Thank you for taking the time to inform us of your indifference. Would you care to make a list of other subjects you are not interested in? Maybe provide an XML feed, so I can have it as a widget on my phone?
Let me make a few suggestions to get the ball rolling:
The fall of the roman empire was gay! Aroma therapy sucks balls. I don't give a fuck about Alexander Hamilton.
Ever since the political parties figured out that "rousing the base" is an easier way to win than winning votes from the center, it's been that way.
Of course, "the center" is not exactly an erudite crowd of free thinkers either. (I am not referring to moderates). Undecided voters and independents are sometimes undecided or independent because they haven't paid enough attention to know their own political leanings. These people are just as susceptible to hyperbole as the base. It's just human nature. The one making the accusation and presenting false certainty sounds more convincing than the guy being accused, or the guy who tries to be accurate.
The character limit certainly hinders long, well-thought-out responses. However, I posit that the real problem is social rather than technological. In the US, at least, we as a society have become much more divisive, and no amount of technology is going to reflect differently.
I think people choose the medium that best suites them. People who want to make nuanced arguments will put up blogs, or choose to comment on forums where long posts are allowed and encouraged. Youtube* and twitter do create constraints that make it harder to make an intelligent point because you are constantly having to edit your post down to a sound byte.
* Youtube - I'm lumping those two together because YouTube's comment system seems to encourage a similar mentality.
Just recently, Blockbuster Video decided to allow people to use their online video subscription (IE their version of netflix) and B&M stores, and also to close all B&M stores. If people can watch Netflix via XBox, PS3, Wii, and various other devices, but their video rental options are limited to whatever is in the Wal-Mart kiosk (does that even have bluray), mom-and-pop video stores that have thousands of DVDs and one or two shelves devoted to bluray videos, or whatever they get in the mail next week, then is there really anything to get excited about there?
Of course, I haven't been in the "gotta see the new movie with the guy and the explosions...it's so awesome!!!11!!!1" crowd for a few years now. Maybe I'm wrong.
* Look at the housing market. How do we determine the value of a house? Look at who wants it, how much they are willing to pay. Those are the only two variables that matter.
Very few people pay cash for a house. The variable that matters more than any other is how much a "home buyer" can afford to borrow (from JP Morgan).
I never said anything about paying cash. It really doesn't seem relevant if they are paying in cash, check, or by bank loan. If the average person made 50,000 per year, he may be able to afford a $100,000 house, and the banks would loan that amount if the credit is good. If the average salary increased to $500,000 per year, the cost of housing would increase by at least a factor of 10, and the disparity would continue.
If electricity were free, then people would have more money to spend on... *finite resources.* Consequently, the price of those resources would increase
If electricity were free, all resources would be essentially limitless.
No. We would still be limited in land quantities, the availability of raw materials, etc...I admit, it would change the world drastically. I can't be sure what the next big shortage/catastrophe would be. An over reliance on electronics might lead to a shortage of conductive metals. We would have to worry about shortages of plastics and lubricants needed to maintain these machines. People would be needed to maintain those devices, and those people would need houses, land, cars, etc.
And then there would be the potential environmental implications to teraforming a large portion of the Earth's surface. Raise the temperature a few degrees and you get erratic weather patterns. What would happen if you removed enough water from the ocean to turn entire deserts into farmland? I'm just speculating, but as long as there is one substance on earth in limited quantities, there will be a class that owns more than their share, and uses it to control others.
Exactly which part of a "night and weekend on-call schedule" do you think will contain private health information?
Aside from the other responses about lowering the overall level of security (which are correct), how about the part where the schedule involves treating patients? If ever so much as a patient's name appears in a doctor's schedule, that's privileged information.
I wish I had mod points...If this calendar is also used to track equipment (as is often done), then you now know that so-and-so will need an MRI, next Tuesday. At the very least, you will know that the guy who performs MRIs is scheduled to work during your appointment.
Many people run Chrome, right? It might not make much of a difference if a small percentage of a website's users are running Chrome but I wouldn't be surprised to see the other major browsers implement something similar.
I was thinking something similar. If Google could somehow convince Joe Sixpack that Firefox and IE are missing some valuable DDoS protection feature, then it would eventually be added to other browsers.
The L curve will always exist. If electricity were free, then people would have more money to spend on housing, food, and other finite resources. Consequently, the price of those resources would increase*, and those who owned them before electricity became free would still be rich. Sure, the people who owned the electric companies would be losing money, but that's why people diversify their investments.
* Look at the housing market. How do we determine the value of a house? Look at who wants it, how much they are willing to pay. Those are the only two variables that matter.
It was probably the chain of command: nobody decides anything at the lower level especially if it means to do some work, so someone has to decide to do something high up, and then lunch time takes most of the day to get the memo all the way down. The decision to investigate probably came from Thales, not the army or police. I'm from France btw. Last year my brother had rare industrial equipment stollen, we found the guy on local craigslist style ad (picture of said equipment in a kid room), gave the police name, and address of the thief. They did not lift a finger while acknowledging he was indeed the culprit.
Did they ever arrest him or was it one of those "meh, what're ya gonna do" responses?
I'm sure that someone once said the same thing about credit cards, checks, and cash money.
So you expect me to trade in this money, which can be used anywhere, for what is basically an IOU. Then, I will write my own IOU to some other institution, (who doesn't know if my IOU is any good), and they will take it to your institution and trade it in for money?
That's great! So, how do you stay in business? Transaction fees? Oh, so I have to pay you for this "service"?
I'm not saying that facebook's money scheme will take off, but stranger things have happened.
If it is this easy to detect a pirated copy of the game, why not all the game developers are doing it to prevent privacy? What am I missing here?
Hacking and playing video games are two completely different things. People who make these pirated copies do it because they are hackers/crackers/programmers/whatever. They often will not notice a subtle problem that only occurs an hour into the game, because playing the game is not their goal. To these people, copy protection is just a bug to be fixed, and this scheme works because this bug is more subtle than most.
I don't know how they came up with their numbers, but they could look at how sales of a game will typically reduce over time and compare this curve to the curve seen by their product, paying close attention to what happened after the "real" crack came out.
I would imagine that it's like Google analytics. It would never tell you the whole story or provide 100% accuracy, but it at least gives you some information.
Most people with pre-paid phones need voice and text messaging...not data plans.
Oh, so it's okay to rip off the ones who actually do need data, then? Or maybe poor peoples' bandwidth actually does cost orders of magnitude more than that of others?
Or maybe it's ok to rip off people who make bad decisions....Freedom for the rich, but if you're poor, then it's "why do you need that?"
any moneys received to pay for anything at all are moneys that PP doesn't have to pay. The money that would have been used to pay for whatever can now be used to fund something else, including abortions. For example, if the federal government pays for PP's light bill, then PP can use the money that WOULD have paid the light bill and use it to fund abortions.
By that logic, shouldn't it be illegal for devout Christians to get any kind of money from the government, whether it be welfare, a tax credit, or a paycheck for services rendered? If a cop happens to be a Christian, his government paycheck goes toward paying for the light bill, and the money that he would have been spent on paying the light bill can now go to the collection plate. Therefore, it is no different from the government giving that money directly to the church.
Right. Individual citizens don't get government funding. Try again.
Congratulations, you have just destroyed civilization. I know the free market fixes everything, but when you stop paying cops, they stop working. But at least you have found a way to avoid looking at the flaw in your argument.
any moneys received to pay for anything at all are moneys that PP doesn't have to pay. The money that would have been used to pay for whatever can now be used to fund something else, including abortions. For example, if the federal government pays for PP's light bill, then PP can use the money that WOULD have paid the light bill and use it to fund abortions.
By that logic, shouldn't it be illegal for devout Christians to get any kind of money from the government, whether it be welfare, a tax credit, or a paycheck for services rendered? If a cop happens to be a Christian, his government paycheck goes toward paying for the light bill, and the money that he would have been spent on paying the light bill can now go to the collection plate. Therefore, it is no different from the government giving that money directly to the church.
Slashdot Mirror
Translation:
WinMo 7 Ain't selling, and we're not going to throw any more money down that hole until we see some results.
Both suck. Do not want.
Thank you for taking the time to inform us of your indifference. Would you care to make a list of other subjects you are not interested in? Maybe provide an XML feed, so I can have it as a widget on my phone?
Let me make a few suggestions to get the ball rolling:
The fall of the roman empire was gay!
Aroma therapy sucks balls.
I don't give a fuck about Alexander Hamilton.
On second thought, I think I'll make my own feed.
Ever since the political parties figured out that "rousing the base" is an easier way to win than winning votes from the center, it's been that way.
Of course, "the center" is not exactly an erudite crowd of free thinkers either. (I am not referring to moderates). Undecided voters and independents are sometimes undecided or independent because they haven't paid enough attention to know their own political leanings. These people are just as susceptible to hyperbole as the base. It's just human nature. The one making the accusation and presenting false certainty sounds more convincing than the guy being accused, or the guy who tries to be accurate.
The character limit certainly hinders long, well-thought-out responses. However, I posit that the real problem is social rather than technological. In the US, at least, we as a society have become much more divisive, and no amount of technology is going to reflect differently.
I think people choose the medium that best suites them. People who want to make nuanced arguments will put up blogs, or choose to comment on forums where long posts are allowed and encouraged. Youtube* and twitter do create constraints that make it harder to make an intelligent point because you are constantly having to edit your post down to a sound byte.
* Youtube - I'm lumping those two together because YouTube's comment system seems to encourage a similar mentality.
Just recently, Blockbuster Video decided to allow people to use their online video subscription (IE their version of netflix) and B&M stores, and also to close all B&M stores. If people can watch Netflix via XBox, PS3, Wii, and various other devices, but their video rental options are limited to whatever is in the Wal-Mart kiosk (does that even have bluray), mom-and-pop video stores that have thousands of DVDs and one or two shelves devoted to bluray videos, or whatever they get in the mail next week, then is there really anything to get excited about there?
Of course, I haven't been in the "gotta see the new movie with the guy and the explosions...it's so awesome!!!11!!!1" crowd for a few years now. Maybe I'm wrong.
* Look at the housing market. How do we determine the value of a house? Look at who wants it, how much they are willing to pay. Those are the only two variables that matter.
Very few people pay cash for a house. The variable that matters more than any other is how much a "home buyer" can afford to borrow (from JP Morgan).
I never said anything about paying cash. It really doesn't seem relevant if they are paying in cash, check, or by bank loan. If the average person made 50,000 per year, he may be able to afford a $100,000 house, and the banks would loan that amount if the credit is good. If the average salary increased to $500,000 per year, the cost of housing would increase by at least a factor of 10, and the disparity would continue.
If electricity were free, then people would have more money to spend on ... *finite resources.* Consequently, the price of those resources would increase
If electricity were free, all resources would be essentially limitless.
No. We would still be limited in land quantities, the availability of raw materials, etc...I admit, it would change the world drastically. I can't be sure what the next big shortage/catastrophe would be. An over reliance on electronics might lead to a shortage of conductive metals. We would have to worry about shortages of plastics and lubricants needed to maintain these machines. People would be needed to maintain those devices, and those people would need houses, land, cars, etc.
And then there would be the potential environmental implications to teraforming a large portion of the Earth's surface. Raise the temperature a few degrees and you get erratic weather patterns. What would happen if you removed enough water from the ocean to turn entire deserts into farmland? I'm just speculating, but as long as there is one substance on earth in limited quantities, there will be a class that owns more than their share, and uses it to control others.
Exactly which part of a "night and weekend on-call schedule" do you think will contain private health information?
Aside from the other responses about lowering the overall level of security (which are correct), how about the part where the schedule involves treating patients? If ever so much as a patient's name appears in a doctor's schedule, that's privileged information.
I wish I had mod points...If this calendar is also used to track equipment (as is often done), then you now know that so-and-so will need an MRI, next Tuesday. At the very least, you will know that the guy who performs MRIs is scheduled to work during your appointment.
Many people run Chrome, right? It might not make much of a difference if a small percentage of a website's users are running Chrome but I wouldn't be surprised to see the other major browsers implement something similar.
I was thinking something similar. If Google could somehow convince Joe Sixpack that Firefox and IE are missing some valuable DDoS protection feature, then it would eventually be added to other browsers.
The L curve will always exist. If electricity were free, then people would have more money to spend on housing, food, and other finite resources. Consequently, the price of those resources would increase*, and those who owned them before electricity became free would still be rich. Sure, the people who owned the electric companies would be losing money, but that's why people diversify their investments.
* Look at the housing market. How do we determine the value of a house? Look at who wants it, how much they are willing to pay. Those are the only two variables that matter.
The PC version was only broken because they broke it.
Ok, now that's the stupidest thing I've ever read.
It was probably the chain of command: nobody decides anything at the lower level especially if it means to do some work, so someone has to decide to do something high up, and then lunch time takes most of the day to get the memo all the way down. The decision to investigate probably came from Thales, not the army or police. I'm from France btw. Last year my brother had rare industrial equipment stollen, we found the guy on local craigslist style ad (picture of said equipment in a kid room), gave the police name, and address of the thief. They did not lift a finger while acknowledging he was indeed the culprit.
Did they ever arrest him or was it one of those "meh, what're ya gonna do" responses?
Well, you don't need a cell phone. I think the cell phone companies should raise your rates.
I'm sure that someone once said the same thing about credit cards, checks, and cash money.
So you expect me to trade in this money, which can be used anywhere, for what is basically an IOU. Then, I will write my own IOU to some other institution, (who doesn't know if my IOU is any good), and they will take it to your institution and trade it in for money?
That's great! So, how do you stay in business? Transaction fees? Oh, so I have to pay you for this "service"?
I'm not saying that facebook's money scheme will take off, but stranger things have happened.
No. You're thinking iWebV6. It sounds great, but we'll just hack web2.0 to keep from ever having to update anything.
From E.org: "Enlightenment libraries already power millions of systems, from mobile phones to set top boxes..."
There's definitely not enough coverage on that then... And not only on ../
I checked ../ and they really don't have much.
If it is this easy to detect a pirated copy of the game, why not all the game developers are doing it to prevent privacy? What am I missing here?
Hacking and playing video games are two completely different things. People who make these pirated copies do it because they are hackers/crackers/programmers/whatever. They often will not notice a subtle problem that only occurs an hour into the game, because playing the game is not their goal. To these people, copy protection is just a bug to be fixed, and this scheme works because this bug is more subtle than most.
Keep it simple.
>10 KILL KILL KILL
>20 GOTO 10
I prefer Monte Carlo Style:
while( (int)(rand(0,9999)) ) {
unset(people[(int)(rand(0,count(people)-1))];
}
Forgive me if my genocide is not object-oriented.
I don't know how they came up with their numbers, but they could look at how sales of a game will typically reduce over time and compare this curve to the curve seen by their product, paying close attention to what happened after the "real" crack came out.
I would imagine that it's like Google analytics. It would never tell you the whole story or provide 100% accuracy, but it at least gives you some information.
Most people with pre-paid phones need voice and text messaging...not data plans.
Oh, so it's okay to rip off the ones who actually do need data, then? Or maybe poor peoples' bandwidth actually does cost orders of magnitude more than that of others?
Or maybe it's ok to rip off people who make bad decisions....Freedom for the rich, but if you're poor, then it's "why do you need that?"
If people are poor, why in God's name to they need a bizarrely useless fashion accessory like a smartphone.
So we can only have a healthy marketplace if the products are mandatory and the people are poor?
Well, there's a 2000 years old example...
Ummm... we're talking human authors here. :)
And there's a 2000 years old example...
Ummm... we're talking fiction here. :)
And there's a 2000 years old example...
"...Will that be enough of a discount to get readers to purchase an ad-supported device?"
The better question is:
How long before the ad-free version stops being offered?
any moneys received to pay for anything at all are moneys that PP doesn't have to pay. The money that would have been used to pay for whatever can now be used to fund something else, including abortions. For example, if the federal government pays for PP's light bill, then PP can use the money that WOULD have paid the light bill and use it to fund abortions.
By that logic, shouldn't it be illegal for devout Christians to get any kind of money from the government, whether it be welfare, a tax credit, or a paycheck for services rendered? If a cop happens to be a Christian, his government paycheck goes toward paying for the light bill, and the money that he would have been spent on paying the light bill can now go to the collection plate. Therefore, it is no different from the government giving that money directly to the church.
Right. Individual citizens don't get government funding. Try again.
Congratulations, you have just destroyed civilization. I know the free market fixes everything, but when you stop paying cops, they stop working. But at least you have found a way to avoid looking at the flaw in your argument.
any moneys received to pay for anything at all are moneys that PP doesn't have to pay. The money that would have been used to pay for whatever can now be used to fund something else, including abortions. For example, if the federal government pays for PP's light bill, then PP can use the money that WOULD have paid the light bill and use it to fund abortions.
By that logic, shouldn't it be illegal for devout Christians to get any kind of money from the government, whether it be welfare, a tax credit, or a paycheck for services rendered? If a cop happens to be a Christian, his government paycheck goes toward paying for the light bill, and the money that he would have been spent on paying the light bill can now go to the collection plate. Therefore, it is no different from the government giving that money directly to the church.
going by the map, the entire state of Florida and a significant part of Georgia is "the border".