I'll back that up too. The bar that I frequent gets a lot of Australians, and they drink nothing but Bud Light. There also tends to be a lot of Japanese, and they just drink Bud. Both of them are always saying, "This bar would be way better if you sold more than just Bud and Bud Light." "Shut up and drink it," the strippers always say. "Shut up and drink it."
Maybe, but we currently have no way to measure stress, so it's not worth worrying about, from a research perspective. You can't measure the effects of something you can't quantify. Even pain at least has qualitative modifiers, if not quantitative, i.e. sharp, dull, aching, throbbing, burning, etc. With stress, the only modifier is "a lot." "Are you under a lot of stress?" What the hell is a lot? You might as well try to measure love. (And no, those 25 cent machines from the 80s don't count).
They meant live, the verb, not live, the adjective. You know.. the one pronounced like Liv Tyler? If only the website looked that good.. I'd pronounce it alllll niiiiight llllllooong.
Well, I work at a place where they don't upgrade the computers every 18 months, and both versions are horribly slow. If you're going to throw in eye candy, there should at least be a way to turn it off. I'm not asking for Lynx here, but there's no reason for things to zip, zoom, or "smoothly" scroll along. Even if it improved the usability (which it doesn't appear to), leaving out a standard HTML-only interface means I won't be using it at all.
Yeah, my first thought was "They released games in February?!?!" It seems like releases have slowed to a trickle over the past year or two. Although I get confused sometimes, because it often seems like I'm playing the same game over and over with new graphics. Although sometimes I suspect they just change the title on the box and sell the same games twice. Or "Oh, it's an expansion, it's an expansion. We left out some content, and now you can purchase it for 75% to 100% of the original title price."
1) # It suddenly diverts massive numbers of requests to a particular system, resulting in an obvious denial of service.
How is that obvious? You've provided your conclusion, but not the means of getting there.
2) The admins of that system are given no prior warning and have no particular reason to expect such a spike, so they can't do anything about it.
Nonsense. Slashdot introduced the dupe policy specifically to give admins notice that their sites were about to be hammered a second time.
3) The Slashdot admins know damn well about the Slashdot effect, and have consistently ignored public suggestions to improve their procedures.
Nonsense. Slashdot introduced the dupe policy specifically to give admins notice that their sites were about to be hammered a second time. Update: 03/08 02:01 GMT by SP: We covered this once before in Question 2.
1) It's a waste of resources. While we will probably never have a clear idea of the costs, it is not unfathomable that the overhead from such a program costs as much or more than the damage done to society through money laundering.
2) Nobody is innocent. Nobody is "not doing anything wrong." If you are honest and thorough, I'm sure you can find at least 5 regulations, rules, or flat-out laws that you've broken within the past week. The "If you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about" argument is moot, since the number of people that statement describes is roughly 0.
3) Requiring burdensome reports for transactions over $10,000 (yes, that's the limit) encourages noncompliance. If the choice is "Deposit $12,000 and spend an hour filling out paperwork" or "Deposit $6k twice and fill out zero paperwork," many people are going to choose the latter. It's like McDonalds. Double cheeseburgers are $.99, but single cheeseburgers are $1.09. Who's going to pay more to get less? Conversely, who's going to go through more effort just to receive greater scrutiny?
4) Let's face it: The people being caught by transaction monitoring are white collar criminals. The people benefitting from such protection are large corporations. As Jon Stewart said last night at the Oscars: "Movie piracy is wrong. Just look what you're doing to the people in this room. Many of the women can barely afford enough clothing to cover their breasts." That's not an excuse, just a reminder to keep things in perspective.
Getting into a good guild can get you items from raids.
Yeah! And then you'll be well equpped to go on raids to get good gear so you can do well in raids and get more gear for raids to get more gear for raids gear raids gear raids! GEAR! RAIDS!!! [Insert Head Explosion Here]
Which is important in CA.. hell, that's 2/3ds of the way to a life sentence. No wait, that IS a life sentence, since you must have had at least 1 prior conviction to be a felon in the first place.
I saw the video at video.google.com the other day, and it's impressive, but clearly needs some work. The balance mechanism only seems to work by lifting its leg and placing it farther away, which results in significant sideways travel when attempting to go straight in slippery terrain. Sort of like when you trip or slip and you have to throw a leg out in front of you to keep from falling. Actually exactly like that.. Imagine if you had to do that every time your balance shifted even slightly. While its ability to accurately place its legs to counter a fall is impressive, it's not the most elegant solution. The ability to lean and shift its center of gravity would help immensely. Once this thing can rear up on two legs and kick people, I'll be duely impressed.
The confusion is obviously that there are legal definitions, and dictionary definitions, and rarely the two shall meet.
bribery n. the crime of giving or taking money or some other valuable item in order to influence a public official (any governmental employee) in the performance of his/her duties. Bribery includes paying to get government contracts (cutting in the roads commissioner for a secret percentage of the profit), giving a bottle of liquor to a building inspector to ignore a violation or grant a permit, or selling stock to a Congressman at a cut-rate price. Example: Governor (later Vice President) Spiro T. Agnew received five cents from the concessionaire for each pack of cigarettes sold in the Maryland capitol building. The definition has been expanded to include bribes given to corporate officials to obtain contracts or other advantages which are against company policy. http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=bribe &type=1&submit1.x=72&submit1.y=3&submit1=Look+up
Is salary legally defined as bribery? No. Technically? Yes. So you're both right.
The whole thing seems bizarre and ridiculous. Skype hardly has the market penetration to dictate consumer choices in hardware. How many people went to Best Buy to grab a new system, or picked Intel when they upgraded because they wanted more than 5-way calling in Skype? Now if Windows pulled something similar, say only 5 apps open at a time on certain systems, I'd immediately suspect foul play. When Skype does it, it's just a big huge "WTF?". The most obvious answers are that they perhaps took kickbacks from Intel (although that only deferrs the question to Intel as to why they would choose Skype of all things) or that they sincerely believed that only certain processors were capable of the workload. Neither answer really seems logical though.
Excellent statement. I particularly like the part: Faith in the law of causality logically (if not temporally) preceeds all experimentation. It may be subsequently reinforced by experience but it can neither be directly proved by experimentation or any other known means and yet is the pre-requisite for rational experimentation.
I don't personally believe in a higher power, but I don't fault those who do, and only the truely closed-minded dismiss the possibility, usually out of some sense of intellectual superiority.
I gave up worrying about it because I fail to see any relevance. Either God exists, or does not. Absent an independent means of discovering His existance outside the realm of word-of-mouth, I can only assume that, if God exists, He isn't particularly worried about whether or not we believe in Him, or any particular version of divine law. Some may interpret such a view as hubris. Who am I to expect anything of God? Believers expect God to watch over them which is, in my opinion, no less arrogant. Additionally, I think that such a position conveniently avoids the lack of evidence, and moreover it contradicts the view that God cares significantly about humanity.
I tend to think belief is popular because it provides answers to questions which are otherwise unanswerable. (Note: I'm not saying it's wrong or right because it's popular, I'm just making an observation). I think it's much more difficult for most people to accept that we might have no purpose, that there is no afterlife, and that no one is looking out for us. That we do not, and may never know where we came from, or where we are going. Many people find such a concept depressing, and feel that such a life would not be worth living. But I think we're pretty good at developing our own purposes, and whether or not we attribute them to divine inspiration makes little difference.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll back that up too. The bar that I frequent gets a lot of Australians, and they drink nothing but Bud Light. There also tends to be a lot of Japanese, and they just drink Bud. Both of them are always saying, "This bar would be way better if you sold more than just Bud and Bud Light." "Shut up and drink it," the strippers always say. "Shut up and drink it."
Maybe, but we currently have no way to measure stress, so it's not worth worrying about, from a research perspective. You can't measure the effects of something you can't quantify. Even pain at least has qualitative modifiers, if not quantitative, i.e. sharp, dull, aching, throbbing, burning, etc. With stress, the only modifier is "a lot." "Are you under a lot of stress?" What the hell is a lot? You might as well try to measure love. (And no, those 25 cent machines from the 80s don't count).
They meant live, the verb, not live, the adjective. You know.. the one pronounced like Liv Tyler? If only the website looked that good.. I'd pronounce it alllll niiiiight llllllooong.
Well, I work at a place where they don't upgrade the computers every 18 months, and both versions are horribly slow. If you're going to throw in eye candy, there should at least be a way to turn it off. I'm not asking for Lynx here, but there's no reason for things to zip, zoom, or "smoothly" scroll along. Even if it improved the usability (which it doesn't appear to), leaving out a standard HTML-only interface means I won't be using it at all.
I burned the internet to a DVD for one of my friends who had a slow connection. Let me know if you want a copy.
Even the Census Department likes FF12, and they've been liking it since at least 1999.
Yeah, my first thought was "They released games in February?!?!" It seems like releases have slowed to a trickle over the past year or two. Although I get confused sometimes, because it often seems like I'm playing the same game over and over with new graphics. Although sometimes I suspect they just change the title on the box and sell the same games twice. Or "Oh, it's an expansion, it's an expansion. We left out some content, and now you can purchase it for 75% to 100% of the original title price."
Excellent points -- almost as if I was reading TFA all over again.
1) # It suddenly diverts massive numbers of requests to a particular system, resulting in an obvious denial of service.
How is that obvious? You've provided your conclusion, but not the means of getting there.
2) The admins of that system are given no prior warning and have no particular reason to expect such a spike, so they can't do anything about it.
Nonsense. Slashdot introduced the dupe policy specifically to give admins notice that their sites were about to be hammered a second time.
3) The Slashdot admins know damn well about the Slashdot effect, and have consistently ignored public suggestions to improve their procedures.
Nonsense. Slashdot introduced the dupe policy specifically to give admins notice that their sites were about to be hammered a second time. Update: 03/08 02:01 GMT by SP: We covered this once before in Question 2.
The most secure place to live is a prison
I think there are a few a-holes that would disagree with you.
That's the best analogy I've heard yet.
It's about time people start realizing they don't have to fall victim to the whims of lightning.
How about these:
1) It's a waste of resources. While we will probably never have a clear idea of the costs, it is not unfathomable that the overhead from such a program costs as much or more than the damage done to society through money laundering.
2) Nobody is innocent. Nobody is "not doing anything wrong." If you are honest and thorough, I'm sure you can find at least 5 regulations, rules, or flat-out laws that you've broken within the past week. The "If you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about" argument is moot, since the number of people that statement describes is roughly 0.
3) Requiring burdensome reports for transactions over $10,000 (yes, that's the limit) encourages noncompliance. If the choice is "Deposit $12,000 and spend an hour filling out paperwork" or "Deposit $6k twice and fill out zero paperwork," many people are going to choose the latter. It's like McDonalds. Double cheeseburgers are $.99, but single cheeseburgers are $1.09. Who's going to pay more to get less? Conversely, who's going to go through more effort just to receive greater scrutiny?
4) Let's face it: The people being caught by transaction monitoring are white collar criminals. The people benefitting from such protection are large corporations. As Jon Stewart said last night at the Oscars: "Movie piracy is wrong. Just look what you're doing to the people in this room. Many of the women can barely afford enough clothing to cover their breasts." That's not an excuse, just a reminder to keep things in perspective.
The Filing Compliance and Terrorism Financing articles were interesting as well.
3.
Cheap and Correct?
Yes. Wait, I don't even know what you're asking! Nevermind, it doesn't matter. I'll stick with "yes."
They's.
Getting into a good guild can get you items from raids.
Yeah! And then you'll be well equpped to go on raids to get good gear so you can do well in raids and get more gear for raids to get more gear for raids gear raids gear raids! GEAR! RAIDS!!! [Insert Head Explosion Here]
How can you cheat at a game that has no score and never ends?
No.
Which is important in CA.. hell, that's 2/3ds of the way to a life sentence. No wait, that IS a life sentence, since you must have had at least 1 prior conviction to be a felon in the first place.
Blizzard games are not rushed. They turn out excellent because they are not rushed.
Really? WoW, meet Tepples. Tepples, WoW, WoW, Tepples. "Hi Tepples, I'm WoW! I get patched every Tuesday, rain or shine!"
I saw the video at video.google.com the other day, and it's impressive, but clearly needs some work. The balance mechanism only seems to work by lifting its leg and placing it farther away, which results in significant sideways travel when attempting to go straight in slippery terrain. Sort of like when you trip or slip and you have to throw a leg out in front of you to keep from falling. Actually exactly like that.. Imagine if you had to do that every time your balance shifted even slightly. While its ability to accurately place its legs to counter a fall is impressive, it's not the most elegant solution. The ability to lean and shift its center of gravity would help immensely. Once this thing can rear up on two legs and kick people, I'll be duely impressed.
The confusion is obviously that there are legal definitions, and dictionary definitions, and rarely the two shall meet.
e &type=1&submit1.x=72&submit1.y=3&submit1=Look+up
bribery
n. the crime of giving or taking money or some other valuable item in order to influence a public official (any governmental employee) in the performance of his/her duties. Bribery includes paying to get government contracts (cutting in the roads commissioner for a secret percentage of the profit), giving a bottle of liquor to a building inspector to ignore a violation or grant a permit, or selling stock to a Congressman at a cut-rate price. Example: Governor (later Vice President) Spiro T. Agnew received five cents from the concessionaire for each pack of cigarettes sold in the Maryland capitol building. The definition has been expanded to include bribes given to corporate officials to obtain contracts or other advantages which are against company policy. http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?typed=brib
Is salary legally defined as bribery? No. Technically? Yes. So you're both right.
The whole thing seems bizarre and ridiculous. Skype hardly has the market penetration to dictate consumer choices in hardware. How many people went to Best Buy to grab a new system, or picked Intel when they upgraded because they wanted more than 5-way calling in Skype? Now if Windows pulled something similar, say only 5 apps open at a time on certain systems, I'd immediately suspect foul play. When Skype does it, it's just a big huge "WTF?". The most obvious answers are that they perhaps took kickbacks from Intel (although that only deferrs the question to Intel as to why they would choose Skype of all things) or that they sincerely believed that only certain processors were capable of the workload. Neither answer really seems logical though.
Excellent statement. I particularly like the part: Faith in the law of causality logically (if not temporally) preceeds all experimentation. It may be subsequently reinforced by experience but it can neither be directly proved by experimentation or any other known means and yet is the pre-requisite for rational experimentation.
I don't personally believe in a higher power, but I don't fault those who do, and only the truely closed-minded dismiss the possibility, usually out of some sense of intellectual superiority.
I gave up worrying about it because I fail to see any relevance. Either God exists, or does not. Absent an independent means of discovering His existance outside the realm of word-of-mouth, I can only assume that, if God exists, He isn't particularly worried about whether or not we believe in Him, or any particular version of divine law. Some may interpret such a view as hubris. Who am I to expect anything of God? Believers expect God to watch over them which is, in my opinion, no less arrogant. Additionally, I think that such a position conveniently avoids the lack of evidence, and moreover it contradicts the view that God cares significantly about humanity.
I tend to think belief is popular because it provides answers to questions which are otherwise unanswerable. (Note: I'm not saying it's wrong or right because it's popular, I'm just making an observation). I think it's much more difficult for most people to accept that we might have no purpose, that there is no afterlife, and that no one is looking out for us. That we do not, and may never know where we came from, or where we are going. Many people find such a concept depressing, and feel that such a life would not be worth living. But I think we're pretty good at developing our own purposes, and whether or not we attribute them to divine inspiration makes little difference.
I don't want to sound like the comic book guy
Too late.