Where have you been the last 10 years - nearly 90% market penetration in the UK, Germany, France is close, and don't even get me started on Japan and S. Korea.
Are you smoking crack? Or more importantly, are the guys who gave you +5, insightful smoking crack?
What really ticks me off is that here in the UK we pay the most IN THE WORLD for songs on itunes (79p = US$1.39), and now we're being asked to fork out £1.89 (or US$3.33) for what you guys in the US can get for $1.99.
This business stinks, and I refuse to support it until we get some degree of price parity.
Not to mention we're unable to get 'lost' or 'desperate housewives' on our itunes here for a good few months yet - apple seems to be enforcing the digital divide across the atlantic all over again (see: region encoding of DVDs and *%^&£$% uncrackable apple dvd drives on their laptops etc.)
Apple is not a 'good' company - they're just like all the others, just with nice shiny aluminium exteriors instead.
And this is coming from a guy who's just bought an brand new mac mini and is thinking of getting the next powerbook revision when it comes out.
Can they PLEASE try to make sure it supports the Wacom graphics tablet series out of the box on mac osx. I've got an Intuos3 only to find that osx gimp doesn't respond to the tip pressure of my pen. I've read all the forums and the problem lies somewhere in the software.
So far, I'm considering getting a cracked version of photoshop instead. Come on gimp!
Whether or not something is morally correct or incorrect has nothing to do with the correct use of language.
What if I said: "You're raping the English language."
And got the following 2 replies:
Person A: "No, he's butchering it, not raping it."
Person B: "Yeah, he's raping the language."
Now, I would defy anyone to say that rape is morally correct. But do you see any linkage between using the word 'rape' and passing a moral judgement on the topic of rape itself from my previous examples?
No?
Really?
You mean just like the way people can debate the correct usage of the terms 'theft' and 'copyright infringement' without passing any moral judgement on either?
I've never quite understood why you americans rant so much about Vietnam, when you're now in Iraq. Don't you get it? Whilst you were out fighting in Vietnam, your parents were probably still having these sorts of arguments over Korea.
And now it's come full circle - your kids are fighting in Iraq (well, the kids of poor, inner city people anyway) whilst you sit and bicker about Vietnam.
And here I was thinking that anyone who had lived through a war (Vietnam), and whose parents had lived through a war (Korea), would not want to vote for a president (Bush) who would send their kids to war (Iraq).
A good point, and well made. Indeed, why do we need this device when we could just learn how to spell like yourself in order to twart all the espinoge?
Just a genuine question - have you guys looked at the Orion 96 processor system? Is that the type of thing this computer was designed for, or is it still underpowered for your needs?
-Nano. (not affiliated with orion in any way, shape or form)
Theft of a car in the manner in which you describe it deprives the owner of the ability to use their own property in perpetuity.
Illegally copying a file from the internet however, does not impinge upon anyone else's ability to enjoy the use of said file, be it a movie, mp3 or whatever.
See a difference?
Good.
Pathetic justifications are pretty lame. So are straw-man arguments.
Ummm...Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand only allow single-purpose bills. And I'm pretty sure the rest of the Western European democracies do as well.
Well then, why not send a probe to test that model out.....ah...bingo!
So why are we cancelling the Voyager missions again?
If that's your logic - we should just cancel all research missions we've developed models for. I mean, we all know aliens built the canals on mars right? That's a pretty good model...no need to test that one further.
Go look up 'lead time bias' and breast cancer treatments. The biggest shock is that we're now detecting far more breast cancers than ever before, yet the death rate (or 5-year survival) has barely changed.
This raises a couple of possibilities: 1 - We're just detecting cancers earlier, and our current treatments do nothing for those with the disease. I.e. people are living longer with the cancer not because the treatment is better but because they're diagnosed earlier.
2 - We're still failing to catch the really bad cancers out there. The ones that develop really quickly and we can't do anything about. These are chipping away at our 5 year survival rates.
So will a rapid home cancer test kit help? Who knows as of yet. Problems are going to be addressing the above issues, as well as letting people know that there are such things as:
- 'sensitivity' - a 'false positive' rate (as well as false negatives of course - a far worse thing) - and also a 'the test is positive but it's because of ingrowing toenails and not cancer' rate (specificity).
Could be good...we'll have to wait and see. Personally, I see better applications for being able to detect minute amounts of blood proteins than 'cancer detection'.
As a trainee cardiothoracic surgeon, I see patients in both the Intensive Care Unit and in the High Dependency Unit at our hospital...and I can't tell you the number of times alarms go off needlessly for such things as minor ECG changes and decreasing blood oxygen saturations.
Causes for alarms going off: Patient takes a deeper breath than normal Patient moves Patient strains on the toilet Patient has a shower Patient's sensor falls off Patient's fingers get cold
And any other innumerable causes for spurious alarms.
So how do we know if a patient is really sick? Simple - look at them!
This is precisely what can't be done with one of these remote monitoring devices - I looked into setting up a remote ECG monitoring system myself about 5 years ago but I can guarantee no cardiologist will want to be woken at 3am for false alarms.
So either this device will cost one hell or a lot to run (may even be cheaper to book yourself a room in hospital for the rest of your life) or have the alarms so insensitive that a lot of people die before this fails.
>>but the nanotransistors are just a few hundred millionths of a meter in size -roughly 100 times smaller than the components used in today's microprocessors
100 millionths of a meter in size = 100 microns
These ain't no 'nano' transistors I've ever heard of.
Latest P4: 65 nanometers (or approximately 0.065 microns)
So these aren't even smaller than the components used in today's microprocessors.
This article was written by monkeys. But what do you expect when you pay peanuts?
Count yourself lucky - we're paying around GBP£0.92 per litre over in the UK - equivalent to USD$5.50 per US gallon right now. And things will only get worse.
That's why I'm thinking of getting my car converted to LPG.
This is instead an astute piece of British sarcasm. They're saying Google can go and stuff themselves because they've used their search engine exactly how it was designed to be used and if Google don't like the results, tough luck.
Wrapping it in an apology is the best way to get this past the American sarcasm-detectors.
>>There's a difference between "spreading creationist crap" and being a thorough scientist.
Yes, indeed there is. And that's why we can all say 'You're spreading creationist crap.'
Microevolution = macroevolution = evolution
The intrinsic link between these forms the cornerstone of the theory of evolution. If you accept one aspect because it works for bacteria but then throw your hands up and say 'Pah, the same process doesn't work for humans though - PROOOOVE it to me otherwise' then you are no different from a creationist in a light chocolate coating.
So accept what you are - a creationist at heart - and stop trying to say otherwise unless you wholeheartedly embrace microevolution = macroevolution = evolution.
Slashdot Mirror
Mobile phones are targeted at a minority group?
Where have you been the last 10 years - nearly 90% market penetration in the UK, Germany, France is close, and don't even get me started on Japan and S. Korea.
Are you smoking crack? Or more importantly, are the guys who gave you +5, insightful smoking crack?
-Nano.
Said it before and I'll say it again.
US: $1.99 per movie
UK: £1.89 per movie. That's US$3.33 for fuck's sake.
That's not price parity, that is gouging.
-Nano.
What really ticks me off is that here in the UK we pay the most IN THE WORLD for songs on itunes (79p = US$1.39), and now we're being asked to fork out £1.89 (or US$3.33) for what you guys in the US can get for $1.99.
This business stinks, and I refuse to support it until we get some degree of price parity.
Not to mention we're unable to get 'lost' or 'desperate housewives' on our itunes here for a good few months yet - apple seems to be enforcing the digital divide across the atlantic all over again (see: region encoding of DVDs and *%^&£$% uncrackable apple dvd drives on their laptops etc.)
Apple is not a 'good' company - they're just like all the others, just with nice shiny aluminium exteriors instead.
And this is coming from a guy who's just bought an brand new mac mini and is thinking of getting the next powerbook revision when it comes out.
-Nano.
Warning everyone:
Goth poet on the loose.
Run for the hills!
Exactly. Why are government account holders allowed to keep their service, but the rest of us folk aren't?
-Nano.
Can they PLEASE try to make sure it supports the Wacom graphics tablet series out of the box on mac osx. I've got an Intuos3 only to find that osx gimp doesn't respond to the tip pressure of my pen. I've read all the forums and the problem lies somewhere in the software.
So far, I'm considering getting a cracked version of photoshop instead. Come on gimp!
Whether or not something is morally correct or incorrect has nothing to do with the correct use of language.
What if I said: "You're raping the English language."
And got the following 2 replies:
Person A: "No, he's butchering it, not raping it."
Person B: "Yeah, he's raping the language."
Now, I would defy anyone to say that rape is morally correct. But do you see any linkage between using the word 'rape' and passing a moral judgement on the topic of rape itself from my previous examples?
No?
Really?
You mean just like the way people can debate the correct usage of the terms 'theft' and 'copyright infringement' without passing any moral judgement on either?
What drugs have you been taking?
Because you seriously need to get that paranoia seen to.
-Nano.
I've never quite understood why you americans rant so much about Vietnam, when you're now in Iraq. Don't you get it? Whilst you were out fighting in Vietnam, your parents were probably still having these sorts of arguments over Korea.
And now it's come full circle - your kids are fighting in Iraq (well, the kids of poor, inner city people anyway) whilst you sit and bicker about Vietnam.
And here I was thinking that anyone who had lived through a war (Vietnam), and whose parents had lived through a war (Korea), would not want to vote for a president (Bush) who would send their kids to war (Iraq).
-Nano.
>>I can see this to twart coorproate espinoge
A good point, and well made. Indeed, why do we need this device when we could just learn how to spell like yourself in order to twart all the espinoge?
-Nano.
Just a genuine question - have you guys looked at the Orion 96 processor system? Is that the type of thing this computer was designed for, or is it still underpowered for your needs?
-Nano. (not affiliated with orion in any way, shape or form)
Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant.
-Nano.
Good email. Now print it out, sign it, and send it as a letter.
That way someone important might get to see it before it's screened by an annoyed web-jockey hired at minimum wage to screen all incoming mail.
-Nano.
Theft of a car in the manner in which you describe it deprives the owner of the ability to use their own property in perpetuity.
Illegally copying a file from the internet however, does not impinge upon anyone else's ability to enjoy the use of said file, be it a movie, mp3 or whatever.
See a difference?
Good.
Pathetic justifications are pretty lame. So are straw-man arguments.
-Nano.
Or OSX. That would be sweet.
-Nano.
Ummm...Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand only allow single-purpose bills. And I'm pretty sure the rest of the Western European democracies do as well.
So why is the US out on its own on this one?
-Nano.
Umm....how do you know the physics are the same?
Because a model tells you so?
Well then, why not send a probe to test that model out.....ah...bingo!
So why are we cancelling the Voyager missions again?
If that's your logic - we should just cancel all research missions we've developed models for. I mean, we all know aliens built the canals on mars right? That's a pretty good model...no need to test that one further.
-Nano.
A very good point.
Go look up 'lead time bias' and breast cancer treatments. The biggest shock is that we're now detecting far more breast cancers than ever before, yet the death rate (or 5-year survival) has barely changed.
This raises a couple of possibilities:
1 - We're just detecting cancers earlier, and our current treatments do nothing for those with the disease. I.e. people are living longer with the cancer not because the treatment is better but because they're diagnosed earlier.
2 - We're still failing to catch the really bad cancers out there. The ones that develop really quickly and we can't do anything about. These are chipping away at our 5 year survival rates.
So will a rapid home cancer test kit help? Who knows as of yet. Problems are going to be addressing the above issues, as well as letting people know that there are such things as:
- 'sensitivity' - a 'false positive' rate (as well as false negatives of course - a far worse thing)
- and also a 'the test is positive but it's because of ingrowing toenails and not cancer' rate (specificity).
Could be good...we'll have to wait and see. Personally, I see better applications for being able to detect minute amounts of blood proteins than 'cancer detection'.
-Nano.
Umm....how do wind turbines cause climate change?
/.
Just....y'know...wondering about your bullshit claims.
Any references (from reputable sources, natch) to back that up?
Or did you just get modded +5 for spouting random crap. Oh, I forget, this is
-Nano.
Obvious M$ shill...
Nothing to see here, move along...
-Nano.
As a trainee cardiothoracic surgeon, I see patients in both the Intensive Care Unit and in the High Dependency Unit at our hospital...and I can't tell you the number of times alarms go off needlessly for such things as minor ECG changes and decreasing blood oxygen saturations.
Causes for alarms going off:
Patient takes a deeper breath than normal
Patient moves
Patient strains on the toilet
Patient has a shower
Patient's sensor falls off
Patient's fingers get cold
And any other innumerable causes for spurious alarms.
So how do we know if a patient is really sick? Simple - look at them!
This is precisely what can't be done with one of these remote monitoring devices - I looked into setting up a remote ECG monitoring system myself about 5 years ago but I can guarantee no cardiologist will want to be woken at 3am for false alarms.
So either this device will cost one hell or a lot to run (may even be cheaper to book yourself a room in hospital for the rest of your life) or have the alarms so insensitive that a lot of people die before this fails.
-Nano.
>>but the nanotransistors are just a few hundred millionths of a meter in size -roughly 100 times smaller than the components used in today's microprocessors
100 millionths of a meter in size = 100 microns
These ain't no 'nano' transistors I've ever heard of.
Latest P4: 65 nanometers (or approximately 0.065 microns)
So these aren't even smaller than the components used in today's microprocessors.
This article was written by monkeys. But what do you expect when you pay peanuts?
-Nano.
Count yourself lucky - we're paying around GBP£0.92 per litre over in the UK - equivalent to USD$5.50 per US gallon right now. And things will only get worse.
That's why I'm thinking of getting my car converted to LPG.
-Nano.
This is instead an astute piece of British sarcasm. They're saying Google can go and stuff themselves because they've used their search engine exactly how it was designed to be used and if Google don't like the results, tough luck.
Wrapping it in an apology is the best way to get this past the American sarcasm-detectors.
-Nano.
>>There's a difference between "spreading creationist crap" and being a thorough scientist.
Yes, indeed there is. And that's why we can all say 'You're spreading creationist crap.'
Microevolution = macroevolution = evolution
The intrinsic link between these forms the cornerstone of the theory of evolution. If you accept one aspect because it works for bacteria but then throw your hands up and say 'Pah, the same process doesn't work for humans though - PROOOOVE it to me otherwise' then you are no different from a creationist in a light chocolate coating.
So accept what you are - a creationist at heart - and stop trying to say otherwise unless you wholeheartedly embrace microevolution = macroevolution = evolution.
-Nano.