And will they then be led off to UN manned FEMA death camps? Seriously, your hot secret info is from a conspiracy website (It even links to Alex Jones.), followed by a link to a site where the author complains that people that are motivated by a magic invisible sky friend to use violence and intimidation to promote political beliefs he shares, are being (rightfully) lumped into the same category as others that are motivated by a different (and from his view, and entirely unbelievable) magic invisible sky friend use violence and intimidation to promote political beliefs he does not share.
Are magnets "thought provoking?" Sure they are with the juggalo crowd, but outside of Richard Feynman's explanation they're not very thought provoking. Of course the aforementioned juggalos would say, "He's fucking lying," but that's different problem.
It's pretty clear what's going on with the "sore throat" versus "a sore throat" query. It's triggering the same sort of code that causes "harry potter" to put up news results in the top spot, complete with a call out image. Let me explain.
"Sore throat" is a common search (found through automated log analysis) and it's also a named entity, which essentially means it's the type of noun that you'd find in a dictionary or encyclopedia, or a user provided tag. Knowing this, you can do some special processing for it, say suggesting the query "Pharyngitis" (very likely gleamed from Wikipedia disambiguation and redirect pages ("'Sore throat' redirects here. For other uses, see Sore throat (disambiguation)." -- Wikipedia's), and then running that query against Google Health and serving the abbreviated results into position 1. (Google knows "pharyngitis" is a medical term, because it's in the English medical term dictionary, which is built again either using WIkipedia category information, or something similar like WordNet. All this information is used to build the Google Health index.
When a query comes in to google.com, the raw query is sent against multiple indexes such as the web index, the news index, the health index, the finance index, the image search index. These queries go through a special API that does very little query rewriting and causes the index to return very quickly the top hit. The results of these getTopHit() calls are then blended into the organic results that come from the web index. So why does "sore throat" return a Google Health result and "a sore throat" not? Simple. "a sore throat" isn't in the health index, and "sore throat" is. Since this is using the getTopHit() API that doesn't do query rewriting, the stop words aren't removed from the query.
Yeah, we still see all those hotmail, yahoo, and aol addresses don't we? Seriously dude, what did you have to do to join the exclusive elite of gmail? That's right. Nothing.
Also, the ability to get all your messages, regardless of delivery vector in one inbox, is pretty useful.
Why are you using a url shortener in a non-twitter-like environment? You could have just copied the URL, just like any other URL instead of passing it through Google, so they'd get click tracking.
Apparently, according to the author, MS's failure in search is purely down to Google's monopoly and completely unrelated to the fact that MS has in the past chosen to skew search results and hence proven itself to be an untrustworthy search provider?
Citation needed. You're the first I have heard to make such an allegation. They only honest way to determine search engine "trustworthiness" or any over perceived performance measure is to do the search engine taste test. Three engines, one query. Choose the best result list.
Granted active directory and exchange are big. But filers and such are running unix, and often these linux. Web servers are linux. Compute servers are all Linux.
This obsession with Windows and Microsoft is lame. It's been 18 years since Linux was released. The world has changed. Microsoft is far from the 20 MT titan they were. They're irrelevant. Sure they're big, and they're not going anywhere. But that's my point. They're not going anywhere. No one quakes in fear of HP or IBM, both fine companies that make tons of money that do interesting things, but at the same time are past they're halcyon days. No one quakes in fear of Microsoft.
If Linux wants to expand, double down on it's strengths in computing and embedded, and let it's weaknesses in desktop and desktop support mope along. That battle was lost years ago. If I want a UNIX desktop, I'll get a mac. (and indeed, after 12 years of Linux, I have.)
This is so 1994 it's not even funny. Sorry kid. The desktop is irrelevant. When was the last time you heard someone talk about how great a desktop app was? (Games don't count.) The browser wars are over. IE 6 is dead. Javascript is (mostly) de facto standardized for modern browsers, and with HTML on the uptake even Flash is going away. Web apps and to a much lesser extent iPad apps are where it's at.
Former Lord Bill's nightmare came true, and now Microsoft is moved into IBM territory. Want a new bad guy? Pick either Google or Facebook.
Want to claim victory? Fine. Linux won the server war, the only platform war that matters.
Surely these are important fields to develop if we want to survive as a species long-term.
Given that horseshoe crabs have been around for 450 million years, "getting off this rock" is demonstrably not a requirement for long term species survival.
A human diaspora to the stars is just an appeal to romanticism rather than an actual argument. There is literally no place to got where we wouldn't die. No way to to get there fast. No way to get there cheaply (for any definition of "cheap").
There are good reasons to use one over the other, but I'm sorry, freedom has different definitions. GPL grants freedoms to end users that BSD does not. BSD grants rights to developers and distributors that GPL does not. It is not magically "more free".
How dare you imply that freedom is not an absolute concept, defined in terms such that what is currently politically convenient for me maximizes this concept, while what is currently politically inconvenient for me minimizes this concept! Clearly, you must be aligned with the group I currently am told I must fear and hate the most!
Capirca was boring. I loved BSG (especially the early season, the later seasons, well the five was lame, and the finale sucked.), but Capirca was just so damn boring. At no point did I care about anyone.
This is not insightful at all, as any insight needs to understand the definitions of the words being used as a prerequisite.
A constitution protects the minority from the majority.
There is no distinction between a "republic" and a "democracy," beacuse a republic is simply a democracy whose head is a president. e.g. Canada and the United States are both democracies, but Canada is not a republic.
Stop taking civics lessons from Internet forums, and read a book. Democracy comes in two flavors: direct and indirect. Both Canada and the United States are indirect democracies.
The larger company(ies) then consolidates the industry in order to form a monopoly/oligopoly.
This only works if you can use government power to either force people to buy your products or outlaw alternatives.
What government made Windows 90+% of the market? What government made Google 70+% of the search market? What government made Google 70+% of the Internet advertising market? What government made DeBeer's the diamond monopoly?
You know nothing about how economics actually work do you? Why do you think anti-trust laws exist?
Slashdot Mirror
And will they then be led off to UN manned FEMA death camps? Seriously, your hot secret info is from a conspiracy website (It even links to Alex Jones.), followed by a link to a site where the author complains that people that are motivated by a magic invisible sky friend to use violence and intimidation to promote political beliefs he shares, are being (rightfully) lumped into the same category as others that are motivated by a different (and from his view, and entirely unbelievable) magic invisible sky friend use violence and intimidation to promote political beliefs he does not share.
What the hell man? What the hell?
Are magnets "thought provoking?" Sure they are with the juggalo crowd, but outside of Richard Feynman's explanation they're not very thought provoking. Of course the aforementioned juggalos would say, "He's fucking lying," but that's different problem.
Er, airlines sell tickets for profit. What exactly does Google make from you when you use their search engine?
Ad revenue. YOU are Google's product.
Bingo.
It's pretty clear what's going on with the "sore throat" versus "a sore throat" query. It's triggering the same sort of code that causes "harry potter" to put up news results in the top spot, complete with a call out image. Let me explain.
"Sore throat" is a common search (found through automated log analysis) and it's also a named entity, which essentially means it's the type of noun that you'd find in a dictionary or encyclopedia, or a user provided tag. Knowing this, you can do some special processing for it, say suggesting the query "Pharyngitis" (very likely gleamed from Wikipedia disambiguation and redirect pages ("'Sore throat' redirects here. For other uses, see Sore throat (disambiguation)." -- Wikipedia's), and then running that query against Google Health and serving the abbreviated results into position 1. (Google knows "pharyngitis" is a medical term, because it's in the English medical term dictionary, which is built again either using WIkipedia category information, or something similar like WordNet. All this information is used to build the Google Health index.
When a query comes in to google.com, the raw query is sent against multiple indexes such as the web index, the news index, the health index, the finance index, the image search index. These queries go through a special API that does very little query rewriting and causes the index to return very quickly the top hit. The results of these getTopHit() calls are then blended into the organic results that come from the web index. So why does "sore throat" return a Google Health result and "a sore throat" not? Simple. "a sore throat" isn't in the health index, and "sore throat" is. Since this is using the getTopHit() API that doesn't do query rewriting, the stop words aren't removed from the query.
And they both can't be dangerous because?
Yeah, we still see all those hotmail, yahoo, and aol addresses don't we? Seriously dude, what did you have to do to join the exclusive elite of gmail? That's right. Nothing.
Also, the ability to get all your messages, regardless of delivery vector in one inbox, is pretty useful.
Not to dis Facebook engineers, but they are nowhere near the capacity of Google
of course the irony of your statement is that googzilla's 10% raises were an attempt to stop brain drain to facebook.
Hand-encode? Of course not! It's a trivial scripting problem. Here's a Python 3 function that does it in one line.
And writing, running, and successfully incorporating it between cmnd-C and cmnd-V, is most definitely non-trivial problem.
Why are you using a url shortener in a non-twitter-like environment? You could have just copied the URL, just like any other URL instead of passing it through Google, so they'd get click tracking.
Or Epcot
Apparently, according to the author, MS's failure in search is purely down to Google's monopoly and completely unrelated to the fact that MS has in the past chosen to skew search results and hence proven itself to be an untrustworthy search provider?
Citation needed. You're the first I have heard to make such an allegation. They only honest way to determine search engine "trustworthiness" or any over perceived performance measure is to do the search engine taste test. Three engines, one query. Choose the best result list.
I bet you'll be surprised.
Granted active directory and exchange are big. But filers and such are running unix, and often these linux. Web servers are linux. Compute servers are all Linux.
This obsession with Windows and Microsoft is lame. It's been 18 years since Linux was released. The world has changed. Microsoft is far from the 20 MT titan they were. They're irrelevant. Sure they're big, and they're not going anywhere. But that's my point. They're not going anywhere. No one quakes in fear of HP or IBM, both fine companies that make tons of money that do interesting things, but at the same time are past they're halcyon days. No one quakes in fear of Microsoft.
If Linux wants to expand, double down on it's strengths in computing and embedded, and let it's weaknesses in desktop and desktop support mope along. That battle was lost years ago. If I want a UNIX desktop, I'll get a mac. (and indeed, after 12 years of Linux, I have.)
This is so 1994 it's not even funny. Sorry kid. The desktop is irrelevant. When was the last time you heard someone talk about how great a desktop app was? (Games don't count.) The browser wars are over. IE 6 is dead. Javascript is (mostly) de facto standardized for modern browsers, and with HTML on the uptake even Flash is going away. Web apps and to a much lesser extent iPad apps are where it's at.
Former Lord Bill's nightmare came true, and now Microsoft is moved into IBM territory. Want a new bad guy? Pick either Google or Facebook.
Want to claim victory? Fine. Linux won the server war, the only platform war that matters.
7:3 Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins."
Oh sure, entirely about his "love for God!"
Breasts? God must have really let himself go.
Perhaps overkill, but EyeWriter uses eye tracking to control a stylus.
Don't think about supporting the children of the prisoner. Think about all the money you're using to keep the father behind bars! P
Surely these are important fields to develop if we want to survive as a species long-term.
Given that horseshoe crabs have been around for 450 million years, "getting off this rock" is demonstrably not a requirement for long term species survival.
A human diaspora to the stars is just an appeal to romanticism rather than an actual argument. There is literally no place to got where we wouldn't die. No way to to get there fast. No way to get there cheaply (for any definition of "cheap").
There are good reasons to use one over the other, but I'm sorry, freedom has different definitions. GPL grants freedoms to end users that BSD does not. BSD grants rights to developers and distributors that GPL does not. It is not magically "more free".
How dare you imply that freedom is not an absolute concept, defined in terms such that what is currently politically convenient for me maximizes this concept, while what is currently politically inconvenient for me minimizes this concept! Clearly, you must be aligned with the group I currently am told I must fear and hate the most!
Capirca was boring. I loved BSG (especially the early season, the later seasons, well the five was lame, and the finale sucked.), but Capirca was just so damn boring. At no point did I care about anyone.
This is not insightful at all, as any insight needs to understand the definitions of the words being used as a prerequisite.
A constitution protects the minority from the majority.
There is no distinction between a "republic" and a "democracy," beacuse a republic is simply a democracy whose head is a president. e.g. Canada and the United States are both democracies, but Canada is not a republic.
Stop taking civics lessons from Internet forums, and read a book. Democracy comes in two flavors: direct and indirect. Both Canada and the United States are indirect democracies.
Stop this nonsense now
Since when has the US paid any money to the UN? If it was paying, it wouldn't owe hundreds of millions of dollars.
The larger company(ies) then consolidates the industry in order to form a monopoly/oligopoly.
This only works if you can use government power to either force people to buy your products or outlaw alternatives.
What government made Windows 90+% of the market?
What government made Google 70+% of the search market?
What government made Google 70+% of the Internet advertising market?
What government made DeBeer's the diamond monopoly?
You know nothing about how economics actually work do you? Why do you think anti-trust laws exist?
It's a real shame that Johnson never pushed for civil rights.
misinformed notion that the Democrat party
I didn't know we had a "Democrat" party. I've heard of the Democratic party. I can only assme that the oppositon is the "Republica" party.
Why do you have to call him black? He's just as white as he is black.
First black president? Pshaw! He's just the 44th cracker in a row.