The American health care system can't be easily compared to other health care systems because it makes no pretense about maximizing outcomes per dollar.
Go ahead and criticize it for not attempting to maximize outcomes per dollar, but spending huge amounts of money on extraordinary care for people that are terminally ill doesn't directly make health care more expensive for other people(indirectly, it may make other health care less available, and thus more expensive, but not every doctor is going to be the best oncologist in the state, nor is every hospital the best, etc.).
If you are really worried about costs and not about the distribution of outcomes, you want more doctors, doctors with less training(yes really!) and a saner liability structure. If you are worried about the distribution of outcomes, go ahead and just say so, you are siding with at least half of the planet.
Microsoft used a generic name so they don't have much to complain about, but I imagine that leaving Microsoft out of the name was more about Office branding than it was about encouraging people to conflate their standard with something called "Open Document".
Population density, bah! The proper measure is subscribers per infrastructure dollar. Population density-density gets you quite a bit closer.
What the hell am I talking about? Wiring Anchorage is easy. Wiring Alaska is hard. The population density of Canada doesn't have much to do with the population density your typical Canadian lives at(or average American in the US).
None of this has much to do with the crappy broadband in the US.
I'm not cheerleading the replacement of silicon, I'm just pointing out that those things end up being technical issues more often than they do fundamental issues.
They weigh heavily on what gets pushed to market(because they make up a huge component of the price), but they are not going to prevent transition to a technology that has fewer fundamental limitations if fundamental limitations become a problem with an existing technology(I am not in any way qualified to make this evalutation for this situation, so read this as a generality, not as a comment on carbon vs silicon).
I'm pretty sure Open Office was named well after Microsoft Office. That's seems to be pretty similar to what you are complaining about. Microsoft probably would have been well served to have used a less generic name, but the virtues of naming such a produce 'Office' are evident in its widespread use.
I'm not gonna yell, but you are misunderstanding the physicists position: No one will die. After that, they address the fact that those other things are possible, but they are using possible in a very narrow sense. So multiply the risk of the collider destroying the world by the value of human society and existence(any number will do), and multiply the risk of crossing the street by the value of a single life, and you find out that the risk adjusted cost of crossing the street is higher.
If I had a point, it was that for there to be progress, the conservative viewpoint has to occasionally be ignored.
The physicists are more certain that nothing cataclysmic will happen than you are certain that there is not a bear waiting to eat you on the other side of the hill. The risks exists, but only in the sense that it cannot be ruled out, not in the sense that it might actually happen.
If you are pooping in the water, I'm damn well gonna go ahead and extend my right to swing my fist right through your face.
Also, don't climb that hill over there, you might find out what is on the other side, and it might be dangerous.
It's certainly possible that the entire physics community is wrong or engaged in a giant conspiracy to destroy us all, but it isn't all that likely, and the fun part is that it is just as much their planet as it is your planet.
(I wonder if the risk of dying while crossing the street is greater than the risk of destroying the planet, not because the outcomes are comparable, but because you are thinking about one a lot more than the other, and the ramifications for you are about the same)
Don't use Columbus as an example. Vikings had been making the trip for a while, and there is decent reason to believe that shipbuilders were coming over to snag masts before Columbus made his voyage, and so on:
Superficially, it seems like they should be able to set things up so that ec2 increases their hardware utilization without really requiring a whole lot of extra hardware beyond what they are using at peaks.
It could just be that the extra hardware is nearly free compared to what they have to spend maintaining what they need for the store.
I'm pretty sure that the Amazon store represents a good real world application. Or really, they need similar technology to run the store, so they just have it lying around.
I like the theory that they are mostly running it on their "Christmas capacity" as far as explaining why they are doing it.
Are you planning on not watching the Olympics and stepping up efforts not to buy products from China? Beyond that, there is approximately fuck all that citizens of other countries can do about it.
That's why I mentioned "stuff you wouldn't mind someone reading over your shoulder".
I get that trusted hardware is really really hard, I'm not pushing back on that, I'm pushing back on the idea that it is absolutely necessary to trust some hardware before it becomes useful(for some things).
And the speculative stuff is more about where things might as well be if there is 20 years of linear progress from where we are, rather than about where things should go right now(so it should be dead simple to access local storage and processing, rather than depending on a network, even if makes sense to use a network for most things, because something the size of a watch will have absurd amounts of both). In the near term, I find it hard to believe that future versions(the next generation or two even) of Bluetooth or Wireless USB will lack support for video. A version or two after that, and it might even work well. So that's half of it right there.
For accessing a lot of stuff, if you were using such a setup, you wouldn't really need to input a password on a keyboard, you could just have a key on the widget and use that to authenticate(so, for checking lots of types of email, accessing a bookmark service, stuff that you don't really mind someone seeing over your shoulder, zero worries).
But mostly, I mean the hardware at my brother's house, or at another location for work(company owned), and things like that.
It is probably exceptionally difficult to actually understand what spending $1000 a day for 3 years would get you, at least as some sort of coherent whole.
I'm pretty sure that most people with 100 M&M's sitting in front of them would have great difficulty scaling that experience to 10,000 M&M's, and it would just get worse as you went up.
Ok, but I want the brain of my laptop to look an awful lot like a thumbdrive, so that when I get home, I can plug it into my TV, and also use it on trusted hardware in other locations.
Mostly, if just needs to be really easy for my widget to drive an arbitrary screen and accept input from whatever device happens to be around, to make it easier to show mom those pictures, or give that presentation, or whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
The American health care system can't be easily compared to other health care systems because it makes no pretense about maximizing outcomes per dollar.
Go ahead and criticize it for not attempting to maximize outcomes per dollar, but spending huge amounts of money on extraordinary care for people that are terminally ill doesn't directly make health care more expensive for other people(indirectly, it may make other health care less available, and thus more expensive, but not every doctor is going to be the best oncologist in the state, nor is every hospital the best, etc.).
If you are really worried about costs and not about the distribution of outcomes, you want more doctors, doctors with less training(yes really!) and a saner liability structure. If you are worried about the distribution of outcomes, go ahead and just say so, you are siding with at least half of the planet.
Microsoft used a generic name so they don't have much to complain about, but I imagine that leaving Microsoft out of the name was more about Office branding than it was about encouraging people to conflate their standard with something called "Open Document".
Population density, bah! The proper measure is subscribers per infrastructure dollar. Population density-density gets you quite a bit closer.
What the hell am I talking about? Wiring Anchorage is easy. Wiring Alaska is hard. The population density of Canada doesn't have much to do with the population density your typical Canadian lives at(or average American in the US).
None of this has much to do with the crappy broadband in the US.
I'm not cheerleading the replacement of silicon, I'm just pointing out that those things end up being technical issues more often than they do fundamental issues.
They weigh heavily on what gets pushed to market(because they make up a huge component of the price), but they are not going to prevent transition to a technology that has fewer fundamental limitations if fundamental limitations become a problem with an existing technology(I am not in any way qualified to make this evalutation for this situation, so read this as a generality, not as a comment on carbon vs silicon).
I'm pretty sure Open Office was named well after Microsoft Office. That's seems to be pretty similar to what you are complaining about. Microsoft probably would have been well served to have used a less generic name, but the virtues of naming such a produce 'Office' are evident in its widespread use.
Those are all issues with silicon as well(crystals vs nanotubes...), they are just reasonably well solved.
I'm not gonna yell, but you are misunderstanding the physicists position: No one will die. After that, they address the fact that those other things are possible, but they are using possible in a very narrow sense. So multiply the risk of the collider destroying the world by the value of human society and existence(any number will do), and multiply the risk of crossing the street by the value of a single life, and you find out that the risk adjusted cost of crossing the street is higher.
If I had a point, it was that for there to be progress, the conservative viewpoint has to occasionally be ignored.
The physicists are more certain that nothing cataclysmic will happen than you are certain that there is not a bear waiting to eat you on the other side of the hill. The risks exists, but only in the sense that it cannot be ruled out, not in the sense that it might actually happen.
If you are pooping in the water, I'm damn well gonna go ahead and extend my right to swing my fist right through your face.
Also, don't climb that hill over there, you might find out what is on the other side, and it might be dangerous.
It's certainly possible that the entire physics community is wrong or engaged in a giant conspiracy to destroy us all, but it isn't all that likely, and the fun part is that it is just as much their planet as it is your planet.
(I wonder if the risk of dying while crossing the street is greater than the risk of destroying the planet, not because the outcomes are comparable, but because you are thinking about one a lot more than the other, and the ramifications for you are about the same)
Don't use Columbus as an example. Vikings had been making the trip for a while, and there is decent reason to believe that shipbuilders were coming over to snag masts before Columbus made his voyage, and so on:
http://www.google.com/search?q=pre+columbian+atlantic+crossings
He didn't have any notion that he was going to sail off the edge of the world either.
That's the plan.
I don't know.
Superficially, it seems like they should be able to set things up so that ec2 increases their hardware utilization without really requiring a whole lot of extra hardware beyond what they are using at peaks.
It could just be that the extra hardware is nearly free compared to what they have to spend maintaining what they need for the store.
I'm pretty sure that the Amazon store represents a good real world application. Or really, they need similar technology to run the store, so they just have it lying around.
I like the theory that they are mostly running it on their "Christmas capacity" as far as explaining why they are doing it.
Huhhuh, you said fsck.
Do you have a trite list of what the average you thinks of westerners?
First, justify evicting one. Then justify evicting 100. Then pay the other 1,499,900 people enough that they don't complain.
Just Kidding. It's crazy. COHRE(the source for the estimate) does pretty much seem to hate the Olympics though:
http://www.cohre.org/view_page.php?page_id=268
Are you planning on not watching the Olympics and stepping up efforts not to buy products from China? Beyond that, there is approximately fuck all that citizens of other countries can do about it.
That's why I mentioned "stuff you wouldn't mind someone reading over your shoulder".
I get that trusted hardware is really really hard, I'm not pushing back on that, I'm pushing back on the idea that it is absolutely necessary to trust some hardware before it becomes useful(for some things).
And the speculative stuff is more about where things might as well be if there is 20 years of linear progress from where we are, rather than about where things should go right now(so it should be dead simple to access local storage and processing, rather than depending on a network, even if makes sense to use a network for most things, because something the size of a watch will have absurd amounts of both). In the near term, I find it hard to believe that future versions(the next generation or two even) of Bluetooth or Wireless USB will lack support for video. A version or two after that, and it might even work well. So that's half of it right there.
There is no cube.
He likes Lea & Perrins.
I'll trust the screen.
For accessing a lot of stuff, if you were using such a setup, you wouldn't really need to input a password on a keyboard, you could just have a key on the widget and use that to authenticate(so, for checking lots of types of email, accessing a bookmark service, stuff that you don't really mind someone seeing over your shoulder, zero worries).
But mostly, I mean the hardware at my brother's house, or at another location for work(company owned), and things like that.
It must be hard to be that special.
It is probably exceptionally difficult to actually understand what spending $1000 a day for 3 years would get you, at least as some sort of coherent whole.
I'm pretty sure that most people with 100 M&M's sitting in front of them would have great difficulty scaling that experience to 10,000 M&M's, and it would just get worse as you went up.
Ok, but I want the brain of my laptop to look an awful lot like a thumbdrive, so that when I get home, I can plug it into my TV, and also use it on trusted hardware in other locations.
Mostly, if just needs to be really easy for my widget to drive an arbitrary screen and accept input from whatever device happens to be around, to make it easier to show mom those pictures, or give that presentation, or whatever.
Actually, fuel pumps in the gas tank suck less. Har.
Yes, the three remaining non-binary users of Usenet shoot at each other with real guns all day long.
Also, they ride unicorns.