I dunno. If I could identify a market segment of 500 million people all of whom are likely to have two things in common (they use a browser and they log into facebook), I'm going to think of a way to make those two things work better together, and not worry about anyone who wasn't going to give me money, anyway.
An analogy: in order to be as successful as James Cameron was when he made Avatar, he only needed to convince 200 million people to part with the price of a movie ticket. That's about 3% of the population of the planet. The other 97% he could give a shit about, and they can feel the same towards him. And he still gets to be the guy who made the biggest movie ever by a 50% margin.
Moral: Niche is not necessarily bad, in fact, sometimes it's best.
Of course it isn't a Picasso. The price is $160 thousand, not $160 million.
As for the "juice", if you just got the boards it would just be a computer. With the other paraphernalia you've got a whole museum setting in one package. Anyone musing on this will be given to imagine the original owner's entire experience being one of the pioneers of computing at home. There's a depth and breadth of context that one more circuit board doesn't bring to it. And then there's the autograph and a record of Jobs' customer-service style, with a bit of wry irony in that it's typewritten.
$160k is the low end of Christie's estimate. The high end is quite low, too.
Good guess, some of it. But there's not much science and a good deal of mysticism in it, so it will be wrong more often than Western medicine, which isn't based on guessing as a rule.
No, you just need to be more rational about your boss and your personality.
Fear is an irrational cause for your actions, whether they are beneficial or not. It will lead you to do the wrong thing as easily as the right thing. Rationality can not, as long as you have the necessary information and know right from wrong.
“Once Red Hat settles and pays for a license for the patent, any subsequent defendant will find it more difficult to convince a court that the patent should not be enforceable.”
In the limit as "more difficult" goes to "not".
Since the case is sealed, subsequent courts will never know exactly what Red Hat copped to, or why. It could be anything, from a total capitulation on the merits to a conflict of the trial date with a lawyer's daughter's wedding. Neither is likely, but neither is impossible, and the unknowability moots this as a precedent. In any subsequent case, plaintiff (Acacia) will have to agree with the defendants (h4xx0rz X, Y, and Z) to stipulate that the Red Hat case can have no bearing, unless Acacia wants to violate the order and tell the judge why it should have bearing.
And even if the settlement was unsealed, settlement precludes the case from being a precedent, so all Acacia could do, if anything, is repeat facts from it, not state that it is a legal validation of their patent.
And, when a soldier breaks, you get another soldier. When this thing breaks, you start filling out forms to request repair or replacement, and you get 1-2 more soldiers.
Frankly, if this thing was worth a damn, it would be all over the civilian logistics industry by now.
But it's not. So putting a soldier in it is just a distraction, and a way to get funding for something that's not as economical as some people think.
BTW, I highly recommend both the LHC and Angry Birds. The latter is highly playable, apparently the physics are correct (at least, the gravity is, not so sure about feathered-friend vs. oaken plank) and all puzzles are solvable at the maximum bonus if you have the touch.
They can't, because the bidding process indemnifies the contractor.
In return, the contractor has to comply with the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA, which will put contractor personnel in jail if there are any lies being told, whether through knowing underbidding or knowing overbidding.
TINA is a bitch. It requires the company to tell the government the truth. Not just the person writing the bid. So if the person writing the bid calculates X dollars for N units of wing-nut Z in a fighter jet, but a person at the company's subsidiary knows those wing nuts can be bought for YX dollars, then the person writing the bid, and possibly the entire chain of authority above him, can end up in the can.
But, once you use TINA, all decisions are the government's, so all fault is the government's. And any changes and overruns are approved by the government in real-time, so they're indemnified, too. At the top are the political denizens of government, who, when they realize they've put their foot in it by allowing all these "reasonable" changes and overruns to the point that the total has become embarassing, suddenly turn around in their chairs and point fingers at anyone but themselves until the cameras turn off.
Well, no, Russia/USSR had major political goals in expanding into Europe after WW2. Considering they were pretty much there already, having been the ones fighting WW2 on that half of the continent, it wasn't much of a stretch to just say it's theirs and keep it, or to come back and take it again to spread their ideology. Still not merely a matter of having power and nowhere to use it.
What they did in South Asia was about access to shipping for their resources. Money, not military. They were, in fact, desperate. That little war pushed their economy over the edge, and losing it caused the end of Soviet Communism.
As for the Revolution, the British definitely did not have overwhelming force in the Colonies. They barely had any to start with, and when the war heated up and they shipped more over, it still wasn't overwhelming. That worked greatly to our advantage.
Slashdot Mirror
I dunno. If I could identify a market segment of 500 million people all of whom are likely to have two things in common (they use a browser and they log into facebook), I'm going to think of a way to make those two things work better together, and not worry about anyone who wasn't going to give me money, anyway.
An analogy: in order to be as successful as James Cameron was when he made Avatar, he only needed to convince 200 million people to part with the price of a movie ticket. That's about 3% of the population of the planet. The other 97% he could give a shit about, and they can feel the same towards him. And he still gets to be the guy who made the biggest movie ever by a 50% margin.
Moral: Niche is not necessarily bad, in fact, sometimes it's best.
Of course it isn't a Picasso. The price is $160 thousand, not $160 million.
As for the "juice", if you just got the boards it would just be a computer. With the other paraphernalia you've got a whole museum setting in one package. Anyone musing on this will be given to imagine the original owner's entire experience being one of the pioneers of computing at home. There's a depth and breadth of context that one more circuit board doesn't bring to it. And then there's the autograph and a record of Jobs' customer-service style, with a bit of wry irony in that it's typewritten.
$160k is the low end of Christie's estimate. The high end is quite low, too.
And as long as the other planets are still there, Jupiter is not a planet.
Were they in this kind of shape, with all the accoutrements, plus Steve Jobs' autograph?
Since the invention of graphical communications media, yes.
On items with this sort of juice, the auction house usually guesses way low.
You're holding it wrong.
I volunteer to apply it.
flatulent whingement
But with what sort of resolution?
And why does this come up in a google search for CMBR images?
Clearly the field needs more study, and I for one think it deserves the funding.
Good guess, some of it. But there's not much science and a good deal of mysticism in it, so it will be wrong more often than Western medicine, which isn't based on guessing as a rule.
He's just got the button. His viewers still have the ignitors in them.
No, you just need to be more rational about your boss and your personality.
Fear is an irrational cause for your actions, whether they are beneficial or not. It will lead you to do the wrong thing as easily as the right thing. Rationality can not, as long as you have the necessary information and know right from wrong.
But it wasn't verbatim. Maybe in plaintext it was...
Found it:
“Once Red Hat settles and pays for a license for the patent, any subsequent defendant will find it more difficult to convince a court that the patent should not be enforceable.”
In the limit as "more difficult" goes to "not".
Since the case is sealed, subsequent courts will never know exactly what Red Hat copped to, or why. It could be anything, from a total capitulation on the merits to a conflict of the trial date with a lawyer's daughter's wedding. Neither is likely, but neither is impossible, and the unknowability moots this as a precedent. In any subsequent case, plaintiff (Acacia) will have to agree with the defendants (h4xx0rz X, Y, and Z) to stipulate that the Red Hat case can have no bearing, unless Acacia wants to violate the order and tell the judge why it should have bearing.
And even if the settlement was unsealed, settlement precludes the case from being a precedent, so all Acacia could do, if anything, is repeat facts from it, not state that it is a legal validation of their patent.
And this is linked from that and is gob-smacking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teletank
You're over 100 years old?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_control#History
True.
And, when a soldier breaks, you get another soldier. When this thing breaks, you start filling out forms to request repair or replacement, and you get 1-2 more soldiers.
Frankly, if this thing was worth a damn, it would be all over the civilian logistics industry by now.
But it's not. So putting a soldier in it is just a distraction, and a way to get funding for something that's not as economical as some people think.
That's true, and so is the paranoid delusion that the community is biased against you.
You're just wrong, is all.
recall the magnet explosion last year that shut down the LHC for a year?
I'm currently playing Angry Birds on my phone, so, yes, hilariously.
BTW, I highly recommend both the LHC and Angry Birds. The latter is highly playable, apparently the physics are correct (at least, the gravity is, not so sure about feathered-friend vs. oaken plank) and all puzzles are solvable at the maximum bonus if you have the touch.
They can't, because the bidding process indemnifies the contractor.
In return, the contractor has to comply with the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA, which will put contractor personnel in jail if there are any lies being told, whether through knowing underbidding or knowing overbidding.
TINA is a bitch. It requires the company to tell the government the truth. Not just the person writing the bid. So if the person writing the bid calculates X dollars for N units of wing-nut Z in a fighter jet, but a person at the company's subsidiary knows those wing nuts can be bought for YX dollars, then the person writing the bid, and possibly the entire chain of authority above him, can end up in the can.
But, once you use TINA, all decisions are the government's, so all fault is the government's. And any changes and overruns are approved by the government in real-time, so they're indemnified, too. At the top are the political denizens of government, who, when they realize they've put their foot in it by allowing all these "reasonable" changes and overruns to the point that the total has become embarassing, suddenly turn around in their chairs and point fingers at anyone but themselves until the cameras turn off.
...it's full of stars!
and a lot of other stuff we've never seen before because we're missing out on everything beyond a certain limit of red-shift and absolute magnitude
But, at some point, we will be looking at the edge of the universe. If it's emitting electromagnetic radiation. Then you can complain.
This would never have happened under President Bush.
Nobody would have taken a second to analyze oil industry safety in his White House.
You just issued it.
Well, no, Russia/USSR had major political goals in expanding into Europe after WW2. Considering they were pretty much there already, having been the ones fighting WW2 on that half of the continent, it wasn't much of a stretch to just say it's theirs and keep it, or to come back and take it again to spread their ideology. Still not merely a matter of having power and nowhere to use it.
What they did in South Asia was about access to shipping for their resources. Money, not military. They were, in fact, desperate. That little war pushed their economy over the edge, and losing it caused the end of Soviet Communism.
As for the Revolution, the British definitely did not have overwhelming force in the Colonies. They barely had any to start with, and when the war heated up and they shipped more over, it still wasn't overwhelming. That worked greatly to our advantage.