America is probably not a good example to use. Estimates of autism have shot up in recent years, it is now classed as the second-worst contry in the Western world for children, education standards have fallen, creationists have become a major political force, obesity is sky-high and rising, something caused Britney Spears' hair to fall out, and 90% of all recent US news stories on legal and/or political issues can be best explained by some form of brain damage.
I don't know where you're from, but let's pick another Western nation - oh, say, Britain - and see if they have any of these problems, shall we?
Education, obesity, autism, and creationism. Hmm. (And these were just top picks from Google searches.) Maybe America's problems are just more widely known than those of other nations?
OLPC has stated that it doesn't want to get into the commercial distribution game, it's a tricky thing sales and distribution is a big cost for most companies.. You know, they just want to order them from a generic plant in Taiwan/China and then dump them in a container with a big fat "Lybia" sticker on the side. This is very different from the business of delivering and marketing a PC for the masses like DELL does.
They could let Quanta sell them to a third party vendor, that could distribute them to the geek crowd.
And then that will give them even more strength to use to make the suit generate even more energy... Holy crap guys, I think we're really on to something here.
You have to remember this -- there is no guarantee of free speech from any corporation. The US Constitution guarantees that "government" shall not infringe the right to a citizen's free speech. Any time you have a non-governmental agency "it doesn't apply".
Just because it's legal doesn't make it right. This sort of behavior, IMO, doesn't jibe with a corporate motto of "don't be evil".
Or perhaps you'd rather remain secure in your prejudices, repeating "correlation does not equal causation" like a mantra, snickering at people whose knowledge you choose not to understand.
But he's right - correlation does not prove causation. Phenomenon Y can correlate to phenomenon X with r=0.99, and that still doesn't mean that X causes Y. Both X and Y might be caused by W, and therefore they always appear together. That's not to say that one phenomenon might not be a good predictor of another, but that's still not the same as causation.
Open Source Medicine? How would you write the GPL of pharmacopeia?
I think what you're refering to is Socialized medicine. One of the benefits of it is the fact that the hospitals and doctors aren't out there to squeeze every last penny out of you.
Non sequitur. Patent-unencumbered drugs have nothing to do with socialism, and neither does GPL software. It is entirely possible to make money off both. The intellectual property status of drugs (or software) and the desire to make money (or not) are orthogonal issues.
I've come to the conclusion that modern American "free market" businessmen are among the greediest, most thoughtless class of wealthy people seen on this planet since the French took objection to theirs two hundred and a few years ago.
Riiight, 'cause this sort of thing never happens anywhere else...
I seem to recall that, at one point, Germany had Great Britan completely cut off from incoming supplies. All they needed to do was maintain the siege and Britan would have fallen. The story, as I understand it, was that Hitler wanted to show Germany's air superiority so, against the advice of his staff (including Goering [sp?]), he sent in his Stutka's to take London. Problem is, they were no match for the British Spitfire - which could outfly and outdive the Stutka. By shifting Germany's resources to a tactical campaign where he was outmatched, Britan was able to eventually break the siege.
Or Hitler's decision to continue the invasion of Russia into the winter. Or Hitler's decision to use the Me-262, the most capable aircraft of the war, as a fighter/bomber instead of using it as an interceptor to attack Allied bombers. Or any of a number of other bad decisions. With Hitler in charge, it's amazing that the Germans did as well as they did, quite frankly. Perhaps the ultimate historical example of executive hubris.
Shall we consider the source of those links? Rush Limbaugh's website? C'mon. If this information is legit, where are the links from, say, CNN, or BBC, or even Fox News? Digging stuff up from fringe sources is... well, digging.
So what would you have people do, wait until it's too late.
How about just skipping the counterproductive hyperbole? It's entirely possible to say that our liberties and freedoms are being eroded, and that we should be wary of it and do something about it, without resorting to comparisons to the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. (Like I just did, for instance.)
OK, fine, you still have reasonable doubts that Iraq might have had WMDs. Meanwhile, we know that North Korea has them, and Iran is busily attempting to acquire them (and for all we know, may already have chemical and/or biological weapons), and thanks to our debacle in Iraq we are no longer in a position to do very much about those threats. That's just great.
Those who don't learn from history are condemmed to repeat it. We didn't declare war, they did. We decided to fight it over there instead of over here. Thanks for noticing.
If the UK was invaded by a foreign power, and the people fought back, we would be called 'the resistance', or 'freedom fighters' or what not - so why do Bliar and Bush and co. call the Iraqi people that fight back 'insurgents' ??
I would imagine that the occupying foreign power in question would probably call your UK resistance fighters "insurgents", so why wouldn't other occupying foreign powers do the same?
Despite of your accurate describtion, the US armies are all over the world. Everywhere the US thinks they have to have their fingers in. They want the oil, the resources and gives the rest of the world the polution and "way of live" ideas back. They want us to buy your gene food, they want us to buy your hormon poisened meat. If a european country has a law that regulates how much medical or hormon particles my be in meat (for safty of children e.g.) and banishes the trade of it, the USA threaten to answer this with e.g. import taxes on european cars.
You don't want to compete with your agility on our markets, you want us to adapt our markets to your needs. I don't think that europeans hate you, as one of the guys answering to you said. But surely lots of people in the poor areas of the world indeed do.
Hey! Who is "you" in the above rant? Who is "the USA"? You're talking about three tenths of a billion individuals there, bub - represented by a government that many of them did not vote for. Generalizations like the ones you're making are a big part of the reason that the people of the world don't understand each other.
But I have a fast way of converting Fahrenheit to Celsius, with a reasonably small margin of error for common values. 100F is more or less the same as 40C. Every degree in Celsius is about 2 degrees Fahrenheit. So if someone tells you that it's 80 degrees, you can guess that it's about 30C. It isn't exact, but it's within about 5 degrees, which is good enough for the most part. It at least tells you what to wear.
You must be someplace in the US that's really hot, if you use 100F = 40C (actually it's 104F) as your equivalence point. You might be better off remembering that 20C = 68F, or maybe 30C = 86F.
Farenheit made the scale first, then marked where on the scale water froze: at 32 degrees on the Farenheit scale... Celsius made the marks first, and then made the scale, starting with the freezing point of water as zero on the Celsius scale.
Not really. Fahrenheit used two natural phenomena for the endpoints of the scale, just like Celsius did; only he didn't use the same phenomena. Both Fahrenheit and Celsius used the boiling point of water for the high mark, but for the low mark, instead of the freezing point of water, Fahrenheit used the coldest temperature he could produce from a mixture of water, salt, and ice. This is where zero degrees came from. (Or at least that's one suggestion; the actual story seems to be a bit muddled.)
Slashdot Mirror
As a Sirius subscriber, I'm a bit worried what a merger, if approved, might bring. They mention a more a la carte selection of channels.
Good, maybe now I can get rid of all those music and other useless channels and just pay for Howard.
America is probably not a good example to use. Estimates of autism have shot up in recent years, it is now classed as the second-worst contry in the Western world for children, education standards have fallen, creationists have become a major political force, obesity is sky-high and rising, something caused Britney Spears' hair to fall out, and 90% of all recent US news stories on legal and/or political issues can be best explained by some form of brain damage.
I don't know where you're from, but let's pick another Western nation - oh, say, Britain - and see if they have any of these problems, shall we?
Edu cation, obesity, autism, and creationism. Hmm. (And these were just top picks from Google searches.) Maybe America's problems are just more widely known than those of other nations?
OLPC has stated that it doesn't want to get into the commercial distribution game, it's a tricky thing sales and distribution is a big cost for most companies.. You know, they just want to order them from a generic plant in Taiwan/China and then dump them in a container with a big fat "Lybia" sticker on the side. This is very different from the business of delivering and marketing a PC for the masses like DELL does.
They could let Quanta sell them to a third party vendor, that could distribute them to the geek crowd.
And then that will give them even more strength to use to make the suit generate even more energy... Holy crap guys, I think we're really on to something here.
You have to remember this -- there is no guarantee of free speech from any corporation. The US Constitution guarantees that "government" shall not infringe the right to a citizen's free speech. Any time you have a non-governmental agency "it doesn't apply".
Just because it's legal doesn't make it right. This sort of behavior, IMO, doesn't jibe with a corporate motto of "don't be evil".
Or perhaps you'd rather remain secure in your prejudices, repeating "correlation does not equal causation" like a mantra, snickering at people whose knowledge you choose not to understand.
But he's right - correlation does not prove causation. Phenomenon Y can correlate to phenomenon X with r=0.99, and that still doesn't mean that X causes Y. Both X and Y might be caused by W, and therefore they always appear together. That's not to say that one phenomenon might not be a good predictor of another, but that's still not the same as causation.
You're welcome. I'm glad that I served. I am genuinely happy that the totalitarian nightmare of the Soviet Union is now merely a bad memory.
And what exactly did the fall of the Soviet Union have to do with your service (if that's what you were implying)?
Open Source Medicine? How would you write the GPL of pharmacopeia?
I think what you're refering to is Socialized medicine. One of the benefits of it is the fact that the hospitals and doctors aren't out there to squeeze every last penny out of you.
Non sequitur. Patent-unencumbered drugs have nothing to do with socialism, and neither does GPL software. It is entirely possible to make money off both. The intellectual property status of drugs (or software) and the desire to make money (or not) are orthogonal issues.
...knock down my city wall!
IBM PS/2 line of computers
More specifically, the Micro Channel Architecture. (Or, at least, the decision to keep MCA closed.)
I've come to the conclusion that modern American "free market" businessmen are among the greediest, most thoughtless class of wealthy people seen on this planet since the French took objection to theirs two hundred and a few years ago.
Riiight, 'cause this sort of thing never happens anywhere else...
I seem to recall that, at one point, Germany had Great Britan completely cut off from incoming supplies. All they needed to do was maintain the siege and Britan would have fallen. The story, as I understand it, was that Hitler wanted to show Germany's air superiority so, against the advice of his staff (including Goering [sp?]), he sent in his Stutka's to take London. Problem is, they were no match for the British Spitfire - which could outfly and outdive the Stutka. By shifting Germany's resources to a tactical campaign where he was outmatched, Britan was able to eventually break the siege.
Or Hitler's decision to continue the invasion of Russia into the winter. Or Hitler's decision to use the Me-262, the most capable aircraft of the war, as a fighter/bomber instead of using it as an interceptor to attack Allied bombers. Or any of a number of other bad decisions. With Hitler in charge, it's amazing that the Germans did as well as they did, quite frankly. Perhaps the ultimate historical example of executive hubris.
Show where it's faster/simpler.
Will you also tell/show them where it's not faster/simpler?
How does MS square this with their supposed recent attempts to become a better world citizen?
No link? Here are a few to check out.
Shall we consider the source of those links? Rush Limbaugh's website? C'mon. If this information is legit, where are the links from, say, CNN, or BBC, or even Fox News? Digging stuff up from fringe sources is... well, digging.
So what would you have people do, wait until it's too late.
How about just skipping the counterproductive hyperbole? It's entirely possible to say that our liberties and freedoms are being eroded, and that we should be wary of it and do something about it, without resorting to comparisons to the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. (Like I just did, for instance.)
So the question is... How long until we leave with our tail between our legs this time? And after Bush is impeached (?), will Cheney pardon him?
Feh. If Bush is impeached out of office, then Cheney oughta be impeached the minute he takes the oath.
I still have reasonable doubts.
OK, fine, you still have reasonable doubts that Iraq might have had WMDs. Meanwhile, we know that North Korea has them, and Iran is busily attempting to acquire them (and for all we know, may already have chemical and/or biological weapons), and thanks to our debacle in Iraq we are no longer in a position to do very much about those threats. That's just great.
Those who don't learn from history are condemmed to repeat it. We didn't declare war, they did. We decided to fight it over there instead of over here. Thanks for noticing.
"They" who? al-Qa'ida? So why did we invade Iraq?
If the UK was invaded by a foreign power, and the people fought back, we would be called 'the resistance', or 'freedom fighters' or what not - so why do Bliar and Bush and co. call the Iraqi people that fight back 'insurgents' ??
I would imagine that the occupying foreign power in question would probably call your UK resistance fighters "insurgents", so why wouldn't other occupying foreign powers do the same?
Despite of your accurate describtion, the US armies are all over the world. Everywhere the US thinks they have to have their fingers in. They want the oil, the resources and gives the rest of the world the polution and "way of live" ideas back. They want us to buy your gene food, they want us to buy your hormon poisened meat. If a european country has a law that regulates how much medical or hormon particles my be in meat (for safty of children e.g.) and banishes the trade of it, the USA threaten to answer this with e.g. import taxes on european cars.
You don't want to compete with your agility on our markets, you want us to adapt our markets to your needs. I don't think that europeans hate you, as one of the guys answering to you said. But surely lots of people in the poor areas of the world indeed do.
Hey! Who is "you" in the above rant? Who is "the USA"? You're talking about three tenths of a billion individuals there, bub - represented by a government that many of them did not vote for. Generalizations like the ones you're making are a big part of the reason that the people of the world don't understand each other.
But I have a fast way of converting Fahrenheit to Celsius, with a reasonably small margin of error for common values. 100F is more or less the same as 40C. Every degree in Celsius is about 2 degrees Fahrenheit. So if someone tells you that it's 80 degrees, you can guess that it's about 30C. It isn't exact, but it's within about 5 degrees, which is good enough for the most part. It at least tells you what to wear.
You must be someplace in the US that's really hot, if you use 100F = 40C (actually it's 104F) as your equivalence point. You might be better off remembering that 20C = 68F, or maybe 30C = 86F.
Farenheit made the scale first, then marked where on the scale water froze: at 32 degrees on the Farenheit scale... Celsius made the marks first, and then made the scale, starting with the freezing point of water as zero on the Celsius scale.
Not really. Fahrenheit used two natural phenomena for the endpoints of the scale, just like Celsius did; only he didn't use the same phenomena. Both Fahrenheit and Celsius used the boiling point of water for the high mark, but for the low mark, instead of the freezing point of water, Fahrenheit used the coldest temperature he could produce from a mixture of water, salt, and ice. This is where zero degrees came from. (Or at least that's one suggestion; the actual story seems to be a bit muddled.)
Too bad that loans are forbidden in Islam
Then perhaps they should choose a set of beliefs and values that is more consistent with reality.
Based on these numbers, it would seem to me that the cost of building the house itself is just a minor factor in the price of a house.
Indeed - I would imagine the price of land is the overriding factor.