I wouldn't buy gold right now (wait until inflation starts to roar), but the inflation adjusted historical average is somewhere north of $2000 (Movement away from gold as a currency and improved mining technology could well account for the decrease in valuation, so I'm not insisting it should be over $2000, who knows).
They report their earnings in the U.S., and (presumably) a significant number of their shareholders are interested in dollars.
Another side of it is that when they are setting prices they are far more concerned with what people will pay than they are with costs (this is much of the point of positioning yourself as a premium brand).
During the preponderance of human history, women were pregnant all the time (except when lactating), and babies were killed if there wasn't enough food. Only relatively recently has life been secure enough to make it a choice.
How does evidence/theory of a big bang contradict something that is based entirely not on evidence (if there were evidence, religion could be a science...)?
The controversy you are talking about stems from people rejecting empiricism, not from people embracing it.
I guess I have issues that aren't technical; That policy would stifle enormous amounts of legitimate comment, which seems much worse to me than anonymous badmouthing.
There is a big difference between protecting websites that choose to allow anonymous contributions and requiring websites to allow anonymous contributions (no doubt some people would advocate for the latter, but certainly not everybody).
Anonymous reviews on insubstantial websites aren't worth much to anybody. I would probably roll my eyes at the review you mention (if it is true, local health officials are useless and I shouldn't trust Tony's either...), as I have been on the internet for several weeks, and I have managed to notice that people post all manner of stupid shit. Look at *any* product review and you will see someone posting a long, poorly thought out screed that amounts to "Product failed to meet my ludicrous expectations"; if this doesn't inform your opinion of the content available on the internet, you shouldn't use the internet.
(None of that means that the judge should ignore Tony's request, but I'm nervous that the end result is that websites being required to maintain identity information, which is not a good outcome, for lots of reasons)
Each time I have ever clicked through to a User Friendly comic, it has failed to be funny.
I clicked through to this one, and if failed to even make sense (SCO happened to be a case involving Linux and patents, but the result of that case has no bearing, at all, on the legitimacy of the patents that Microsoft has, not to mention the much larger war chest that Microsoft has, or the fact that Microsoft is still a going concern...the comparison isn't witty, it is stupid).
Still, a lot of recent advances in cancer treatment have come from treating it as a cellular/molecular disease, rather than an organ disease (meaning that the treatments are generally more appropriate for the cancer in question, and so on).
If it was cheap enough, a universal screen would make a lot of sense (but that's an enormous, at this point untrue, if).
So don't agree to and use that billing structure. I have used pre pay phones that charge $0.10 and $0.05 per message, and if you get a contract, you can pay $10 to send as many text messages as you want (hopefully anyone agreeing to that sends at least a couple of messages a day).
If you think that the cellular companies are obligated to be your friend, well, that's unfortunate.
There is a non-zero chance that the Silverlight player has better platform support (hint, a post above talks about using it on a Mac), and probably has different backend and network requirements.
Really, the world would be a much better place if nobody ever did anything new, especially on some sort of crazy 'opt-in' basis.
It sounds like they would benefit from making it possible to switch back, but maybe they already decided to switch everybody, once the (common) complaints are addressed.
If the potential correction contains accurate information, it is far more helpful to the reader than the incorrect information, citation or not (even if all it does is prompt the reader to obtain a reliable source for the information).
Solar panels will have different outputs depending on the weather and latitude where they are installed. Quoting the price per watt under idealized conditions isn't propaganda, it provides a reasonable basis for comparison.
Though if some salesman comes to your house and quotes the price per watt, you should probably get all reactionary (unless he is comparing two different systems).
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't buy gold right now (wait until inflation starts to roar), but the inflation adjusted historical average is somewhere north of $2000 (Movement away from gold as a currency and improved mining technology could well account for the decrease in valuation, so I'm not insisting it should be over $2000, who knows).
They report their earnings in the U.S., and (presumably) a significant number of their shareholders are interested in dollars.
Another side of it is that when they are setting prices they are far more concerned with what people will pay than they are with costs (this is much of the point of positioning yourself as a premium brand).
During the preponderance of human history, women were pregnant all the time (except when lactating), and babies were killed if there wasn't enough food. Only relatively recently has life been secure enough to make it a choice.
How does evidence/theory of a big bang contradict something that is based entirely not on evidence (if there were evidence, religion could be a science...)?
The controversy you are talking about stems from people rejecting empiricism, not from people embracing it.
I guess I have issues that aren't technical; That policy would stifle enormous amounts of legitimate comment, which seems much worse to me than anonymous badmouthing.
I think you are being far too optimistic about the extent of the sand/dust and also the effectiveness of blowing it away.
I don't know, people in general are pretty put off by the allegations that Yelp reviews are for sale.
There is a big difference between protecting websites that choose to allow anonymous contributions and requiring websites to allow anonymous contributions (no doubt some people would advocate for the latter, but certainly not everybody).
Anonymous reviews on insubstantial websites aren't worth much to anybody. I would probably roll my eyes at the review you mention (if it is true, local health officials are useless and I shouldn't trust Tony's either...), as I have been on the internet for several weeks, and I have managed to notice that people post all manner of stupid shit. Look at *any* product review and you will see someone posting a long, poorly thought out screed that amounts to "Product failed to meet my ludicrous expectations"; if this doesn't inform your opinion of the content available on the internet, you shouldn't use the internet.
(None of that means that the judge should ignore Tony's request, but I'm nervous that the end result is that websites being required to maintain identity information, which is not a good outcome, for lots of reasons)
So do people operate websites need to have a mechanism where they can peel back anonymity? That's a pretty daunting technical requirement.
Each time I have ever clicked through to a User Friendly comic, it has failed to be funny.
I clicked through to this one, and if failed to even make sense (SCO happened to be a case involving Linux and patents, but the result of that case has no bearing, at all, on the legitimacy of the patents that Microsoft has, not to mention the much larger war chest that Microsoft has, or the fact that Microsoft is still a going concern...the comparison isn't witty, it is stupid).
Sounds like that microscope was effective propaganda....
Still, a lot of recent advances in cancer treatment have come from treating it as a cellular/molecular disease, rather than an organ disease (meaning that the treatments are generally more appropriate for the cancer in question, and so on).
If it was cheap enough, a universal screen would make a lot of sense (but that's an enormous, at this point untrue, if).
Credits often push your tax rate into the negative (it depends on how they structure it), so you might get the money anyway.
So don't agree to and use that billing structure. I have used pre pay phones that charge $0.10 and $0.05 per message, and if you get a contract, you can pay $10 to send as many text messages as you want (hopefully anyone agreeing to that sends at least a couple of messages a day).
If you think that the cellular companies are obligated to be your friend, well, that's unfortunate.
Perhaps they have ~100 users on some internal site, 10 of which happen to use Mac.
There is a non-zero chance that the Silverlight player has better platform support (hint, a post above talks about using it on a Mac), and probably has different backend and network requirements.
Really, the world would be a much better place if nobody ever did anything new, especially on some sort of crazy 'opt-in' basis.
It sounds like they would benefit from making it possible to switch back, but maybe they already decided to switch everybody, once the (common) complaints are addressed.
XKCD is often funny, but Mr. Monroe is also often wildly nihilistic and (usually separately) soppy.
It depends on which one is correct.
If the potential correction contains accurate information, it is far more helpful to the reader than the incorrect information, citation or not (even if all it does is prompt the reader to obtain a reliable source for the information).
Huffington Post is a news organization. Calling it a blog is just silly and lends far too much credence to little Jimmy and his postcards.
Solar panels will have different outputs depending on the weather and latitude where they are installed. Quoting the price per watt under idealized conditions isn't propaganda, it provides a reasonable basis for comparison.
Though if some salesman comes to your house and quotes the price per watt, you should probably get all reactionary (unless he is comparing two different systems).
User Friendly isn't a random comic, it is a shitty comic.
You should go all in and say "ooze about".
This post should be modded entertaining. There is nothing intrinsic to the post that is funny.
I find cleartype (on XP) to be far better than a wide range of other font engines. Am I doing it wrong?