously the object with the most mass will be doing most of the pulling. Gas giants are deceiving in the fact that for all their size, they aren't dense, therefore not as much mass and they will have a deceivingly low gravitational pull. So a smaller celestial body could knock it out of obit.
Well not being an astrophysicist either, all i can do is speculate. Obviously everything in space has mass. I've heard of galaxies colliding together so why not solar systems? Assuming you introduced a strong enough gravitational force that wasn't able to capture a planet due to inertia, merely alter its course, than it's reasonable to believe that an orbiting body could be flung away for the gravitational influence of its star.
As the title suggests, what they taught us in school was next to useless. The primary focus was on Microsoft Office and typing. The only thing i took away from MS office was a love for excel sheets. I learned to type more from IM clients than the typing class. Now i learned a lot about computers in high school, but most of it was self taught. Wireless networking? Learned that during LAN parties. Computer hardware? Learned that upgrading my computer, for LAN parties.
..the satellite with the gas generator now that you have it up there?
Sounds like more space junk to me.
It would almost be better to make a disposable satellite that latches onto the target space debris and uses thrusters to slow both units down to a orbit destabilizing speed. That way the orbital debris is removed, and there's not another hunk of junk floating around up there.
Slashdot Mirror
No, This is more like 6 degrees of TPB. Only it's not a fun parlor game and is instead a means of scarring ISPs into submission.
Actually, Bill gates doesn't mind a little piracy. "Although the world's largest software maker spends millions of dollars annually to combat illegal copying and distribution of its products, critics allege -- and Microsoft acknowledges -- that piracy sometimes helps the company establish itself in emerging markets and fend off threats from free open-source programs." http://articles.latimes.com/2006/apr/09/business/fi-micropiracy9
I don't always analyze the battle strategies of fictional characters but when i do, It's usually the characters from Star Wars, or Jurassic Park.
My car would be worth $165 Billion... If someone would pay me that much for it... see how ridiculous these hypothetical articles really sound?
Very, puctuationisthedestroyerofworkflow.
Yea, it's called a black list redirect.
A. It's Rhetorical. We all know the answer. B. The fact that we all know the answer makes the question humorous.
Was about to post the same thing... damn you.
71% of Americans don't pay attention to past events (History)
This revolves around the 1:1 sale value idea where 1 download = 1 license value. Of course it's going to be hypothetical because some people may download once to a flash drive and then use that to install OO on all their systems or they might have failed downloads and have to try multiple times. This whole article is interesting but doesn't really say much about anything relevant.
How else am i supposed to watch all my illegally downloaded movies?
When they blame firearms they fail to note that cars, knives, and blunt trauma are still valid and highly common causes of death in the U.S. Cars kill just as many people as guns. Stabbings and being beaten to death occur more often than deaths from firearms. (I don't know the exact figures off the top of my head. Sorry.)
I hope they go through with this at a time when AMD is poised to produce higher end CPU's thereby effectively stealing Intel's consumer share.
There was also a time when dinosaurs roamed the earth. What's your point?
Proton pack for catching ghosts? That's cool, and not "killy". And what pre-teen (laymen) doesn't love ghostbusters?
Give me a fully-functional, fully-OPEN, miniature computer in the format of a phone, not tied to FUCKING Google, Apple, Microsoft, or any other multinational company of liars.
I believe what you're referring to is a dumb phone.
Apple didn't lose half their share. The market's absolute size increased, with Android being the main player in that growth, thus Apple's part of the pie shrank even if in absolute numbers it didn't
100% of the market share is everyone who owns a smart phone. In order for apple to have maintained its share of the market, they would have had to make an appropriate number of sales in relation to the number of android sales. They obviously didn't other android would not have surged up to 72%. Therefore off all the smartphones owners on the market, apple has lost shares. It doesn't matter if they have the same number of users or not, in the grand scheme of things they have lost shares.
Sorry I didn't cover this in the first reply. Im a posting this at work. Anyway, with gravitational forces you have to factor in quite a few things. Orbital velocity, Mass, and all other gravitational interactions. While it's true that objects with mass pull each other closer, obviously the object with the most mass will be doing most of the pulling. Gas giants are deceiving in the fact that for all their size, they aren't dense, therefore not as much mass and they will have a deceivingly low gravitational pull. So a smaller celestial body could knock it out of obit.
Well not being an astrophysicist either, all i can do is speculate. Obviously everything in space has mass. I've heard of galaxies colliding together so why not solar systems? Assuming you introduced a strong enough gravitational force that wasn't able to capture a planet due to inertia, merely alter its course, than it's reasonable to believe that an orbiting body could be flung away for the gravitational influence of its star.
Sorry, forgot to add my age or anything. I graduated in 2006. I'm 26.
As the title suggests, what they taught us in school was next to useless. The primary focus was on Microsoft Office and typing. The only thing i took away from MS office was a love for excel sheets. I learned to type more from IM clients than the typing class. Now i learned a lot about computers in high school, but most of it was self taught. Wireless networking? Learned that during LAN parties. Computer hardware? Learned that upgrading my computer, for LAN parties.
How do they propose to keep the non-junk from being de-orbited by the same gas? (I'm too lazy to read TFA.)
Physics.
..the satellite with the gas generator now that you have it up there?
Sounds like more space junk to me.
It would almost be better to make a disposable satellite that latches onto the target space debris and uses thrusters to slow both units down to a orbit destabilizing speed. That way the orbital debris is removed, and there's not another hunk of junk floating around up there.
I left out the citations because i'm lazy but I'll claim it was accident.
Is it the same company profiting by replacing their old useless hardware with the new?
Whatever the company is that makes them, you can be sure the TSA have shares in that company.