Given the highly negative feedback provided for the User Interface of the IE7 BETA releases why did you decide to stick with the same format for the final release?
... Microsoft should get out of the OS business and stick to what they do best - producing mice/keyboard combos. They should also give a try to making swiss cheese, now that they have expeirience with all those holes in IE.
Slashdot's done it once again - it's patently stupid to say that "good with math means bad with people". This is not what the study says at all. It establishes a relationship between enjoyment of math and math skills. It also concludes that the more you were taught math as a fun game the less likely you are to be good at it. It mentions nothing at all about social skills in relationship to math.
is so reminiscent of the years when Microsoft was snatching deals from under IBM's nose. I just hope that for the sake of all users Microsoft can reinvent and save itself from extinction.
Oil companies claim the backers of Prop 87, some of them venture capitalists, would profit from state money flowing into the alternative-energy projects they are funding.
There is nothing wrong with profiting as all the oil-companies can attest but for the record Vinod Khosla, the founder of Sun and major backer of Prop 87 has said that if any ethanol companies in which he invests profit from the proposition, he will donate the profits to charity. So it's not all self-serving as the oil companies would have you believe. (info is from today's WSJ).
Not really. I moved so that I could be closer to work - my commute is 10 minutes in a major metropolitan city - against the traffic. Life offers plenty of choices - whether we take them or not is entirely up to us. Which do you think will help solve his problem - complaining or taking action to fix it?
A similarly bloated planet has been found before (HD 209458b), so these puffed-up planets may be quite common. Right you are, Ken, you needn't look further than Kirstie Alley.
At a moment where many people wonder if the use of nanoparticles is safe, it's good to know that nanotechnology has been widely used for a very long time.
People have been smoking for much longer than the tobacco companies have been selling cigarettes. They've also been drinking alcohol for even longer than that. Neither of those is safe today (the former more unsafe than the latter).
46% of women doing their own PC-troubleshooting, eh? I guess that is equivalent to me doing my own car maintenance by glancing at the odometer and then at the oil change sticker to figure out if it's time for another oil change.
Not sure what you are saying there... Let's say a researcher uses a microscope to find a very deadly bacteria/virus is the miscroscope company to blame for the find? Google is in the same position. The best thing they can do is to stop indexing sites with such content. But then where do we stop? Who decides what is malicious and what is not? Placing a prominent warning on search results may help google users avoid such sites. But then Google is the loser - it's the same effect as placing gruesome images on cigarettes. Google is in a pretty tight spot here.
Good luck with that...you have contradictory goals there. You're only getting to 100 mpg if you make nearly the entire car out of plastic, but a car that's made that way falls apart if you just look at it funny.
Totally wrong! Heard of kevlar? Five times stronger than steel for the same total weight. Materials research has come a long way since the late 70s. There are now materials much stronger than steel and even kevlar. They just don't use them in cars because they WANT YOU to buy spare parts. Companies make more money on the spare parts than on the car itself.
Republican? Pro-big business? Not that it matters, but I think the government can do way more than it's doing now to encourage fuel-efficient cars. If the government were to put a huge tax markup on gas everybody will be affected - consumers, companies, many many airlines will struggle horribly and everntually go out of business. ALL prices will go up across the board because there is not a single company in the world which is not dependent on energy costs. Can you say inflation? Can you say high interest rates? Can you say recession?
If they put in place more stringent fuel-effiency requirements only the car companies will have to struggle (and possibly larger shareholders). I have no problem paying $1-3k more for a car if that's going to save me money on many of the others things that are NOT going to go up!
There are ways to craft those laws so that changes are very highly encouraged. In fact, the government can provide incentives in the form of tax breaks to car companies. They will more than make up the money in the savings from fuel efficiency.
However, that would be against the interests of a whole army of lobbying groups for the car manufacturers and oil companies. This is why it's not happenening.
How is it possible that an entire country (Sweden, read in the news) is able to wean itself from oil and the US is not?
I do not want our government mandating what types of products I can sell or buy any more than they do now. If you want to cut the amount of fuel that Americans consume, raise the tax on fuel. As much as I would hate to pay more at the pump, this is the fairest way to do it. Don't tax people on what they drive, but how much energy they consume.
Seriously, how is the parent insightful? GM is already dead in the water as a result of similarly stupid "logic". Some years ago when Toyota and Honda introduced hybrid cars everybody was laughing but look at what's happening now. GM's fate is a direct result of their lack of initiative and competitiveness. The best way to compete is to make improvements to cars and trucks that go towards increasing the fuel efficiency. I don't think we'll see gas prices lower than $2.50 ever again.
I'd love a car that can go 100 MPG, travel at less than the current max speeds (who the hell goes at 160mph?!) and not cost me $2000 in repairs for a fender bender.
"Self-propelled through slimy jets" is also part of the job credentials of any current and/or future RIAA president. And yes, many many bacteria have suffered and died in order to perfect this method of propulsion.
Re:Javascript is insecure - AJAX is security hole
on
Ruby On Rails Goes 1.1
·
· Score: 1
Bill, don't forget eating cookies causes browser cavities as well!!
Slashdot Mirror
Given the highly negative feedback provided for the User Interface of the IE7 BETA releases why did you decide to stick with the same format for the final release?
... Microsoft should get out of the OS business and stick to what they do best - producing mice/keyboard combos. They should also give a try to making swiss cheese, now that they have expeirience with all those holes in IE.
Slashdot's done it once again - it's patently stupid to say that "good with math means bad with people". This is not what the study says at all. It establishes a relationship between enjoyment of math and math skills. It also concludes that the more you were taught math as a fun game the less likely you are to be good at it. It mentions nothing at all about social skills in relationship to math.
is so reminiscent of the years when Microsoft was snatching deals from under IBM's nose. I just hope that for the sake of all users Microsoft can reinvent and save itself from extinction.
Oil companies claim the backers of Prop 87, some of them venture capitalists, would profit from state money flowing into the alternative-energy projects they are funding.
There is nothing wrong with profiting as all the oil-companies can attest but for the record Vinod Khosla, the founder of Sun and major backer of Prop 87 has said that if any ethanol companies in which he invests profit from the proposition, he will donate the profits to charity. So it's not all self-serving as the oil companies would have you believe. (info is from today's WSJ).
What Came First, the Violence or the Videogame?
You win retard of the day for this gem.
Not really. I moved so that I could be closer to work - my commute is 10 minutes in a major metropolitan city - against the traffic. Life offers plenty of choices - whether we take them or not is entirely up to us. Which do you think will help solve his problem - complaining or taking action to fix it?
Just proves that it's very easy making excuses. Or you could try moving to another apt/house or switching jobs. It's all about choices, friend.
A similarly bloated planet has been found before (HD 209458b), so these puffed-up planets may be quite common.
Right you are, Ken, you needn't look further than Kirstie Alley.
I see your humor and I'd like to remind you that Montgomery County, MD is chock full of rich, white neighborhoods! And they still vote Democratic.
For the black-hole-fearing crowd... RIAA/MPAA morphed into a black hole a long time ago.
People have been smoking for much longer than the tobacco companies have been selling cigarettes. They've also been drinking alcohol for even longer than that. Neither of those is safe today (the former more unsafe than the latter).
46% of women doing their own PC-troubleshooting, eh? I guess that is equivalent to me doing my own car maintenance by glancing at the odometer and then at the oil change sticker to figure out if it's time for another oil change.
From TFA: A histone of peas and cows differs in just 2 of its 102 amino acid units.
Mmmm, a histone of peas... Seriously, let me be the first to say: I smell a Nobel prize for this one.
Not sure what you are saying there ... Let's say a researcher uses a microscope to find a very deadly bacteria/virus is the miscroscope company to blame for the find? Google is in the same position. The best thing they can do is to stop indexing sites with such content. But then where do we stop? Who decides what is malicious and what is not? Placing a prominent warning on search results may help google users avoid such sites. But then Google is the loser - it's the same effect as placing gruesome images on cigarettes. Google is in a pretty tight spot here.
Yes, I will happily get an RFID chip implant if the CEO of the company selling the chips gets an ANAL implant first.
Basically every guy's password will be "boobies"?
I am paying for Yahoo's premium account. Unfortunately, yahoo is not exactly delivering. Still it's way better than hotmail.
Obligatory Seinfeld quote:
"Yes, I shrunk it!"
Good luck with that...you have contradictory goals there. You're only getting to 100 mpg if you make nearly the entire car out of plastic, but a car that's made that way falls apart if you just look at it funny.
Totally wrong! Heard of kevlar? Five times stronger than steel for the same total weight. Materials research has come a long way since the late 70s. There are now materials much stronger than steel and even kevlar. They just don't use them in cars because they WANT YOU to buy spare parts. Companies make more money on the spare parts than on the car itself.
Republican? Pro-big business? Not that it matters, but I think the government can do way more than it's doing now to encourage fuel-efficient cars. If the government were to put a huge tax markup on gas everybody will be affected - consumers, companies, many many airlines will struggle horribly and everntually go out of business. ALL prices will go up across the board because there is not a single company in the world which is not dependent on energy costs. Can you say inflation? Can you say high interest rates? Can you say recession?
If they put in place more stringent fuel-effiency requirements only the car companies will have to struggle (and possibly larger shareholders). I have no problem paying $1-3k more for a car if that's going to save me money on many of the others things that are NOT going to go up!
There are ways to craft those laws so that changes are very highly encouraged. In fact, the government can provide incentives in the form of tax breaks to car companies. They will more than make up the money in the savings from fuel efficiency.
However, that would be against the interests of a whole army of lobbying groups for the car manufacturers and oil companies. This is why it's not happenening.
How is it possible that an entire country (Sweden, read in the news) is able to wean itself from oil and the US is not?
I do not want our government mandating what types of products I can sell or buy any more than they do now. If you want to cut the amount of fuel that Americans consume, raise the tax on fuel. As much as I would hate to pay more at the pump, this is the fairest way to do it. Don't tax people on what they drive, but how much energy they consume.
Seriously, how is the parent insightful? GM is already dead in the water as a result of similarly stupid "logic". Some years ago when Toyota and Honda introduced hybrid cars everybody was laughing but look at what's happening now. GM's fate is a direct result of their lack of initiative and competitiveness. The best way to compete is to make improvements to cars and trucks that go towards increasing the fuel efficiency. I don't think we'll see gas prices lower than $2.50 ever again.
I'd love a car that can go 100 MPG, travel at less than the current max speeds (who the hell goes at 160mph?!) and not cost me $2000 in repairs for a fender bender.
"Self-propelled through slimy jets" is also part of the job credentials of any current and/or future RIAA president. And yes, many many bacteria have suffered and died in order to perfect this method of propulsion.
Bill, don't forget eating cookies causes browser cavities as well!!
but 42 is not prime :(