In theory they should interpret punctuations as characters to search on if they're placed within quotes. (Of course google isn't case sensitive, even within quotes). But then how do you search for quotes? The next step would be a system of escaping "special" characters.
From TFA, the web server does have i.e. mod_python, so there should be some programmability there. I could see using the web server as a proxy - maybe for security reasons, but even more for automatic downloading & caching of web pages as the user moves in and out of connectivity.
I agree with you - the governmant (SIC) is absolutely inefficient with how they use and allocate their money in terms of "saving lives." They should spend more on bigger killers, and spend better on "terrorism". But I think it's naive to believe that the effort they are putting in has no effect, and that just because that particular threat has always been low that it is still as low today. We haven't always had events like 9/11, and we haven't always Bush's bungling in the Middle East. Is it still much lower than these other problems? Of course. But my original point is that this money and effort does have some effect. There have not been succesful major attacks on US soil since 9/11, and (partially because of Bush's ineptitude) that threat is significantly higher today than it has historically been.
Another viewpoint to use is that "theatre" IS exactly what's needed to combat terrorism. There is no hope for terrorists to actually kill as many Westerners as, say, heart disease. But killing a few creates an atmosphere of fear - and THAT is their primary goal. This theater combats that atmosphere; it attakcs their incentives rather than their operations directly.
Look, I don't think one has to be a neo-con media personality to discuss different angles of the country's approach to fighting terrorism.
We're on/. so here we know enough to equate "lucky" with probability. We were mostly "lucky" last year. Not so lucky in 2001. That's just short-term dips & spikes in the overall probabilistic average.
As the parent to my original post dervied, in the US, we've had a ~ 1/333K chance of being a terrorist victim over the last few years. The point I'm making is maybe that would be 1/100K if we spent half of what we currently do, and maybe it'd be 1/500K if we spent double. I'm not saying that it's money well spent (compared to, say, reducing auto deaths by 1/3 which amounts to a whole lot more people saved), and I'm not saying the government is particularly efficient with that money, but I am saying it's ignorant to believe that our efforts and money accomplishes nothing.
Anecdotally, I'm not sure if I agree. In my personal experience living and working in the Boston area, startups are and have been alive and well. I find a very thriving community of entrepreneurs who have no interest in big companies (other than the eventual acquisition-as-exit-strategy). At least in IT. In Biotech (Boston is arguably bigger than SV in this field), you may be right as it seems to take the resources of a large firm to develop a product.
Also, to my recollection, as hard-hit as the Boston IT sector was during the post-9/11 recession, Silicon Valley was hit harder and had considerably worse unemployment numbers.
The Boston area is already arguably the top technology hub in the country outside of Silicon Valley. And is the leading location for some fields - Biotech, for example.
And something on this scale is takes a whole lot more money than the investment arm of just one company! But for true startups, that's the wrong money anyway. Google doesn't fund the three guys sitting around a kitchen table from TFA. An individual angel investor (TFA's rich guy) funds those three guys. Google is the exit strategy for those three guys AND their angel.
Care to share any actual specifics -or better yet, some statistics? I work with police officers every day, and the vast majority of them care deeply & apply justice universally to the best of their ability.
Sure, poorer people tend to be convicted of crimes a lot more. Especially minorities. But I posit that's not the police; there are two posibilities: 1. Having less to lose, more to gain, and arguably coming from a less-"educated" background, they (on average) commit more crimes. Really, what's the incentive for a well-to-do capitalist to go out and commit crimes? 2. The legal system is such that money buys the best lawyers, who can get people off the hook better. The police have nothing to do with this, other than perhaps the pragmatic issue of limited resources. If the police know that they have a weak case against a well-to-do offender who will get the best legal representation, they (along with the DA) may decide not to pursue a case they have no chance of winning in favor of keeping more officers on the streets doing their jobs.
Or maybe it's just a conspiratorial plot by tens of thousands of individual (and truly independent) police departments across the nation to hold up the evil American oligarchy. After all, we all know that policemen are millionaire robber-barons, every last one.
Complete agreement here. Unfortunately, they're generally not considered "professional" and just socially untenable in a business setting.
I do find myself throwing a few in for emphasis once I have already developed a rapport with somebody, but I'd never do it in a professional email to someone I didn't feel I knew well enough to understand it as an additional communication, rather than cutesy childish decorations.:-)
More profits. Thing is, they charge on both ends. They want to charge the producers, but they are already making money from the consumers. Why do the consumers buy broadband? So they can get (e.g.) video services from producers. More video already = more demand for consumer bandwidth. But why not double-dip?
Would be nice if they could do a "diff" between the new cancer-resistant white blood cells & normal ones. Find out what makes the new ones better, and then do more of it. Or extract the benefits, if that's reasonable once the cause is understood.
Rather than a full wearable computer with keyboard, etc., I'd rather attach a button camera, maybe GPS, and let the cpu process information about my surroundings, and display information that makes me *more* aware of my surroundings. A map, or some facial recognition to tell me who is walking up to me would be good starts.
I think Apple users tend to fall into two tiers. Sure, there is a large population of people who use Macs so they don't have to know about IT (and really, is that such a bad idea? If they're going to be ignorant anyway, sure is a lot safer than a Windows PC - even if it's not bulletproof).
And there is a growing faction of the technical elite that use Macs, myself being one. They are very nice machines.
If only it were so easy as to just say "meat is bad, plants are good." It's the nutritional components they break down into, and your overall intake of nutrents and "poisons" that matters. You need carbohydrates, fiber, protein, omega-3's, etc. Trans fats, saturated fats, sugars, etc. tend to not be good for you.
While these may typically be more abundant in meat products, all meat is not created equal. A prime steak (which is worth having on ocassion) or a burger from McDonald's is not equivalent to grilled chicken breast & fish.
And on the vegetarian side... McDonald's french fries - nutritionally the most evil thing that even McD's serves, which says a lot - are completely vegetarian.
Depends who the consumers are. End users don't have to read that mumbo-jumbo. They just have to use the pretty web site.
My customers are the wanna-be entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, and "Web 2.0" and this kind of language is working wonders as far as sales & marketing goes for my consulting services.
Er - $1/W only really applies when you're buying industrial capacity in the MW range. I think you'll find that the price is somewhat higher for home (and even farm) use. $2-3/W when I was last pricing them about a year ago. If you know of any small scale (say, 10KW) turbines at this rate, please post a link because I'll run out and buy one!
The other issues have to do with living in an urban area. Erecting a turbine on a tower usually isn't popular with the neighbors, and wind is not all that strong or predictable in cities for a host of reasons. OTOH, if you live on a farm out in the plains states, more power to you!
It'll be insanely tough to convince customers that a 600mhz, 256mb ram linux machine is equivalent or better than a 2.0ghz, 512mb winbox
You don't have to. You just have to convince them it's a better bang for the buck. Not everyone drives a Mercedes - and it's not because they think their Kias are better cars.
Um, from the Constitution, the purpose of patents are "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
Um, that's a Power of Congress relating to IP, not the purpose behind it. But thank you for playing.
The reason Congress has that power is to realize the intended purpose that I stated before: to incentivize inventors, artists, and other creators to create and publicly disclose their ideas for others to share the benefits in the long run. And yes, this is a paraphrase of my understanding of the spirit of the law, not the letter.
Slashdot Mirror
In theory they should interpret punctuations as characters to search on if they're placed within quotes. (Of course google isn't case sensitive, even within quotes). But then how do you search for quotes? The next step would be a system of escaping "special" characters.
From TFA, the web server does have i.e. mod_python, so there should be some programmability there. I could see using the web server as a proxy - maybe for security reasons, but even more for automatic downloading & caching of web pages as the user moves in and out of connectivity.
I agree with you - the governmant (SIC) is absolutely inefficient with how they use and allocate their money in terms of "saving lives." They should spend more on bigger killers, and spend better on "terrorism". But I think it's naive to believe that the effort they are putting in has no effect, and that just because that particular threat has always been low that it is still as low today. We haven't always had events like 9/11, and we haven't always Bush's bungling in the Middle East. Is it still much lower than these other problems? Of course. But my original point is that this money and effort does have some effect. There have not been succesful major attacks on US soil since 9/11, and (partially because of Bush's ineptitude) that threat is significantly higher today than it has historically been.
Another viewpoint to use is that "theatre" IS exactly what's needed to combat terrorism. There is no hope for terrorists to actually kill as many Westerners as, say, heart disease. But killing a few creates an atmosphere of fear - and THAT is their primary goal. This theater combats that atmosphere; it attakcs their incentives rather than their operations directly.
Assertions:
Nerds make good software engineers.
A defining characteristics of nerds is that people don't like them.
Nerds are people too.
Conclusion:
Nerds don't like other nerds, and are happier with distance between them.
There are currently plenty of "fanatics" at the Minuteman Project who seem willing to donate their time.
Look, I don't think one has to be a neo-con media personality to discuss different angles of the country's approach to fighting terrorism.
/. so here we know enough to equate "lucky" with probability. We were mostly "lucky" last year. Not so lucky in 2001. That's just short-term dips & spikes in the overall probabilistic average.
We're on
As the parent to my original post dervied, in the US, we've had a ~ 1/333K chance of being a terrorist victim over the last few years. The point I'm making is maybe that would be 1/100K if we spent half of what we currently do, and maybe it'd be 1/500K if we spent double. I'm not saying that it's money well spent (compared to, say, reducing auto deaths by 1/3 which amounts to a whole lot more people saved), and I'm not saying the government is particularly efficient with that money, but I am saying it's ignorant to believe that our efforts and money accomplishes nothing.
Care to offer any counter arguments other than "you're wrong"?
One could argue that deaths due to terrorism are low precisely because we've spent a lot on fighting it.
Anecdotally, I'm not sure if I agree. In my personal experience living and working in the Boston area, startups are and have been alive and well. I find a very thriving community of entrepreneurs who have no interest in big companies (other than the eventual acquisition-as-exit-strategy). At least in IT. In Biotech (Boston is arguably bigger than SV in this field), you may be right as it seems to take the resources of a large firm to develop a product.
Also, to my recollection, as hard-hit as the Boston IT sector was during the post-9/11 recession, Silicon Valley was hit harder and had considerably worse unemployment numbers.
The Boston area is already arguably the top technology hub in the country outside of Silicon Valley. And is the leading location for some fields - Biotech, for example.
And something on this scale is takes a whole lot more money than the investment arm of just one company! But for true startups, that's the wrong money anyway. Google doesn't fund the three guys sitting around a kitchen table from TFA. An individual angel investor (TFA's rich guy) funds those three guys. Google is the exit strategy for those three guys AND their angel.
Care to share any actual specifics -or better yet, some statistics? I work with police officers every day, and the vast majority of them care deeply & apply justice universally to the best of their ability.
Sure, poorer people tend to be convicted of crimes a lot more. Especially minorities. But I posit that's not the police; there are two posibilities:
1. Having less to lose, more to gain, and arguably coming from a less-"educated" background, they (on average) commit more crimes. Really, what's the incentive for a well-to-do capitalist to go out and commit crimes?
2. The legal system is such that money buys the best lawyers, who can get people off the hook better. The police have nothing to do with this, other than perhaps the pragmatic issue of limited resources. If the police know that they have a weak case against a well-to-do offender who will get the best legal representation, they (along with the DA) may decide not to pursue a case they have no chance of winning in favor of keeping more officers on the streets doing their jobs.
Or maybe it's just a conspiratorial plot by tens of thousands of individual (and truly independent) police departments across the nation to hold up the evil American oligarchy. After all, we all know that policemen are millionaire robber-barons, every last one.
Complete agreement here. Unfortunately, they're generally not considered "professional" and just socially untenable in a business setting.
:-)
I do find myself throwing a few in for emphasis once I have already developed a rapport with somebody, but I'd never do it in a professional email to someone I didn't feel I knew well enough to understand it as an additional communication, rather than cutesy childish decorations.
Why charge producers?
More profits. Thing is, they charge on both ends. They want to charge the producers, but they are already making money from the consumers. Why do the consumers buy broadband? So they can get (e.g.) video services from producers. More video already = more demand for consumer bandwidth. But why not double-dip?
If only we could cause rapidly terminal cancer in the "wild" rat population. Now THAT would be a breakthough!
Would be nice if they could do a "diff" between the new cancer-resistant white blood cells & normal ones. Find out what makes the new ones better, and then do more of it. Or extract the benefits, if that's reasonable once the cause is understood.
Rather than a full wearable computer with keyboard, etc., I'd rather attach a button camera, maybe GPS, and let the cpu process information about my surroundings, and display information that makes me *more* aware of my surroundings. A map, or some facial recognition to tell me who is walking up to me would be good starts.
I think Apple users tend to fall into two tiers. Sure, there is a large population of people who use Macs so they don't have to know about IT (and really, is that such a bad idea? If they're going to be ignorant anyway, sure is a lot safer than a Windows PC - even if it's not bulletproof).
And there is a growing faction of the technical elite that use Macs, myself being one. They are very nice machines.
Yes, but then they wouldn't fit my classification as vegetarian. :-X
But seriously, they are still pure evil for your body.
If only it were so easy as to just say "meat is bad, plants are good." It's the nutritional components they break down into, and your overall intake of nutrents and "poisons" that matters. You need carbohydrates, fiber, protein, omega-3's, etc. Trans fats, saturated fats, sugars, etc. tend to not be good for you.
While these may typically be more abundant in meat products, all meat is not created equal. A prime steak (which is worth having on ocassion) or a burger from McDonald's is not equivalent to grilled chicken breast & fish.
And on the vegetarian side... McDonald's french fries - nutritionally the most evil thing that even McD's serves, which says a lot - are completely vegetarian.
Depends who the consumers are. End users don't have to read that mumbo-jumbo. They just have to use the pretty web site.
My customers are the wanna-be entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs, and "Web 2.0" and this kind of language is working wonders as far as sales & marketing goes for my consulting services.
Er - $1/W only really applies when you're buying industrial capacity in the MW range. I think you'll find that the price is somewhat higher for home (and even farm) use. $2-3/W when I was last pricing them about a year ago. If you know of any small scale (say, 10KW) turbines at this rate, please post a link because I'll run out and buy one!
The other issues have to do with living in an urban area. Erecting a turbine on a tower usually isn't popular with the neighbors, and wind is not all that strong or predictable in cities for a host of reasons. OTOH, if you live on a farm out in the plains states, more power to you!
I would think a typical application would be to run a browser and web/intranet apps
:-)
Perhaps that's what it's called the [com]Municator?
It'll be insanely tough to convince customers that a 600mhz, 256mb ram linux machine is equivalent or better than a 2.0ghz, 512mb winbox
You don't have to. You just have to convince them it's a better bang for the buck. Not everyone drives a Mercedes - and it's not because they think their Kias are better cars.
> The woman is also hot.
:-)
That's just for believability. Who would buy a well-educated PhD-type woman who wasn't a world-class hottie?
Um, from the Constitution, the purpose of patents are "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries
Um, that's a Power of Congress relating to IP, not the purpose behind it. But thank you for playing.
The reason Congress has that power is to realize the intended purpose that I stated before: to incentivize inventors, artists, and other creators to create and publicly disclose their ideas for others to share the benefits in the long run. And yes, this is a paraphrase of my understanding of the spirit of the law, not the letter.