"the lines at the voting booths. People complained about waiting a full hour to get their voices heard while the others shared their similar stories."
Queues? Why would there be queues? Voting is a massively parallel process, one person's vote does not depend on the state of anyone elses vote. Increase the parallelism, more polling stations, more voting booths, no queues. Problem solved.
Look, the reason for electronic voting must be cost. Cut down the lugging of boxes, hiring of halls etc. I can't otherwise think of a single reason that pen and paper isn't better...
Actually, no, I've changed my mind, the machines'll cost a fortune. I can't believe it's cost either.
I'm stumped. Why is electronic voting better than a pen and a cross on a bit of paper?
I couldn't find the word innovate anywhere in the article. Surely if it was really Microsoft they would be "innovating a new music service". Does this mean that Microsoft are no longer innovating and innovative?
The big lads are doing it. There are lots of manufacturers, distributers etc in Taiwan and China who would love to sell more directly (to businesses, not consumers), they get a larger proportion of the cash and you get a cheaper product. It's what companies like alibaba are all about.
Only if they don't negotiate a cheaper deal. Most people, companies still need Office and Windows, and it isn't because Linux and OpenOffice aren't up to the job, it because they don't have the skills to simply switch.
I think this is why we're seeing the Linux adoption slow a bit, the easy installations have been done, people who know Unix/linux have gone ahead and done it, the trick now is to make it easy for people who don't know anything about Linux or Open Office.
"Somehow it seems unlikely the same rules will be applied to developing companies and poorer individuals in the United States."
You scream Linux, OpenOffice and not bluff you'll get big discounts. MS is rich because people simply pay up. Start being an *informed* consumer, markets work better that way.
There are inumerable young attractive women married/engaged/attached to ugly old successful men who have money. Relatively few who are married/engaged/attached to ugly old unsuccessful men who have no money.
I'd go as far as to say that almost the whole of human society is based on the male drive to impress females. It's all feathers.
You don't have to be specific with money. The appearance of money will do, if you're single without kids and have a reasonable job you can appear to be as wealthy as you like. Jag, yacht, appartment etc. If you're a student, married or have kids you'll be skint and you're stuffed.
In fact the status stuff works with just about everyone. You wouldn't believe how impressed people are when you mention that you've got a boat, it's ridiculous, you can pick up yacht for less than $10,000.
All you have to do is recognise that ability to provide, status actually matter to people, especially women whether they recognise it consciously or not. Most blokes though and especially geeks fritter their cash away on stuff which is basically trash.
Now, that was something I wasn't going to bring up, I suspect it's more to do with alpha male leadership qualities than purely physical. However, I think you're basically right, though I reckon it goes beyond society, it seems to be cross cultural.
Until a few years ago a male could never be 100% sure a child was his and the scientific evidence is that *huge* numbers aren't. It could be around 20% or so.
"That women are looking for providers implies their only function in life is to serve man and squat out their babies every few years. That's BS, and completely sexist."
"Serve man". I didn't say anything about serving.
You think that a male's purpose is anything other than to impregnate females? Life has no meaning, the *sole* purpose for *all* life is to have children and pass the genes on to the next generation.
You're a geek, take an anthropology lesson from society.
Women are looking for providers. They can't help it. It makes sense. Who gets stuck with the baby for 15 years as it grows up? Not the bloke, he can wander off and father a dozen (a thousand?) more. It's just the same way you can't help looking for physically attractive females.
Why are men fascinated by money, cars, houses etc? Status items, evidence of their ability to provide. Why do women spend sooo much time on their appearance?
You want to be sexy to women? Look around you. Start looking and acting like someone who can provide.
But you're not a competent professional systems administrator. Most of the developers I've seen as admins have been a disaster, continually trying to code their way out of problems after the fact when they should have organised their way round the problems before they happened.
You couldn't *pay* for the publicity that people like/. readers, admins, developers give for Google.
Know the first thing I tell a new user who know bugger all about the Internet? www.google.com. In fact, I usually set it as their home page to make my life easier.
That translates directly into advertising revenue, and I do it because they have a spectacularly good search system, very cool add on tools and they let us play with them for free. They know *exactly* what they're doing and I'm fine with it.
Slashdot Mirror
"the lines at the voting booths. People complained about waiting a full hour to get their voices heard while the others shared their similar stories."
Queues? Why would there be queues? Voting is a massively parallel process, one person's vote does not depend on the state of anyone elses vote. Increase the parallelism, more polling stations, more voting booths, no queues. Problem solved.
Look, the reason for electronic voting must be cost. Cut down the lugging of boxes, hiring of halls etc. I can't otherwise think of a single reason that pen and paper isn't better...
Actually, no, I've changed my mind, the machines'll cost a fortune. I can't believe it's cost either.
I'm stumped. Why is electronic voting better than a pen and a cross on a bit of paper?
"The reality is, however, that most scientific experiments are not reproduced."
Really, and I suppose you have data which backs that statement up?
Lets add Scientific Scepticism to the list as well.
This is why we have peer review, independant repetition of studies, randomised double blind trials etc. It all comes out in the wash.
e.g.- 1173432_2,00.html
s /tudor/
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12529
The Octavia vRS does 0->60 in 7.9s and this is the kind of thing they're planning:
http://www.skoda-auto.com/global/showroom/concept
Then there's the WRC and BTCC racing cars. They aren't the joke they were 10 years ago, thinking they are is complacency.
The moral is that market leaders had better keep on their toes.
You have to pay to use MP3, there's no lock in or copy control. Hence additional music formats.
I couldn't find the word innovate anywhere in the article. Surely if it was really Microsoft they would be "innovating a new music service". Does this mean that Microsoft are no longer innovating and innovative?
The big lads are doing it. There are lots of manufacturers, distributers etc in Taiwan and China who would love to sell more directly (to businesses, not consumers), they get a larger proportion of the cash and you get a cheaper product. It's what companies like alibaba are all about.
Where have you been the last 30 years?
I think you'll find that China could cripple pretty much all of the American economy should it choose to, and without bothering to invade Taiwan.
Only if they don't negotiate a cheaper deal. Most people, companies still need Office and Windows, and it isn't because Linux and OpenOffice aren't up to the job, it because they don't have the skills to simply switch.
I think this is why we're seeing the Linux adoption slow a bit, the easy installations have been done, people who know Unix/linux have gone ahead and done it, the trick now is to make it easy for people who don't know anything about Linux or Open Office.
"Somehow it seems unlikely the same rules will be applied to developing companies and poorer individuals in the United States."
You scream Linux, OpenOffice and not bluff you'll get big discounts. MS is rich because people simply pay up. Start being an *informed* consumer, markets work better that way.
I'd go as far as to say that almost the whole of human society is based on the male drive to impress females. It's all feathers.
You don't have to be specific with money. The appearance of money will do, if you're single without kids and have a reasonable job you can appear to be as wealthy as you like.
Jag, yacht, appartment etc. If you're a student, married or have kids you'll be skint and you're stuffed.
In fact the status stuff works with just about everyone. You wouldn't believe how impressed people are when you mention that you've got a boat, it's ridiculous, you can pick up yacht for less than $10,000.
All you have to do is recognise that ability to provide, status actually matter to people, especially women whether they recognise it consciously or not. Most blokes though and especially geeks fritter their cash away on stuff which is basically trash.
Now, that was something I wasn't going to bring up, I suspect it's more to do with alpha male leadership qualities than purely physical. However, I think you're basically right, though I reckon it goes beyond society, it seems to be cross cultural.
d _opinion/choices_and_behaviours/misattributed_pate rnity.htm
Until a few years ago a male could never be 100% sure a child was his and the scientific evidence is that *huge* numbers aren't. It could be around 20% or so.
e.g.
http://www.childsupportanalysis.co.uk/analysis_an
"You're saying that people are born to want a certain body shape."
t icles/mask.html
Yes, I'm saying that there are certain characteristics which we are *hardwired* to find attractive.
e.g.
http://tlc.discovery.com/convergence/humanface/ar
"That women are looking for providers implies their only function in life is to serve man and squat out their babies every few years. That's BS, and completely sexist."
"Serve man". I didn't say anything about serving.
You think that a male's purpose is anything other than to impregnate females? Life has no meaning, the *sole* purpose for *all* life is to have children and pass the genes on to the next generation.
Eric, I'd put money on it that you're really 14 and have never been laid, have you.
http://www.nndb.com/people/533/000044401/
Every American adaptation of a British sitcom has been truly dreadful.
It'd be like the BBC "adapting" Star Trek or Stargate, complete with spray painted washing up bottles and bits of string showing on the spacecraft.
Just show them.
It's the nothing which makes The Office so squirmingly excruciating. Some people find it funny but I find it almost painful to watch.
Coupling is much better than The Office.
You're a geek, take an anthropology lesson from society.
Women are looking for providers. They can't help it. It makes sense. Who gets stuck with the baby for 15 years as it grows up? Not the bloke, he can wander off and father a dozen (a thousand?) more. It's just the same way you can't help looking for physically attractive females.
Why are men fascinated by money, cars, houses etc? Status items, evidence of their ability to provide. Why do women spend sooo much time on their appearance?
You want to be sexy to women? Look around you. Start looking and acting like someone who can provide.
Added to the legal process so that patent lawyers can charge a little bit more. Yay! Lets have more lawyers making more legislation.
It works for Italians.
And a 30 user network.
But you're not a competent professional systems administrator. Most of the developers I've seen as admins have been a disaster, continually trying to code their way out of problems after the fact when they should have organised their way round the problems before they happened.
A bit like the iron fist in the velvet glove?
You couldn't *pay* for the publicity that people like /. readers, admins, developers give for Google.
Know the first thing I tell a new user who know bugger all about the Internet? www.google.com. In fact, I usually set it as their home page to make my life easier.
That translates directly into advertising revenue, and I do it because they have a spectacularly good search system, very cool add on tools and they let us play with them for free. They know *exactly* what they're doing and I'm fine with it.