You will find that Henry VIII's divorce was very much a religious issue, leading to the creation of the Church of England.
More to the point, I never claimed the pope personally ordered Tyndale's execution. However, a highly placed bishop (Cuthbert Tunstall) declared his translation to be heretical and had the books burned.
Another cardinal (Thomas Woolsey) demanded Tyndale's arrest as a heretic after his translation was published. Note that Woolsey, though English, remained true to the Catholic church, and was stripped of power by Henry VIII.
The parent is correct. While the Pope may have bought into printing for his own purposes, the Church objected mightily to the translations that were printed in the common language. William Tynedale was even executed for his work in translating the Bible into English.
I've decided that Malcolm Gladwell is a storyteller. As such, he learns what stories resonate with people, and because he's a good storyteller, he's become very successful at spinning his tales.
While I haven't read Outliers, I did read "Blink" and found that while he provided lots of anecdotes to support his premise, there was no mechanism, no measurement, and no way to verify it. In fact, he provided a number of other anecdotes that showed just the opposite.
What he did in that book, I think, was to state a premise that we'd like to believe, that our gut instincts are right, and tell stories to reinforce that, but never go so far as to make a claim that could be verified. I'm not alone in this view.
Based on what I've read so far, "Outliers" seems like more of the same.
I'll second all of these points. As a confirmed Microsoft skeptic, I was prepared for a best, a horrible install experience, and at worst, having my system horrible messed with. Silverlight installed like a dream and ran quickly and painlessly. The Windows team could learn a lot from those guys.
Same with DRM. If I'm buying content, I don't want it. If I'm renting a la Netflix, I could care less.
Also, (and it seems no one has mentioned this yet), Google doesn't require you to enter an email address. If all you enter is a first name, or initials, or what ever, it takes it. The reason the email option is there is to add to your contacts.
Also, my personal experience was that Picasa did a better job of recognizing the same person. YMMV.
1) Assembly of God fundamentalist. No separation of church and state for them, they'd like the biblical version of sharia law.
2) Shows no sign of intellectual curiousity. Like Bush, she accused of being stupid, but isn't. Just ignorant. Ignorance can be cured, but I'd like a leader who curious enough to have looked into the kinds of questions she's been asked on her own.
It wasn't the pledge anyway, it was the Star Spangled Banner, and Obama said "My grandfather taught me that you put your hand over your heart during the pledge, and during the national anthem, you sing."
Gee, if you go by the text, it seems to me you could have headlined the article "McCain clinically depressed." That seems to be much more newsworthy than "politicians only tell the part of the story they want you to hear." I guess that's true of these so-called "scientists" as well.
Actually, it's been proven that you can get by with only a single instruction, a subtract and branch with three operand addresses. However, having three memory references isn't really classic RISC, which tends to also reduce the number of cycles it takes to execute, and rarely includes read-modify-write instructions.
At least, not with this purchase. The parent is correct, though. The real target here is IBM.
I'm sure Microsoft has realized that the glory days of the consumer market are gone, but the need for computing power in businesses will provide a vein to tap for quite a while.
Whether or not Google is evil isn't really the key issue. What's happening is we're starting to approach the era of data banking.
Just as now, when it's not convenient or safe to carry all our money around with us, it is no longer convenient or safe for an individual (or even a company) to maintain its own data. So, just as banks arose to hold your money and give you access to it, Google and others are going to do the same thing for data.
The fact that they use this data is no different than what the banks do with your money, either. The issue then becomes who gives you the most value for the privilege of storing your data and who do you trust, e.g. who has the best interest rates and who is less likely to fail in a credit crunch. For "data banks" it will be issues of bandwidth, security, and value in terms of applications or advertisements.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, we all get our power from the "electrical cloud". We all need private generators. Ah! Ah!
Do some more research.
You will find that Henry VIII's divorce was very much a religious issue, leading to the creation of the Church of England.
More to the point, I never claimed the pope personally ordered Tyndale's execution. However, a highly placed bishop (Cuthbert Tunstall) declared his translation to be heretical and had the books burned.
Another cardinal (Thomas Woolsey) demanded Tyndale's arrest as a heretic after his translation was published. Note that Woolsey, though English, remained true to the Catholic church, and was stripped of power by Henry VIII.
The parent is correct. While the Pope may have bought into printing for his own purposes, the Church objected mightily to the translations that were printed in the common language. William Tynedale was even executed for his work in translating the Bible into English.
FYI: Safari 4 is out (as beta). It screams. Unfortunately a little too buggy to use, but damn, it's fast.
I've decided that Malcolm Gladwell is a storyteller. As such, he learns what stories resonate with people, and because he's a good storyteller, he's become very successful at spinning his tales.
While I haven't read Outliers, I did read "Blink" and found that while he provided lots of anecdotes to support his premise, there was no mechanism, no measurement, and no way to verify it. In fact, he provided a number of other anecdotes that showed just the opposite.
What he did in that book, I think, was to state a premise that we'd like to believe, that our gut instincts are right, and tell stories to reinforce that, but never go so far as to make a claim that could be verified. I'm not alone in this view.
Based on what I've read so far, "Outliers" seems like more of the same.
I'll second all of these points. As a confirmed Microsoft skeptic, I was prepared for a best, a horrible install experience, and at worst, having my system horrible messed with. Silverlight installed like a dream and ran quickly and painlessly. The Windows team could learn a lot from those guys.
Same with DRM. If I'm buying content, I don't want it. If I'm renting a la Netflix, I could care less.
Also, (and it seems no one has mentioned this yet), Google doesn't require you to enter an email address. If all you enter is a first name, or initials, or what ever, it takes it. The reason the email option is there is to add to your contacts.
Also, my personal experience was that Picasa did a better job of recognizing the same person. YMMV.
Gates: Elevate me!
Ballmer: Now? Right here?
The dude is a dudette.
Anyone who's switched to gmail is undoubtedly capable of changing their default home page.
I suspect this is more about offering features that are too painful to either implement or run in IE6 than about advertising.
1) Assembly of God fundamentalist. No separation of church and state for them, they'd like the biblical version of sharia law.
2) Shows no sign of intellectual curiousity. Like Bush, she accused of being stupid, but isn't. Just ignorant. Ignorance can be cured, but I'd like a leader who curious enough to have looked into the kinds of questions she's been asked on her own.
It wasn't the pledge anyway, it was the Star Spangled Banner, and Obama said "My grandfather taught me that you put your hand over your heart during the pledge, and during the national anthem, you sing."
Gee, if you go by the text, it seems to me you could have headlined the article "McCain clinically depressed." That seems to be much more newsworthy than "politicians only tell the part of the story they want you to hear." I guess that's true of these so-called "scientists" as well.
Note that it went onto Bloomberg (which is what caused all the traders to freak) because a human put it there. Without fact checking.
Actually I thought the whole thing was about stroking Gates and sucking up to him.
"You're a 10, Bill"
"The Conquistador."
"Let me get down on my knees and serve you, Bill."
I read about it here.
They've already posted a correction. Google is still feeding their employees.
http://valleywag.com/5041464/dinner-saved-for-googles-geeks
Actually, it's been proven that you can get by with only a single instruction, a subtract and branch with three operand addresses. However, having three memory references isn't really classic RISC, which tends to also reduce the number of cycles it takes to execute, and rarely includes read-modify-write instructions.
It's even simpler. Publish China's maps when the request comes from China, publish non-Chinese maps the rest of the time.
Microsoft's not going after Google.
At least, not with this purchase. The parent is correct, though. The real target here is IBM.
I'm sure Microsoft has realized that the glory days of the consumer market are gone, but the need for computing power in businesses will provide a vein to tap for quite a while.
For Pete's sake, people, remember who is the customer in the "TV transaction".
It's NOT the viewers. It's the ADVERTISERS.
For me, that was the "big chill" when I read the article, because that's the model our search engines are running on, too.
Tom Standage's book covered this quite well.
This has been reported at least a month ago, see http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9043243. I agree it's probably not governmental, just "ordinary" corruption. Pay off a few ISPs and collect a few days worth of revenue before people complain.
Whether or not Google is evil isn't really the key issue. What's happening is we're starting to approach the era of data banking.
Just as now, when it's not convenient or safe to carry all our money around with us, it is no longer convenient or safe for an individual (or even a company) to maintain its own data. So, just as banks arose to hold your money and give you access to it, Google and others are going to do the same thing for data.
The fact that they use this data is no different than what the banks do with your money, either. The issue then becomes who gives you the most value for the privilege of storing your data and who do you trust, e.g. who has the best interest rates and who is less likely to fail in a credit crunch. For "data banks" it will be issues of bandwidth, security, and value in terms of applications or advertisements.
I'd not know what to do with the black box computer that controls my girlfriend's car...no levers or pulleys in there...
No physics, either. (Semiconductor physics isn't the movie kind.)