No, you are pretty close. His basic idea is "I believe in all the science you can throw at me, but that still doesn't disprove God". And though he somehow thinks that makes him different, to a real scientist it's not much different from "do you believe in Odin or does Zeus sound more believable?"
I am most definitely NOT an Apple fanboy (I do have some of their products, and like the overall UI but hate the closed features of those products and their totalitarian control of content).
But, seriously - the company with the LARGEST MARKET CAP IN THE WORLD has not "jumped the shark" just because you (or I) don't like what they have done with iTunes. Consumers, businesses, it's irrelevant. That shark is not seeing Fonzie's waterskis any time soon...
Seriously... I started using Windows 7 and now it's finally making (reasonable) distinctions about what files can be modified in system directories. Windows is moving towards UNIX, and UNIX is moving towards Windows... the perfect convergence, or the sign of the apocalypse!?
One click purchase is more than just clicking the button. You have to bind the current web browser window to a user-id, use the very same user-id for billing, maintain a secure database of personal information, and be able to transfer those orders to a global connected network of warehouses as well as interfacing with the financial networks. There would be ways of guaranteeing fault-tolerance and reliability.
So they need to explain every step of the way and which techniques were used. And if someone comes up with another one-click purchase that does something different, it should not violate the patent. (the problem is the patent lawyers try to come up with such vague terms and cover every random possibility that won't ever be implemented by the patent holder that this becomes pretty difficult...)
And for the UI - shouldn't matter. A UI should no more be patentable than a painting. If they can copyright it, go ahead, but they should only be able to patent the basic techniques used to create the UI (IF they were novel), not the end result.
I don't think there are many people (at least among those who think patents are valid in some way) who don't believe you should be able to patent algorithms. An algorithm is a process or method, the concept of which has been around since the patent system was created. Algorithms can be factory processes, chemical reactions, implemented in mechanical or electrical hardware, etc.
I think people's main protest is in implementing software that has no inherently novel algorithms - things that just seem like arranging UI elements on a screen, formatting text/XML in a specific way, etc. One click purchase is not a novel algorithm. TV electronic program grid guides are not an algorithm. In fact, a very specific way that these are implemented *could* be considered one, but that shouldn't prevent someone else from writing different code that ends up with the same result.
And another reason this is a relatively meaningless metric: in many cases this is an apples to oranges [sorry, obvious pun;) ] comparison. iPhone retail prices (and discounted prices) are much higher than the average HTC phone retail/discount prices, and so Apple's profit margin (and total profit) are in another league from its competitors...
Absolutely. That's why such a large proportion of high tech innovation has come from the US in this century - no one cares about titles, it's all about results. Hell, a lot of the most successful high tech entrepreneurs never finished their degrees anyway, let alone bother with a useless "engineering license".
Pretending that a certificate somehow makes you better is the real joke. I don't know anyone in computer or electrical engineering who bothered getting a "certificate".
I guess that's why they have had to settle for EE/CS jobs at second rate companies like Intel, nVidia, Apple, Oracle, Marvell, Broadcom, Google, or any of the others here in Silicon Valley that could give a shit about a piece of paper issued from bureaucrats over intelligence and motivation...
According to their site, that's part of the reason for the increase, is increasing Debit Fee charges.
Yeah, the new "debit card fee" changes intended to decrease debit card costs to retailers in fact results in large increase in debit costs for small transactions.
Instead of $0.04 + 1.55% per transaction max, it's $0.21 + %0.05 per transaction... that means for anything less than about $12, they get *more* money now. And of course the banks know that the trend of using debit cards for small/micro transactions instead of cash means their revenues are just going to go up.
Your corrupt and/or incompetent Congresspeople hard at work...
If you lent your card to someone to rent them, it's your own fault and you should pay. If someone stole or cloned your card, then it's fraud and so it's your credit card company that is wrong for not reversing the charge. Either way, it wasn't redbox's fault.
Exactly. It's like claiming Google is becoming a monopoly so they must allow uninstalling the Chrome browser from Chrome OS. The browser is becoming the window manager/desktop, big f-ing deal! I have IE, Chrome, Firefox, and Safari on my Windows machine, and it's pretty damn easy to use whichever I want to browse the web.
Depends on what kind of doctor you are... recent advances in surgical techniques (laparoscopy, robotic surgery, etc) means surgeons have to learn new techniques all the time - and ones that require a lot more precision and practice than the latest HTML standards or OS APIs...
But there is no cost savings for their streaming business (which is the one they want to grow). Streaming is pennies per GB these days (and is dependent on users, so there is no savings), and they are paying a flat (but HUGE) licensing fee on much of their content. So fewer customers means higher cost per customer.
Besides - Netflix make their money by providing a service that they hope majority of their customers use as little as possible without cancelling - if they all used it as much as possible, the costs would be even higher for the same revenue. After losing about a million of those customers who were clearly underutilizing it, they basically lost a whole bunch of free revenue...
Yeah, except that Netflix hasn't really *innovated* in anything beyond "return envelope technology" in years. Spinning off a business that will eventually go away isn't even an attempt at innovation, it's just bookkeeping. And their streaming service is most definitely not innovative - their UI is horrible, the content catalog is even worse, and their streaming quality below that of many competitors.
All they really have going for them is their huge customer base, and their recent customer losses (followed by stock losses) shows people have finally realized that. A huge customer base and lack of innovation is exactly where Blockbuster was 5 years ago...
We all know (before he went tits up) he and the rest of the pentavirate ran everything. Plus, he put an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes you crrrrave it fortnightly...
Manufacturing costs in Scandinavia is a lot higher, it's not uncommon for unskilled factory workers to make 25 USD per hour, not counting overtime, late hours etc.
US auto worker wages (UAW) are in the $30-$40 / hour range, so maybe it is cheaper there.
Seriously in the process of spending half a billion how much is 500 manufacturing jobs?
Plus the huge benefits to the local economy due to those 500 employed workers, infrastructure improvements needed to run a large factory, suppliers, etc. Something that size probably adds $100M/year to the economy where it's located.
Slashdot Mirror
He was quoting Einstein...
http://www.lettersofnote.com/2009/10/word-god-is-product-of-human-weakness.html
Besides, he was raised (non-practicing) Jewish anyway, no idea where Christianity would even come into it...
This is a story passed down verbally for thousands of years, translated multiple times then finally wrote down and translated again.
Yes, it is. Same with The Odyssey, but I don't really believe Odysseus blinded a cyclops or had his men turned into pigs by a witch, either.
Not that your little anecdote makes any sense whatsoever... the whole point of evolution is there is no "First Man"...
No, you are pretty close. His basic idea is "I believe in all the science you can throw at me, but that still doesn't disprove God". And though he somehow thinks that makes him different, to a real scientist it's not much different from "do you believe in Odin or does Zeus sound more believable?"
"it's release"!? For the love of... ok, refresher course...
The Oatmeal
I am most definitely NOT an Apple fanboy (I do have some of their products, and like the overall UI but hate the closed features of those products and their totalitarian control of content).
But, seriously - the company with the LARGEST MARKET CAP IN THE WORLD has not "jumped the shark" just because you (or I) don't like what they have done with iTunes. Consumers, businesses, it's irrelevant. That shark is not seeing Fonzie's waterskis any time soon...
Seriously... I started using Windows 7 and now it's finally making (reasonable) distinctions about what files can be modified in system directories. Windows is moving towards UNIX, and UNIX is moving towards Windows... the perfect convergence, or the sign of the apocalypse!?
One click purchase is more than just clicking the button. You have to bind the current web browser window to a user-id, use the very same user-id for billing, maintain a secure database of personal information, and be able to transfer those orders to a global connected network of warehouses as well as interfacing with the financial networks. There would be ways of guaranteeing fault-tolerance and reliability.
So they need to explain every step of the way and which techniques were used. And if someone comes up with another one-click purchase that does something different, it should not violate the patent. (the problem is the patent lawyers try to come up with such vague terms and cover every random possibility that won't ever be implemented by the patent holder that this becomes pretty difficult...)
And for the UI - shouldn't matter. A UI should no more be patentable than a painting. If they can copyright it, go ahead, but they should only be able to patent the basic techniques used to create the UI (IF they were novel), not the end result.
I don't think there are many people (at least among those who think patents are valid in some way) who don't believe you should be able to patent algorithms. An algorithm is a process or method, the concept of which has been around since the patent system was created. Algorithms can be factory processes, chemical reactions, implemented in mechanical or electrical hardware, etc.
I think people's main protest is in implementing software that has no inherently novel algorithms - things that just seem like arranging UI elements on a screen, formatting text/XML in a specific way, etc. One click purchase is not a novel algorithm. TV electronic program grid guides are not an algorithm. In fact, a very specific way that these are implemented *could* be considered one, but that shouldn't prevent someone else from writing different code that ends up with the same result.
Yeah, brain fart. I meant to say $2.5-3B from the iPhone, $7B total. It was a bit under 5x HTC's profit and for some reason I multiplied by 10 :)
$18.6B NT is about $600M USD. Apple's total profit is about $7B over the same time, with about $5-6B from the iPhone.
It's great to see Apple competitors (especially Android-based) making a healthy profit... but still... in another league...
Exactly what I was going to say...
And another reason this is a relatively meaningless metric: in many cases this is an apples to oranges [sorry, obvious pun ;) ] comparison. iPhone retail prices (and discounted prices) are much higher than the average HTC phone retail/discount prices, and so Apple's profit margin (and total profit) are in another league from its competitors...
To me software development is a form of applied mathematics, not engineering.
Well, engineering is often regarded as a form of applied mathematics. Some universities even put them in the same department.
Absolutely. That's why such a large proportion of high tech innovation has come from the US in this century - no one cares about titles, it's all about results. Hell, a lot of the most successful high tech entrepreneurs never finished their degrees anyway, let alone bother with a useless "engineering license".
Pretending that a certificate somehow makes you better is the real joke. I don't know anyone in computer or electrical engineering who bothered getting a "certificate".
I guess that's why they have had to settle for EE/CS jobs at second rate companies like Intel, nVidia, Apple, Oracle, Marvell, Broadcom, Google, or any of the others here in Silicon Valley that could give a shit about a piece of paper issued from bureaucrats over intelligence and motivation...
That and when some crazy laid off tech worker burns down the building over his red stapler. Plus, who doesn't want to bring their lunch in a pail?
The thing about aiming light is it's pretty fast... ;)
And a laser just has to flash over the cabin window for a fraction of a second to be noticed...
According to their site, that's part of the reason for the increase, is increasing Debit Fee charges.
Yeah, the new "debit card fee" changes intended to decrease debit card costs to retailers in fact results in large increase in debit costs for small transactions.
Instead of $0.04 + 1.55% per transaction max, it's $0.21 + %0.05 per transaction... that means for anything less than about $12, they get *more* money now. And of course the banks know that the trend of using debit cards for small/micro transactions instead of cash means their revenues are just going to go up.
Your corrupt and/or incompetent Congresspeople hard at work...
If you lent your card to someone to rent them, it's your own fault and you should pay. If someone stole or cloned your card, then it's fraud and so it's your credit card company that is wrong for not reversing the charge. Either way, it wasn't redbox's fault.
Exactly. It's like claiming Google is becoming a monopoly so they must allow uninstalling the Chrome browser from Chrome OS. The browser is becoming the window manager/desktop, big f-ing deal! I have IE, Chrome, Firefox, and Safari on my Windows machine, and it's pretty damn easy to use whichever I want to browse the web.
Depends on what kind of doctor you are... recent advances in surgical techniques (laparoscopy, robotic surgery, etc) means surgeons have to learn new techniques all the time - and ones that require a lot more precision and practice than the latest HTML standards or OS APIs...
But there is no cost savings for their streaming business (which is the one they want to grow). Streaming is pennies per GB these days (and is dependent on users, so there is no savings), and they are paying a flat (but HUGE) licensing fee on much of their content. So fewer customers means higher cost per customer.
Besides - Netflix make their money by providing a service that they hope majority of their customers use as little as possible without cancelling - if they all used it as much as possible, the costs would be even higher for the same revenue. After losing about a million of those customers who were clearly underutilizing it, they basically lost a whole bunch of free revenue...
It's Reed Hastings, so more like epic arrogance.
Yeah, except that Netflix hasn't really *innovated* in anything beyond "return envelope technology" in years. Spinning off a business that will eventually go away isn't even an attempt at innovation, it's just bookkeeping. And their streaming service is most definitely not innovative - their UI is horrible, the content catalog is even worse, and their streaming quality below that of many competitors.
All they really have going for them is their huge customer base, and their recent customer losses (followed by stock losses) shows people have finally realized that. A huge customer base and lack of innovation is exactly where Blockbuster was 5 years ago...
We all know (before he went tits up) he and the rest of the pentavirate ran everything. Plus, he put an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes you crrrrave it fortnightly...
Manufacturing costs in Scandinavia is a lot higher, it's not uncommon for unskilled factory workers to make 25 USD per hour, not counting overtime, late hours etc.
US auto worker wages (UAW) are in the $30-$40 / hour range, so maybe it is cheaper there.
Seriously in the process of spending half a billion how much is 500 manufacturing jobs?
Plus the huge benefits to the local economy due to those 500 employed workers, infrastructure improvements needed to run a large factory, suppliers, etc. Something that size probably adds $100M/year to the economy where it's located.