It's high risk. Having a large proportion of your personal wealth on one stock is ALWAYS high risk. That stock is at an all time high. P/E is at 24 and cash flow appears to be peaking.
That's not to say that they aren't in a good financial position. They are very strong but nobody can know the future. Moving a large portion of his investment to more conservative positions is prudent.
Is it "totally understandable"? Interest rates are basically zero, which means that taking money "here and now" doesn't gain him anything. He might want to invest elsewhere in order to diversify his portfolio but such a move would only make sense given an underlying principle that he a) suspects something may perform better than GOOG or b) has uncertainties about the future of GOOG (to the point where cashing out now and stuffing cash in his mattress is better than holding onto GOOG).
It isn't to say either of those reasons are "bad" from a savvy-businessman point of view, but it also doesn't mean you can simply dismiss the action as "totally understandable" either.
It gains him not having all his money in one basket, and not tying all of his fortune to a company whose stock is at an all-time high and may be overvalued based on its possibly saturated growth potential.
It's because the math is confusing. They compute the pay they get divided by the hours they work and try to compare that figure to the same statistic for a capitalist. They get in trouble when they attempt to divide by zero...
Why does anything always have to do with practicality or use. Tinkering with new or old operating systems can be compared with learning and messing with new or old math or physics. I guess that when developing some USB drivers for hurd, you learn more than improving a given drivers for linux. The later is like reading and understanding and improving on a paper which is "well known", the former like breaking new grounds.
... then they will ask for one more month, and one more, and three more, and one more year...... and then they will ask to expand the censorship to other form of media...... there is no way to fully satisfy the insatiable appetite for censorship for the Islamists...... ask the people in North Mali how them Islamists had treated them...... no music, no tee vee, not even ringtones on the phones
There's no asking involved. They're blocking the service.
Unfortunately, neither the slashdot submission nor the articles it referenced pointed to the actual data. Sloppy writing. They cited their sources but in this day and age one expects a link to public data.
The data are for what they call "direct emitting facilities." That is, industrial sites where the gases are emitted. It doesn't count what comes out of tailpipes and I don't think it counts what goes up residential furnace flues.
Power plants emit approximately 10x as much as oil and gas production, but I think the figure for oil and gas production is startlingly high at 225 million tonnes. Aren't there regulations in force that say you can't just vent methane from oil wells? If you flare it, you reduce the environmental impact by 96%. If you collect and produce it, even better.
I could not disagree more. An off-the-shelf program is very often a perfectly adequate tool for the job and has all the features you want. Most small businesses need the same things to do their accounting and only need slight customization within the range of what standard programs can be easily configured to do.
It's easy to find somebody to explain how to use it or set up your custom installation. And your data will all be in a standard format. If later on you decide that LitteWare Accounting doesn't fit your business needs any more, you can usually just import your old data into BigWare Accounting. But you might not have to do that in which case you're way ahead, or LittleWare may offer an upgrade. If you want to switch programs and you can't import your old data, you might have to hire a programmer to figure out how to translate formats, that's a lot less of a task than writing the whole thing from scratch.
Seriously, how many standard programs does a programmer use every day? I only consider writing code when there is not a standard, canned program available even if it costs me money. Because it's MUCH more efficient to use standard tools. I only write my own programs or consider hiring somebody to do it for me if there's no standard tool available (because it's a one-off task that nobody else has seen fit to publish) or the standard tools all have glaring deficiencies.
On top of that, there are trust issues. It's easier to trust that the well-known and widely used software has been checked for serious errors and security deficiencies. Who's going to be checking the hired programmer's work? How do you know it will be done on schedule? What if the schedule is, I HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING TOMORROW?
So, doesn't that give Bing 7.4% or something along those lines, since Yahoo just front-ends the bing search engine? (Or did I miss something in the past couple of years of drinking the cool-aid)
It means that the user front-end adds significant value for the users who use Yahoo.
Not that Yandex beats Bing. Obviously the main Russian-oriented search engine is going to be a major player, there being 155 million native Russian speakers.
What's surprising to me is that Bing is SO far behind Yahoo given that Windows computers come configured to use Bing until you change the default search engine in Internet Explorer. They have half the rate of usage of Yahoo, despite copying much of Google's bare style. To me, Yahoo's search pages are inordinately cluttered with ads and junk compared to Google's or Bing's. But I guess if you like the bare style you use Google and if you like the clutter you use Yahoo. Bing needs to find a third option if they're going to be competitive with either of the main English-language oriented search engines.
Hydraulic fracturing does not release CO2, burning fuels does. It just helps get about 30% of what is trapped in rock, out of the ground for our use. H
Fracking releases methane. That's the greenhouse gas they're talking about.
As a cautionary tale though, I checked with the EPA website, and their figures indicate that electricity(40%) and transportation(31%) are the largest contributors to U.S. CO2 emissions from 1990-2010. It may indeed be determined one day that the sacrifice in land and water resources is too great to sustain the First World luxury that is the ribeye steak (sorry about that, grandchildren), but I would grudgingly eat lab-grown protein way, way, way before I would be willing to live without power and a horseless carriage.
CO2 is non synonymous with greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gases include CO2. Methane is 21x more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas according to this EPA methane page . Therefore it's possible (at least theoretically) that the effects of leaks of natural gas can exceed the effects of burning that gas.
Slashdot Mirror
Because software is engineering, not science.
Says who? Maybe some purely experimental projects (and I'm not necessarily saying Hurd is one) can be very useful too.
There's that word again.
a government censor and the Chinese government should realize corruption is an inevitable result of censorship.
The inevitable result of government itself is corruption.
Arguing over minor facets is pretty pointless in the long run.
Only because without government, there are no rules against which corruption can be judged.
It's high risk. Having a large proportion of your personal wealth on one stock is ALWAYS high risk. That stock is at an all time high. P/E is at 24 and cash flow appears to be peaking.
That's not to say that they aren't in a good financial position. They are very strong but nobody can know the future. Moving a large portion of his investment to more conservative positions is prudent.
Is it "totally understandable"? Interest rates are basically zero, which means that taking money "here and now" doesn't gain him anything. He might want to invest elsewhere in order to diversify his portfolio but such a move would only make sense given an underlying principle that he a) suspects something may perform better than GOOG or b) has uncertainties about the future of GOOG (to the point where cashing out now and stuffing cash in his mattress is better than holding onto GOOG). It isn't to say either of those reasons are "bad" from a savvy-businessman point of view, but it also doesn't mean you can simply dismiss the action as "totally understandable" either.
It gains him not having all his money in one basket, and not tying all of his fortune to a company whose stock is at an all-time high and may be overvalued based on its possibly saturated growth potential.
It's because the math is confusing. They compute the pay they get divided by the hours they work and try to compare that figure to the same statistic for a capitalist. They get in trouble when they attempt to divide by zero...
Dead or dying is worse.
Why does anything always have to do with practicality or use. Tinkering with new or old operating systems can be compared with learning and messing with new or old math or physics. I guess that when developing some USB drivers for hurd, you learn more than improving a given drivers for linux. The later is like reading and understanding and improving on a paper which is "well known", the former like breaking new grounds.
Because software is engineering, not science.
Umm, both? If Stallman actually put some work into in, Hurd would probably be a functioning OS by now.
Presuming he has the skills, of course.
This will only harm the people of Egypt. Google will lose a few ad hits.
But it will help control the people of Egypt, which is the point.
... then they will ask for one more month, and one more, and three more, and one more year ... ... and then they will ask to expand the censorship to other form of media ... ... there is no way to fully satisfy the insatiable appetite for censorship for the Islamists ... ... ask the people in North Mali how them Islamists had treated them ... ... no music, no tee vee, not even ringtones on the phones
There's no asking involved. They're blocking the service.
Unfortunately, neither the slashdot submission nor the articles it referenced pointed to the actual data. Sloppy writing. They cited their sources but in this day and age one expects a link to public data.
The data are for what they call "direct emitting facilities." That is, industrial sites where the gases are emitted. It doesn't count what comes out of tailpipes and I don't think it counts what goes up residential furnace flues.
Power plants emit approximately 10x as much as oil and gas production, but I think the figure for oil and gas production is startlingly high at 225 million tonnes. Aren't there regulations in force that say you can't just vent methane from oil wells? If you flare it, you reduce the environmental impact by 96%. If you collect and produce it, even better.
Or maybe they're saying they've had complaints that the producers of the video are full of shit and the magazine won't hold up to an acceptable level.
My phone is too full to run the upgrade. I guess I am just good.
Try removing the pirated songs and videos.
If a pipeline is leaking ~1/20th of the gas it carries then... well, words escape me.
I said it was theoretically possible, not likely.
I could not disagree more. An off-the-shelf program is very often a perfectly adequate tool for the job and has all the features you want. Most small businesses need the same things to do their accounting and only need slight customization within the range of what standard programs can be easily configured to do.
It's easy to find somebody to explain how to use it or set up your custom installation. And your data will all be in a standard format. If later on you decide that LitteWare Accounting doesn't fit your business needs any more, you can usually just import your old data into BigWare Accounting. But you might not have to do that in which case you're way ahead, or LittleWare may offer an upgrade. If you want to switch programs and you can't import your old data, you might have to hire a programmer to figure out how to translate formats, that's a lot less of a task than writing the whole thing from scratch.
Seriously, how many standard programs does a programmer use every day? I only consider writing code when there is not a standard, canned program available even if it costs me money. Because it's MUCH more efficient to use standard tools. I only write my own programs or consider hiring somebody to do it for me if there's no standard tool available (because it's a one-off task that nobody else has seen fit to publish) or the standard tools all have glaring deficiencies.
On top of that, there are trust issues. It's easier to trust that the well-known and widely used software has been checked for serious errors and security deficiencies. Who's going to be checking the hired programmer's work? How do you know it will be done on schedule? What if the schedule is, I HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING TOMORROW?
Examples of popular things on Yahoo's front page:
Yahoo finance
Weather
Popular news stories
OMG! <-- I know, you hate it, I hate it, but it's still popular.
Flikr
Yahoo mail (a lot of people have accounts)
So, doesn't that give Bing 7.4% or something along those lines, since Yahoo just front-ends the bing search engine? (Or did I miss something in the past couple of years of drinking the cool-aid)
It means that the user front-end adds significant value for the users who use Yahoo.
Not that Yandex beats Bing. Obviously the main Russian-oriented search engine is going to be a major player, there being 155 million native Russian speakers.
What's surprising to me is that Bing is SO far behind Yahoo given that Windows computers come configured to use Bing until you change the default search engine in Internet Explorer. They have half the rate of usage of Yahoo, despite copying much of Google's bare style. To me, Yahoo's search pages are inordinately cluttered with ads and junk compared to Google's or Bing's. But I guess if you like the bare style you use Google and if you like the clutter you use Yahoo. Bing needs to find a third option if they're going to be competitive with either of the main English-language oriented search engines.
Hydraulic fracturing does not release CO2, burning fuels does. It just helps get about 30% of what is trapped in rock, out of the ground for our use. H
Fracking releases methane. That's the greenhouse gas they're talking about.
As a cautionary tale though, I checked with the EPA website, and their figures indicate that electricity(40%) and transportation(31%) are the largest contributors to U.S. CO2 emissions from 1990-2010. It may indeed be determined one day that the sacrifice in land and water resources is too great to sustain the First World luxury that is the ribeye steak (sorry about that, grandchildren), but I would grudgingly eat lab-grown protein way, way, way before I would be willing to live without power and a horseless carriage.
CO2 is non synonymous with greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gases include CO2. Methane is 21x more potent than CO2 as a greenhouse gas according to this EPA methane page . Therefore it's possible (at least theoretically) that the effects of leaks of natural gas can exceed the effects of burning that gas.
Software monocultures suck no matter who's culture it is.
You mean whose. Hope this helps
Warning: Adobe has detected this file may be infected. Click here to report this to Corporate IT security and secure your workstation.
Does it uninstall Flash, then?
... or rather hoping that the USPTO can't get any stupider. But they keep surprising me.
God created man first ...
You've got it backwards.
There, I think I've exhausted the major variants.