There's a neat web-based type racing site at www.typrx.com, which allows a person to measure their word-per-minute score either by themselves or against strangers or (in the case of "private" races) friends. The current top score on that site is a bit over 200 words per minute.
Tell it to the person in Milwaukee who, on November 21, used his carry weapon to defend himself in a hair salon. Two men knocked, were let in by a customer, then one of the men pulled a gun and aimed it at the customer, who knocked it away and then used his own gun to kill his attacker and wound the attacker's accomplice.
When I search for news of the above, I get an October (rather than November) 21st incident at the Azana Salon in Milwaukee. Of the several articles I read, not a single one mentions a customer having a gun or the heroics you mention. Would you please indicate the source of your information so that I don't have to wonder whether my search is of or your retelling is, um, overly enthusiastic?
Couldn't have said it better myself. RMS rocks. Socially awkward? Fuck yes. But on the freakin' money time after time about the fundamental issues? The man has sense, and the courage to outmatch a million critics who want to try to make the issue about his beard or whatever.
say you wrote an amazing article. I summarize it and slap advertisements on it and provide a link to your original article. Lets say that my summary of your work brings me a ten thousand bucks. Shouldn't you be entitled to a cut of that ten thousand bucks?
What if I win a marathon, and you run an article on it with ads that end up getting you thousands of dollars... shouldn't I be entitled to some of that money for having done the newsworthy thing? My marathon training cost me enormous amounts of money, as well as true sweat and pain.
What if instead of running a marathon, I throw a benefit auction for children with leukemia, and you make money off of making news/ads over that? Might the dying children be entitled to some of the money you made?
What if I rob a bank, and you run an article on that which brings you ad money? What if your refusal to share that ad money with me makes me decide never to rob a bank again unless you change your policy?
a Tobin Tax on each trade would have little impact, as a significant amount of the HFT activity involves submitting trades with no intention of completing them.
Is there a reason that the concept (a fee on each transaction) can't readily be extended to include all submitted trades, whether consummated or not?
Is this just Linus being Linus? Or does such outspokenness on non-technical matters reflect poorly on the Linux community that Torvalds leads?
Or are the statements simply great and accurate?
I'm not saying they are or aren't, but this option was conspicuously absent from the options listed for how readers are allowed to feel about it (which were "should this be ignored, or does it suck").
In what way does Wales not have authority in the Wikipedia domain? This is not a rhetorical/snarky question, I'm genuinely curious. He holds the founding seat on the board, and at least claims to be highly involved. Is their coverage available that would support contrary views about his involvement and influence?
I still feel there's room for doubt... the gov site offers simply the naked claim (no substantiating study or even backing theory), while the mpgforspeed site is a single page put up by a person who's self-description is "a nerd from San Diego". What I'd really like would be a reviewed study. And preferably from some impartial entity like ConsumerReports (I wouldn't completely disregard a gov study, but our US government has shown itself to be too ready to fabricate information for the sake of ends other than the truth).
Ever calculate the costs of driving faster? For example, driving 55 mph instead of 65 saves about 10% on fuel.
I don't know if that's true... supporting citations, anyone? I think the original 1973 law may have *intended* to save fuel, but my brief search yielded a few citations that would seem to cast some doubt on limits actually having that effect:
A 1986 paper (a pdf, booh, sorrry) stating total fuel savings to be 1% and that independent studies found a 0.5% savings.
In 2009 The American Trucking Associations called for raising the limit to 65 mph and also national fuel economy standards claiming that the lower speed limit was not effective at saving fuel.
>I'm curious, do you say, "I'll be there in 58 minutes and 48 seconds," or do you say, "I'll be there in an hour?"
Personally I'd say an hour.
But more to the point, if someone said that an hour was nearly three times 20 minutes, their odd use of "nearly" would still catch my attention. That's just me though.:)
Funny comment, but it masks an important truth: that while the behavior discussed is both common and comprehendable (in terms of greed as a motivator), it's still deeply disappointing, outrageous, and matters to those of us who have not surrendered our civility.
So my retort: Cynic poses as sophisticated by conflating deserved outrage with naivete. Color me shocked. Shocked I say.
Assange's main mistake was to be politically dangerous while not also being celibate.
The rape charge is just a pretext (to get him extradited). If he had indeed been celibate, they'd be after him for anything else they could cook up: parking tickets, overdue library books, or not saying gezundheit when someone sneezed.
I too am struck by the timing of the initial post, and the similarity of your id to that party's id... it does indeed suggest you're engaged in paid astroturfing for Microsoft.
The response to your 'question': Google doesn't lock down their devices; they leave that choice entirely to the manufacturers, some of whom choose to lock down, others who choose not to (e.g. Samsung, and Google itself).
If Google had as long and detailed a history of being as anti-competetive as Microsoft, they'd garner just as much hate as Microsoft. But Google is much better than Microsoft, both in this case and in longterm overall behavior.
Slashdot, can we have a system where people can be tagged as shills, not just per-comment but as a lingering account attribute?
Slashdot Mirror
There's a neat web-based type racing site at www.typrx.com, which allows a person to measure their word-per-minute score either by themselves or against strangers or (in the case of "private" races) friends. The current top score on that site is a bit over 200 words per minute.
When I search for news of the above, I get an October (rather than November) 21st incident at the Azana Salon in Milwaukee. Of the several articles I read, not a single one mentions a customer having a gun or the heroics you mention. Would you please indicate the source of your information so that I don't have to wonder whether my search is of or your retelling is, um, overly enthusiastic?
Couldn't have said it better myself. RMS rocks. Socially awkward? Fuck yes. But on the freakin' money time after time about the fundamental issues? The man has sense, and the courage to outmatch a million critics who want to try to make the issue about his beard or whatever.
I'm liking Mint so far.
Well *I'm* convinced... your unsupported gripes say more than real evidence ever could.
Please feel free to provide evidence of your claim.
If at first you don't secede, try and try again?
What if I win a marathon, and you run an article on it with ads that end up getting you thousands of dollars... shouldn't I be entitled to some of that money for having done the newsworthy thing? My marathon training cost me enormous amounts of money, as well as true sweat and pain.
What if instead of running a marathon, I throw a benefit auction for children with leukemia, and you make money off of making news/ads over that? Might the dying children be entitled to some of the money you made?
What if I rob a bank, and you run an article on that which brings you ad money? What if your refusal to share that ad money with me makes me decide never to rob a bank again unless you change your policy?
To paraphrase Eric Schmidt: If Google is doing something it doesn't want investigated, maybe it shouldn't be doing it in the first place.
I'm just sayin'.
Is there a reason that the concept (a fee on each transaction) can't readily be extended to include all submitted trades, whether consummated or not?
I found this article an interesting read on high frequency trading.
... dare I ask how one pronounces "PNAS"?
Or are the statements simply great and accurate?
I'm not saying they are or aren't, but this option was conspicuously absent from the options listed for how readers are allowed to feel about it (which were "should this be ignored, or does it suck").
Just sayin'.
In what way does Wales not have authority in the Wikipedia domain? This is not a rhetorical/snarky question, I'm genuinely curious. He holds the founding seat on the board, and at least claims to be highly involved. Is their coverage available that would support contrary views about his involvement and influence?
Why do you hate google glasses??? STOP THE HATING!!!!!!!!
I still feel there's room for doubt... the gov site offers simply the naked claim (no substantiating study or even backing theory), while the mpgforspeed site is a single page put up by a person who's self-description is "a nerd from San Diego". What I'd really like would be a reviewed study. And preferably from some impartial entity like ConsumerReports (I wouldn't completely disregard a gov study, but our US government has shown itself to be too ready to fabricate information for the sake of ends other than the truth).
I don't know if that's true... supporting citations, anyone? I think the original 1973 law may have *intended* to save fuel, but my brief search yielded a few citations that would seem to cast some doubt on limits actually having that effect:
>I'm curious, do you say, "I'll be there in 58 minutes and 48 seconds," or do you say, "I'll be there in an hour?"
Personally I'd say an hour.
But more to the point, if someone said that an hour was nearly three times 20 minutes, their odd use of "nearly" would still catch my attention. That's just me though. :)
>the pressure is at 1.6 megapascals, nearly 16 times the 0.1 megapascals it takes to trigger an eruption.
I'm no mathematician, but I'm pretty sure that 1.6 divided by 0.1 is *EXACTLY* 16.
Funny comment, but it masks an important truth: that while the behavior discussed is both common and comprehendable (in terms of greed as a motivator), it's still deeply disappointing, outrageous, and matters to those of us who have not surrendered our civility.
So my retort: Cynic poses as sophisticated by conflating deserved outrage with naivete. Color me shocked. Shocked I say.
The rape charge is just a pretext (to get him extradited). If he had indeed been celibate, they'd be after him for anything else they could cook up: parking tickets, overdue library books, or not saying gezundheit when someone sneezed.
What good is a packet trace if you can't turn the hex into useful data?
Isn't that what they said to Neo in the Matrix?
I too am struck by the timing of the initial post, and the similarity of your id to that party's id... it does indeed suggest you're engaged in paid astroturfing for Microsoft.
The response to your 'question': Google doesn't lock down their devices; they leave that choice entirely to the manufacturers, some of whom choose to lock down, others who choose not to (e.g. Samsung, and Google itself).
If Google had as long and detailed a history of being as anti-competetive as Microsoft, they'd garner just as much hate as Microsoft. But Google is much better than Microsoft, both in this case and in longterm overall behavior.
Slashdot, can we have a system where people can be tagged as shills, not just per-comment but as a lingering account attribute?
I think I remember Walmart was or is in the game of selling linux laptops too... (?)
Is it morally wrong to install toilets? Are we just trying to 'normalize' humans to a common experience of not dying of dysentery?