Buying a house is cheaper than renting where I live. If you have no credit or bad credit, just get one credit card that you pay the balance in full every month and you easily hit 750+ credit rating. That's what I did anyways, and my credit score was 822 when I applied for a mortgage, and I'm not rich or anything.
Actually in my own tests I've gotten better ratios with winrar.
Anyways torrents that use rar format don't bother me so long as it's ONE file instead of being broken up into over 96523481256712 files. That's usually a symptom of somebody taking a usenet release and torrenting it, which by the way rar is wonderful for usenet.
Nice try but no banana. There's no harm in everyone being forced to reducing pollution and use clean energy sources. However there is harm in everyone being forced to believe in Jesus. Not a comparable argument by a long shot.
You're grossly underestimating what the environmentalist movement asks for. First of all, nobody is asking to be able to pollute. Libertarians, conservatives, and liberals are all in favor of having an EPA. Contrary to Obama's statements, nobody anywhere is asking for dirty air and water. Makes for a wonderful straw man argument, but it's just not true.
Likewise CO2 isn't a pollutant. CO2 does not make air and water dirty. So what's the problem then? Kyoto protocol, cap and trade, and carbon indulgences all propose either stopping or dramatically slowing economic growth and/or creating dramatic cost burdens on just about everything you do. And believe it or not, this will impact those with lower incomes MUCH worse than it will impact anybody else. For example, imagine a situation where the cost of transportation doubles or even triples, which is a realistic requirement of many of these ideas in order to reduce their usage.
So yes, there's quite a big downside to adopting these policies.
Any idiot can write a whitepaper and claim a new discovery, confirm one, etc, but there are a lot of crackpots out there who make dubious conclusions based on their data, fudge their data, etc. So it's not just that your research is published, the value add of these journals is that they have expert staff who peer review your work and ask questions (to test your conclusion) that you yourself may not have thought of, and somebody who isn't an expert in your field of study may not have thought of. If you're an independent researcher then you can't afford to retain the services of more experts than just yourself, so you'll need their publishing services.
Not only that, but a journal that frequently publishes whitepapers that have withstood scrutiny tend to attract more readers, so if you publish your material, somebody is more likely to take it seriously than if they just found your blog somewhere on wordpress.
Some of these journals however don't stick to these higher standards, and will just publish anything. These sham journals are basically just a scam some unscrupulous people run (similar to say, a spammer, a snake oil salesman) for nothing more than to just make a quick buck, and aren't inclusive of the group of journals I'm referring to.
The problem in all of this is that most of these researchers are working on a skeleton budget as it is, and it's a bit of a shame that more of that money can't go directly to them. IMO this has all of the hallmarks of a market ripe for disruption; the question is who can come up with a good business model that meets all of the above needs.
The stories appear the same day as a press release by investigators who returned this week from 3 weeks at the site. The release claims that Agbogbloshie's depiction as the worlds "largest ewaste dump site" to be a hoax.
As for your second link, the first Google result says the factory was shut down.
See, you're part of the "boy who cried wolf" problem. Go to a grateful dead concert or something.
Acidification comes from increased CO2, which in relatively recent times has been much higher than it is now. In other words, today the ocean is more alkaline than it used to be.
Anyways you can make all of the hostile comments all you want, it won't change the fact that these predictions are always being made, and never come true.
I mean shit, the arctic sea ice was supposed to have completely melted back in 2010.
The ocean is pretty big first of all, and second of all, it isn't homogenous. We're not talking about a lake here. In other words, you can cause total devastation in one area and still have another area remain pristine. In fact we've already observed that today, for example in the Gulf of Mexico after the BP spill, or the various naturally dead spots throughout the globe.
As far as the fish stocks, that's caused by overfishing and has nothing to do with pollution.
What I'm saying is that when we create problems, we tend to be pretty well self correcting.
In case you haven't noticed, people like Michael Mann have been predicting environmental doomsday scenarios for a long time now, several of which were supposed to have come true already, only they haven't.
I've heard this argument before. Basically it goes like this: If the Christians are wrong, then no big deal, but if they're right, then we're all in trouble unless we believe in Jesus.
Actually in that lawsuit, Sun brought up the emails uncovered in the DoJ investigation where a Microsoft exec (can't recall the name) specifically called out Java as a threat to Windows (the same email mentioned Netscape Navigator as a threat to Windows, and for the same reason.) This is why they won the lawsuit.
Sun did indeed try for copyright infringement, but that portion of the lawsuit was shot down, and the only one that stood was the violation of anti-compete laws.
Sun has argued in court that Microsoft viewed Java's "Write Once, Run Anywhere" capability as a threat to Windows, because Java reduced the incentive for software developers to write programs for the Microsoft operating system.
According to Sun, the version of Java distributed by Microsoft worked better with its Windows software. Such a move threatened Java's ability to provide a cross-platform development environment, Sun's lawyers said.
Microsoft has vehemently denied any wrongdoing and has maintained that it stuck to the letter of its licensing agreement with Sun. Any changes Microsoft made to Java merely allowed developers to take advantage of features specific to Windows, the company has argued.
The case has been watched closely, and Microsoft's dealings with Java were cited by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson in the U.S. government's antitrust case against Microsoft as evidence of the software giant's anticompetitive behavior.
Tom Burt, Microsoft's deputy general counsel for litigation, portrayed Tuesday's settlement as a positive outcome for Microsoft.
"Microsoft is very pleased with the successful conclusion of this litigation," Burt said in a statement. The agreement confirms Microsoft's ability to independently develop technology to compete with Sun's products, the company said.
Sun scored a victory in the case in November 1998, when Judge Ronald Whyte of the U.S. District Court in San Jose, California, ruled that Sun was likely to win its case based on the merits and issued a preliminary injunction in Sun's favor. The injunction forced Microsoft to modify the Java technology it had distributed in its operating system, Web browser, and development tools so that it passed Sun's tests.
A U.S. Appeals Court overturned the injunction the following year, questioning the grounds on which Whyte had based his decision. Whyte reinstated the injunction, but based his order on California's unfair competition statutes rather than on copyright law, as Sun had requested. The ruling was seen as a partial victory for Sun.
Personally I've had enough with the dire predictions that never come true. This one in particular seems fishy (no pun intended) because it's already known that the oceans have been more acidic in the past few thousand years, and yet aquatic life remains.
But, changes that people really don't like tend to bring about a response. The Cuyahoga river for example was so toxic that it was completely devoid of fish, and the water itself was flammable, whereas now some 44 species inhabit it.
Unless you're Nissan and you're hell bent on extracting a domain name that somebody owned before you even existed. Then you'll spend a shitload on lawyers fees only to lose and have your name dragged through the mud.
Microsoft created libraries that were compatible with Sun's Java, and then added their own proprietary (and incompatible) extensions to pull developers away from the real Java. This was a deliberate move to make sure that developers had to target Windows and couldn't target ordinary Java (which could run on any other platform) By the way, this was the same motivation Microsoft had for creating Internet Explorer (that is, they didn't want developers being able to target a web browser instead of an operating system.)
The whole idea was to force end users to stay with Windows instead of anything else, as Microsoft wanted to maintain their monopoly status.
Android on the other hand wasn't attempting to do that. That is, it never made any effort to pull any developers away from the Java platform, nor was it ever intended to do that in the future, nor did they make any attempt at being compatible with existing Java applications. Sure, it would be easier to port Java applications over, but it's intended to be the same at all, whereas Microsoft's implementation was intended to be a drop-in replacement.
Furthermore, Sun won their case against Microsoft because it was proven that Microsoft did what they did for anti-competitive reasons; copyright infringement was never claimed at any point. And likewise, Oracle isn't making any kind of anti-compete claims towards Google.
Oracle is just saying "Hey, you created an interface with similar naming to something created by a company we purchased. Even though other companies have done the same thing numerous times and have never been sued before, we're going to shake you down because we happened to have noticed just how successful you are and we'd like to get on your gravy train without having contributed anything to it."
Which by the way, what I just said above is typical Oracle behavior. When somebody comes along that does something similar to what they do, then they first try to buy it out, and if they can't buy it out, then they sue it out. Having said that, Oracle is every bit as much of an asshole company as Microsoft has ever been, if not more so.
Pretty much all that's holding them afloat is exclusivity for the NES era intellectual property, which they keep re-hashing over and over and over again and their die-hard fans (of which there are a lot) keep buying.
Kind of a wonder how well them and a lot of other Japanese based games developers are holding out. Japan used to be the source of some very good games, especially during the late 80s and 90s, but over the last decade especially they've been crap. That is to say, companies like Square, Konami, Capcom, etc, haven't put out any good games in a LONG time.
The 8 hour work day 5 day work week was started by Henry Ford, not unions. Ford did that as an incentive to attract permanent employees. It proved to be very successful and caught on.
Unions were at no point making any kind of demand for that. At the beginning of the industrial revolution, and up until Ford, typical hours were 10 hours a day, 6 days a week. Prior to the industrial revolution, most people were farmers and worked seasonally, typically less than 30 hours a week during planting season and about 30 hours a week during harvest season, with less than 10 hours a week in between seasons.
Likely not. There's a lot of research that shows that the optimal collaborative team size is 4 people, and once you go beyond 8, voices get lost in the noise. This is why a republic is better IMO.
In common law, there's a principle whereby things are legal in the sense that the laws that cover them are deliberately unenforced. So yes, while there are state laws against it, the state government has chosen to not enforce these laws until new laws are written to accommodate these services, meaning that for the time being, it is legal.
Here's an article on the subject. Long story short, the governor wants to see the impact of these services before crafting new legislation that will govern their use, which IMO is a perfectly rational thing to do (knee-jerk banning of these services without consideration of their potential benefits is irrational.)
This. The city I live in is somewhat large (6th largest in the US) and nobody cares who you pay to get from point a to point b. We haven't has any incidents either.
Just personally, waking up to juicy meat on an empty stomach doesn't thrill me.
That's why bacon and eggs are popular. Both have a mild sweet taste and are soft and easy to chew if prepared correctly.
One of my personal favorites is a finely cut loin (so it's easy to chew,) with a scrambled egg, swiss cheese, and sriracha sauce in a low carb tortilla.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally I won't vote for him because of his comments about Snowden.
Buying a house is cheaper than renting where I live. If you have no credit or bad credit, just get one credit card that you pay the balance in full every month and you easily hit 750+ credit rating. That's what I did anyways, and my credit score was 822 when I applied for a mortgage, and I'm not rich or anything.
Actually in my own tests I've gotten better ratios with winrar.
Anyways torrents that use rar format don't bother me so long as it's ONE file instead of being broken up into over 96523481256712 files. That's usually a symptom of somebody taking a usenet release and torrenting it, which by the way rar is wonderful for usenet.
Nice try but no banana. There's no harm in everyone being forced to reducing pollution and use clean energy sources. However there is harm in everyone being forced to believe in Jesus. Not a comparable argument by a long shot.
You're grossly underestimating what the environmentalist movement asks for. First of all, nobody is asking to be able to pollute. Libertarians, conservatives, and liberals are all in favor of having an EPA. Contrary to Obama's statements, nobody anywhere is asking for dirty air and water. Makes for a wonderful straw man argument, but it's just not true.
Likewise CO2 isn't a pollutant. CO2 does not make air and water dirty. So what's the problem then? Kyoto protocol, cap and trade, and carbon indulgences all propose either stopping or dramatically slowing economic growth and/or creating dramatic cost burdens on just about everything you do. And believe it or not, this will impact those with lower incomes MUCH worse than it will impact anybody else. For example, imagine a situation where the cost of transportation doubles or even triples, which is a realistic requirement of many of these ideas in order to reduce their usage.
So yes, there's quite a big downside to adopting these policies.
Any idiot can write a whitepaper and claim a new discovery, confirm one, etc, but there are a lot of crackpots out there who make dubious conclusions based on their data, fudge their data, etc. So it's not just that your research is published, the value add of these journals is that they have expert staff who peer review your work and ask questions (to test your conclusion) that you yourself may not have thought of, and somebody who isn't an expert in your field of study may not have thought of. If you're an independent researcher then you can't afford to retain the services of more experts than just yourself, so you'll need their publishing services.
Not only that, but a journal that frequently publishes whitepapers that have withstood scrutiny tend to attract more readers, so if you publish your material, somebody is more likely to take it seriously than if they just found your blog somewhere on wordpress.
Some of these journals however don't stick to these higher standards, and will just publish anything. These sham journals are basically just a scam some unscrupulous people run (similar to say, a spammer, a snake oil salesman) for nothing more than to just make a quick buck, and aren't inclusive of the group of journals I'm referring to.
The problem in all of this is that most of these researchers are working on a skeleton budget as it is, and it's a bit of a shame that more of that money can't go directly to them. IMO this has all of the hallmarks of a market ripe for disruption; the question is who can come up with a good business model that meets all of the above needs.
Ah yeah -- about that:
http://news.slashdot.org/story...
The stories appear the same day as a press release by investigators who returned this week from 3 weeks at the site. The release claims that Agbogbloshie's depiction as the worlds "largest ewaste dump site" to be a hoax.
As for your second link, the first Google result says the factory was shut down.
See, you're part of the "boy who cried wolf" problem. Go to a grateful dead concert or something.
Acidification comes from increased CO2, which in relatively recent times has been much higher than it is now. In other words, today the ocean is more alkaline than it used to be.
Anyways you can make all of the hostile comments all you want, it won't change the fact that these predictions are always being made, and never come true.
I mean shit, the arctic sea ice was supposed to have completely melted back in 2010.
The ocean is pretty big first of all, and second of all, it isn't homogenous. We're not talking about a lake here. In other words, you can cause total devastation in one area and still have another area remain pristine. In fact we've already observed that today, for example in the Gulf of Mexico after the BP spill, or the various naturally dead spots throughout the globe.
As far as the fish stocks, that's caused by overfishing and has nothing to do with pollution.
What I'm saying is that when we create problems, we tend to be pretty well self correcting.
In case you haven't noticed, people like Michael Mann have been predicting environmental doomsday scenarios for a long time now, several of which were supposed to have come true already, only they haven't.
I've heard this argument before. Basically it goes like this: If the Christians are wrong, then no big deal, but if they're right, then we're all in trouble unless we believe in Jesus.
Actually in that lawsuit, Sun brought up the emails uncovered in the DoJ investigation where a Microsoft exec (can't recall the name) specifically called out Java as a threat to Windows (the same email mentioned Netscape Navigator as a threat to Windows, and for the same reason.) This is why they won the lawsuit.
Sun did indeed try for copyright infringement, but that portion of the lawsuit was shot down, and the only one that stood was the violation of anti-compete laws.
Sun has argued in court that Microsoft viewed Java's "Write Once, Run Anywhere" capability as a threat to Windows, because Java reduced the incentive for software developers to write programs for the Microsoft operating system.
According to Sun, the version of Java distributed by Microsoft worked better with its Windows software. Such a move threatened Java's ability to provide a cross-platform development environment, Sun's lawyers said.
Microsoft has vehemently denied any wrongdoing and has maintained that it stuck to the letter of its licensing agreement with Sun. Any changes Microsoft made to Java merely allowed developers to take advantage of features specific to Windows, the company has argued.
The case has been watched closely, and Microsoft's dealings with Java were cited by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson in the U.S. government's antitrust case against Microsoft as evidence of the software giant's anticompetitive behavior.
Tom Burt, Microsoft's deputy general counsel for litigation, portrayed Tuesday's settlement as a positive outcome for Microsoft.
"Microsoft is very pleased with the successful conclusion of this litigation," Burt said in a statement. The agreement confirms Microsoft's ability to independently develop technology to compete with Sun's products, the company said.
Sun scored a victory in the case in November 1998, when Judge Ronald Whyte of the U.S. District Court in San Jose, California, ruled that Sun was likely to win its case based on the merits and issued a preliminary injunction in Sun's favor. The injunction forced Microsoft to modify the Java technology it had distributed in its operating system, Web browser, and development tools so that it passed Sun's tests.
A U.S. Appeals Court overturned the injunction the following year, questioning the grounds on which Whyte had based his decision. Whyte reinstated the injunction, but based his order on California's unfair competition statutes rather than on copyright law, as Sun had requested. The ruling was seen as a partial victory for Sun.
http://www.javaworld.com/artic...
Personally I've had enough with the dire predictions that never come true. This one in particular seems fishy (no pun intended) because it's already known that the oceans have been more acidic in the past few thousand years, and yet aquatic life remains.
But, changes that people really don't like tend to bring about a response. The Cuyahoga river for example was so toxic that it was completely devoid of fish, and the water itself was flammable, whereas now some 44 species inhabit it.
Unless you're Nissan and you're hell bent on extracting a domain name that somebody owned before you even existed. Then you'll spend a shitload on lawyers fees only to lose and have your name dragged through the mud.
That said, never buy a Nissan car. Ever.
Microsoft created libraries that were compatible with Sun's Java, and then added their own proprietary (and incompatible) extensions to pull developers away from the real Java. This was a deliberate move to make sure that developers had to target Windows and couldn't target ordinary Java (which could run on any other platform) By the way, this was the same motivation Microsoft had for creating Internet Explorer (that is, they didn't want developers being able to target a web browser instead of an operating system.)
The whole idea was to force end users to stay with Windows instead of anything else, as Microsoft wanted to maintain their monopoly status.
Android on the other hand wasn't attempting to do that. That is, it never made any effort to pull any developers away from the Java platform, nor was it ever intended to do that in the future, nor did they make any attempt at being compatible with existing Java applications. Sure, it would be easier to port Java applications over, but it's intended to be the same at all, whereas Microsoft's implementation was intended to be a drop-in replacement.
Furthermore, Sun won their case against Microsoft because it was proven that Microsoft did what they did for anti-competitive reasons; copyright infringement was never claimed at any point. And likewise, Oracle isn't making any kind of anti-compete claims towards Google.
Oracle is just saying "Hey, you created an interface with similar naming to something created by a company we purchased. Even though other companies have done the same thing numerous times and have never been sued before, we're going to shake you down because we happened to have noticed just how successful you are and we'd like to get on your gravy train without having contributed anything to it."
Which by the way, what I just said above is typical Oracle behavior. When somebody comes along that does something similar to what they do, then they first try to buy it out, and if they can't buy it out, then they sue it out. Having said that, Oracle is every bit as much of an asshole company as Microsoft has ever been, if not more so.
Pretty much all that's holding them afloat is exclusivity for the NES era intellectual property, which they keep re-hashing over and over and over again and their die-hard fans (of which there are a lot) keep buying.
Kind of a wonder how well them and a lot of other Japanese based games developers are holding out. Japan used to be the source of some very good games, especially during the late 80s and 90s, but over the last decade especially they've been crap. That is to say, companies like Square, Konami, Capcom, etc, haven't put out any good games in a LONG time.
The 8 hour work day 5 day work week was started by Henry Ford, not unions. Ford did that as an incentive to attract permanent employees. It proved to be very successful and caught on.
Unions were at no point making any kind of demand for that. At the beginning of the industrial revolution, and up until Ford, typical hours were 10 hours a day, 6 days a week. Prior to the industrial revolution, most people were farmers and worked seasonally, typically less than 30 hours a week during planting season and about 30 hours a week during harvest season, with less than 10 hours a week in between seasons.
Actually it's been scientifically proven that Apple fans view that brand as they would a religion:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/...
It's not needed. Everybody knows that macs don't get malware and come with a free unicorn.
Try reading the article, moron.
Likely not. There's a lot of research that shows that the optimal collaborative team size is 4 people, and once you go beyond 8, voices get lost in the noise. This is why a republic is better IMO.
That usually doesn't work, a common analogy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
The founding fathers were very adamant that there must be certain inalienable rights, and a balance of power between the have's and the have not's.
And thus, a republic was born.
In common law, there's a principle whereby things are legal in the sense that the laws that cover them are deliberately unenforced. So yes, while there are state laws against it, the state government has chosen to not enforce these laws until new laws are written to accommodate these services, meaning that for the time being, it is legal.
Here's an article on the subject. Long story short, the governor wants to see the impact of these services before crafting new legislation that will govern their use, which IMO is a perfectly rational thing to do (knee-jerk banning of these services without consideration of their potential benefits is irrational.)
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
They aren't breaking the law in my city.
This. The city I live in is somewhat large (6th largest in the US) and nobody cares who you pay to get from point a to point b. We haven't has any incidents either.
Just personally, waking up to juicy meat on an empty stomach doesn't thrill me.
That's why bacon and eggs are popular. Both have a mild sweet taste and are soft and easy to chew if prepared correctly.
One of my personal favorites is a finely cut loin (so it's easy to chew,) with a scrambled egg, swiss cheese, and sriracha sauce in a low carb tortilla.