Not sure about the sample size...but the Institute backing the research looks reputable enough. (Yes, that matters.)
Anecdotally, I've been turning my TVs and monitors' backlights down after 5 pm for months now. I'm definitely able to get to sleep more easily than leaving monitors at full brightness.
Actually, you're only semi-correct. Apple was selling DRM'd music for a while there (protected.aac files) and then stopped about 3 or so years into their music business. *Now* the stuff you download from iTMS is DRM free (though I think you can still opt for the DRM stuff, not sure).
There are problems: -You may only have 5 machines "associated" with your Apple Store ID at any given point. (So if you do have DRM music, only authorized machines may play back your DRM'd music). -If your HD dies and you haven't backed up your iTMS music, then Apple is under no obligation to let you redownload your music. (This might be irrelevant now that they have a "cloud service". But, and this is a deal breaker for me, you have to allow Apple to scan your entire media library to their servers.)
It's a better process than it was in the past, that is for sure. The other half of the discussion involves Google's media service. Considering how often Google just axes entire services and leaves users in the cold...I'm unwilling to consider buying media from them.
LOL Your post is just so full of over assumptions and speculation that all I can do is laugh. Thank you, supremely silly person, thank you.
1.) I'm significantly younger than 35, thank you very much. I listen to the range of music that I do because of my personal taste. I'm far from alone in having these tastes.
2.) "Optical media is dying this decade." Oh yeah? What led you to believe that? Because Apple and a handful of laptop manufacturers sell one or two models (per manufacturer) without optical drives? Phht, I say, phht! If you want a CD player you can buy one easily enough, and will continue to be able to do so. (Cassette decks are only now becoming scarce in retail stores, and boy did the CD make them look silly.)
3.) Surely you realize there's more to playing music than queuing something up on a computer and listening over headphones. (Not that I'm an audiophile, but there is something to be said for a quality amplifier and speaker combo. Just about anything can be plugged into them, and not all computer audio streams are created equally.)
4.) Audio reproduction does not necessitate the use of a computer. Also, the use of a computer does not necessitate audio reproduction. There are better ways to 'consume media' than via a general purpose computer, and there are plenty of high demand uses for general purpose computers that have *nothing at all* to do with media consumption.
Go to a used LP or used CD store sometime (yes, at least in this city they're located in different stores in different zipcodes even!). Just try and preach your views there. Report back with the results.
...and just one of the many reasons I have hundreds of CDs lying around. I've bought some music and videos from iTunes. I prefer buying CDs because they're physical and tangible. Google or Apple can't decide to "close the service" and take all of my CDs away.
For that matter, there are still recordings only to be found on vinyl. There's either too weak of a modern interest in certain albums or "not enough profit" for record companies in re-releasing them. Either way, I don't see physical media going away anytime soon.
There's a reason this option is never illustrated in film/story lines...it's boring. But, between a bullet in the head and cooperating, I'd cooperate.
It's like in TNG when Trelane threatens to destroy the Enterprise. The Captain orders everyone to go about their business as usual. He's not a quitter, but what chance does his crew stand against a Q, aka god? None. So either go about your business or find a way to survive in the situation.
I suspect you're not far from the truth. He's got a good point about context switching. It is mentally jarring to switch contexts, but I imagine I can get used to Metro's "annoyance" . Contrast this with the very critical flaw(s) that Vista rolled out with: driver problems leading to system failure. There's *no* chance of getting used to that kind of problem.
They include that bit about "from LA to NY in one hour" so that people can grasp how fast the speed is.
It isn't meant to make you conjure up a day where you'll be flying that speed. It isn't meant to sell you on an airline ticket in the future...it's simply a way to communicate speed to a broader audience. Anything you think of beyond the raw speed involved is *you* day dreaming.
It's really up to you to figure out whether you want a PhD or not. Theoretically, a PhD does NOT have the same increase in ROI that a master's does. But if it's what you want, then it's what you want. Only *you* can decide that for yourself.
As for letters of recommendation, I think you can use a boss for at least one of them. It doesn't hurt to call up your professors from undergrad, in any case. Email them first, then call. In my experience, they always appreciate talking to one of their former students. Remember, they're people and people *need* feedback and validation of their life's work...you can be part of it.
I suggest you be realistic with the time and effort required for a PhD. You'll be back in the world of sleepless nights and final exams. Four years is *fast* and six years (or more) is more realistic.
I sort of agree, and it's good to hear at least one decenter from the crowd. I also don't really like facebook, and scorn it for my own personal reasons. But, I do see where people are always going to be looking for ways to connect. FB did that pretty well at one point. (Myspace did it for a while, and before them yahoo, etc, in different ways.)
I think the problem with FB, now, is they're either too greedy or too big. It might be a case where several, smaller FB-like organizations, ran privately, would do the same job and more profitably. Instead, they've sold themselves to the market, and the market is realizing what FB's income sheets look like.
(I'm kind of free associating so get your salt lick out.)
for example, just about every economist agrees that America would be better off if we eliminated the mortgage deduction for income tax
Uhh...haven't seen that topic come up. Keep in mind, not everyone who calls him/herself an "economist" actually *is* an economist.
I think you're trying to highlight the contrast between future and present preferences. There are many things that society claims to prefer - regardless of political creed. But when you consider those preferences logically, they require long term planning. Once you cut down that long term plan into compatible short-term plans, no one's interested.
(Obviously, I'm not attempting academic lingo in this post.)
Economics can be used to inform public policy. Want to estimate the marginal increase in demand for social services (transfer payments from the government to citizens) associated with a change in some relevant public policy? Then do an "event study" using labor/micro economic theory and some econometrics. You keep those results in mind when considering further modifications to welfare. That's one way to use the past to inform the present using economics. It's scientific, and not equivalent to pulling straws out of a hat or predicting all possible states of the world (but it's only as good as the data used).
Frankly, why is math the one thing that gets asked this question so much? You do, of course, realize that math is one of the courses most disciplines require their students to take, yes?
Your criticism would have merit if I were offering a prediction, but then I didn't suggest people read those sources to magically become prediction makers. There're many people interested in just how an economy can work and work against itself. These same people tend to read poor sources and end up with irrational views of the world.
Economics is suspect when placed as a predictor of a future state of the world. As a science, economics just isn't that developed yet. (Which is understandable, considering it's age as a separate discipline and the complicated objects of its consideration.) But, economics does work reasonably well as a *descriptive* science. That is precisely what a good read of Galbraith and Case & Shiller provide (to name only two good sources).
If you read 1929: The Great Crash, by John K. Galbraith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Crash,_1929), you'll see a pretty good picture of what happened between 2002-2007.
Then there's Case and Shiller's 2003 article. Mind you, their article was published in 2003 and describes erratic behavior in housing markets across several US cities.
In short, many of the same things that went wrong in the 1920s went wrong in the 2000s. The difference is that, this time, we actually had academics (at universities and at the Fed) who were basically ignored or powerless to act. Hell, I've seen interviews where Alan Greenspan says exactly what I just said. He even added that, after consulting hundreds of math professors across the academic world, they (the Fed) couldn't figure out what many of the "investment instruments" represented.
Anyway...that wasn't all that related to the units on the axis of the charts.
No where does the author define the units at play, EXPLICITLY.
So, I'm guessing that it's the volume (number of) shares traded on a specific day, on a minute basis throughout the entire business day. Multiple data are included, representing the various trading markets in the US.
That makes: x: time (from 8 am to 4 pm, eastern time) y: shares traded at time x (multiplier? could be x10^1, x10^7, or who knows) chart title: the specific day depicted
Slashdot Mirror
Not sure about the sample size...but the Institute backing the research looks reputable enough. (Yes, that matters.)
Anecdotally, I've been turning my TVs and monitors' backlights down after 5 pm for months now. I'm definitely able to get to sleep more easily than leaving monitors at full brightness.
Actually, you're only semi-correct. Apple was selling DRM'd music for a while there (protected .aac files) and then stopped about 3 or so years into their music business. *Now* the stuff you download from iTMS is DRM free (though I think you can still opt for the DRM stuff, not sure).
There are problems:
-You may only have 5 machines "associated" with your Apple Store ID at any given point. (So if you do have DRM music, only authorized machines may play back your DRM'd music).
-If your HD dies and you haven't backed up your iTMS music, then Apple is under no obligation to let you redownload your music. (This might be irrelevant now that they have a "cloud service". But, and this is a deal breaker for me, you have to allow Apple to scan your entire media library to their servers.)
It's a better process than it was in the past, that is for sure. The other half of the discussion involves Google's media service. Considering how often Google just axes entire services and leaves users in the cold...I'm unwilling to consider buying media from them.
That's no reason to keep compact discs; a hard drive is tangible, too. The real question is, do you control it yourself.
There's no reason to *not* keep them, and I continue to use them daily. Therefore, I'm keeping them.
Hard drive backups? Yeah, been there, done that, will continue to do so. Ever heard of tape backups? They're archival quality, even!
LOL Your post is just so full of over assumptions and speculation that all I can do is laugh. Thank you, supremely silly person, thank you.
1.) I'm significantly younger than 35, thank you very much. I listen to the range of music that I do because of my personal taste. I'm far from alone in having these tastes.
2.) "Optical media is dying this decade." Oh yeah? What led you to believe that? Because Apple and a handful of laptop manufacturers sell one or two models (per manufacturer) without optical drives? Phht, I say, phht! If you want a CD player you can buy one easily enough, and will continue to be able to do so. (Cassette decks are only now becoming scarce in retail stores, and boy did the CD make them look silly.)
3.) Surely you realize there's more to playing music than queuing something up on a computer and listening over headphones. (Not that I'm an audiophile, but there is something to be said for a quality amplifier and speaker combo. Just about anything can be plugged into them, and not all computer audio streams are created equally.)
4.) Audio reproduction does not necessitate the use of a computer. Also, the use of a computer does not necessitate audio reproduction. There are better ways to 'consume media' than via a general purpose computer, and there are plenty of high demand uses for general purpose computers that have *nothing at all* to do with media consumption.
Go to a used LP or used CD store sometime (yes, at least in this city they're located in different stores in different zipcodes even!). Just try and preach your views there. Report back with the results.
...and just one of the many reasons I have hundreds of CDs lying around. I've bought some music and videos from iTunes. I prefer buying CDs because they're physical and tangible. Google or Apple can't decide to "close the service" and take all of my CDs away.
For that matter, there are still recordings only to be found on vinyl. There's either too weak of a modern interest in certain albums or "not enough profit" for record companies in re-releasing them. Either way, I don't see physical media going away anytime soon.
There's a reason this option is never illustrated in film/story lines...it's boring. But, between a bullet in the head and cooperating, I'd cooperate.
It's like in TNG when Trelane threatens to destroy the Enterprise. The Captain orders everyone to go about their business as usual. He's not a quitter, but what chance does his crew stand against a Q, aka god? None. So either go about your business or find a way to survive in the situation.
Kinda seems like you read the first half of that sentence and neglected the rest.
I suspect you're not far from the truth. He's got a good point about context switching. It is mentally jarring to switch contexts, but I imagine I can get used to Metro's "annoyance" . Contrast this with the very critical flaw(s) that Vista rolled out with: driver problems leading to system failure. There's *no* chance of getting used to that kind of problem.
why don't we just line our streets and cars with (electro) magnets?
(What? Afraid of the poles reversing?)
"New York to London in just one hour"
Woops, got the reference wrong! :P
They include that bit about "from LA to NY in one hour" so that people can grasp how fast the speed is.
It isn't meant to make you conjure up a day where you'll be flying that speed. It isn't meant to sell you on an airline ticket in the future...it's simply a way to communicate speed to a broader audience. Anything you think of beyond the raw speed involved is *you* day dreaming.
It's really up to you to figure out whether you want a PhD or not. Theoretically, a PhD does NOT have the same increase in ROI that a master's does. But if it's what you want, then it's what you want. Only *you* can decide that for yourself.
As for letters of recommendation, I think you can use a boss for at least one of them. It doesn't hurt to call up your professors from undergrad, in any case. Email them first, then call. In my experience, they always appreciate talking to one of their former students. Remember, they're people and people *need* feedback and validation of their life's work...you can be part of it.
I suggest you be realistic with the time and effort required for a PhD. You'll be back in the world of sleepless nights and final exams. Four years is *fast* and six years (or more) is more realistic.
I sort of agree, and it's good to hear at least one decenter from the crowd. I also don't really like facebook, and scorn it for my own personal reasons. But, I do see where people are always going to be looking for ways to connect. FB did that pretty well at one point. (Myspace did it for a while, and before them yahoo, etc, in different ways.)
I think the problem with FB, now, is they're either too greedy or too big. It might be a case where several, smaller FB-like organizations, ran privately, would do the same job and more profitably. Instead, they've sold themselves to the market, and the market is realizing what FB's income sheets look like.
(I'm kind of free associating so get your salt lick out.)
for example, just about every economist agrees that America would be better off if we eliminated the mortgage deduction for income tax
Uhh...haven't seen that topic come up. Keep in mind, not everyone who calls him/herself an "economist" actually *is* an economist.
I think you're trying to highlight the contrast between future and present preferences. There are many things that society claims to prefer - regardless of political creed. But when you consider those preferences logically, they require long term planning. Once you cut down that long term plan into compatible short-term plans, no one's interested.
(Obviously, I'm not attempting academic lingo in this post.)
Economics can be used to inform public policy. Want to estimate the marginal increase in demand for social services (transfer payments from the government to citizens) associated with a change in some relevant public policy? Then do an "event study" using labor/micro economic theory and some econometrics. You keep those results in mind when considering further modifications to welfare. That's one way to use the past to inform the present using economics. It's scientific, and not equivalent to pulling straws out of a hat or predicting all possible states of the world (but it's only as good as the data used).
I use math every day.
Frankly, why is math the one thing that gets asked this question so much? You do, of course, realize that math is one of the courses most disciplines require their students to take, yes?
Come on dude, this gets posted to EVERY SINGLE "ask slashdot" THREAD.
It's just redundant at this point. Then I see you added some verbs to make your post a little more than a link to wikipedia...doesn't cut it.
Your criticism would have merit if I were offering a prediction, but then I didn't suggest people read those sources to magically become prediction makers. There're many people interested in just how an economy can work and work against itself. These same people tend to read poor sources and end up with irrational views of the world.
Economics is suspect when placed as a predictor of a future state of the world. As a science, economics just isn't that developed yet. (Which is understandable, considering it's age as a separate discipline and the complicated objects of its consideration.) But, economics does work reasonably well as a *descriptive* science. That is precisely what a good read of Galbraith and Case & Shiller provide (to name only two good sources).
I broke down my deductions in a comment titled "the problem with this article..." above.
The econ in me hopes it'll make the market more efficient ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient-market_hypothesis ). But, surely the stock market is already vastly more efficient than slow movers like real estate.
And, see, I found it hilarious and a good way to end a series.
You should read how he ended "Long Dark Tea-time of the Soul". Might as well have said "frankly, I don't wish to write another book in this series!"
If you read 1929: The Great Crash, by John K. Galbraith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Crash,_1929), you'll see a pretty good picture of what happened between 2002-2007.
Then there's Case and Shiller's 2003 article. Mind you, their article was published in 2003 and describes erratic behavior in housing markets across several US cities.
In short, many of the same things that went wrong in the 1920s went wrong in the 2000s. The difference is that, this time, we actually had academics (at universities and at the Fed) who were basically ignored or powerless to act. Hell, I've seen interviews where Alan Greenspan says exactly what I just said. He even added that, after consulting hundreds of math professors across the academic world, they (the Fed) couldn't figure out what many of the "investment instruments" represented.
Anyway...that wasn't all that related to the units on the axis of the charts.
Yes, but I'm not sure it's the current unit of basis IN THAT GRAPH.
No where does the author define the units at play, EXPLICITLY.
So, I'm guessing that it's the volume (number of) shares traded on a specific day, on a minute basis throughout the entire business day. Multiple data are included, representing the various trading markets in the US.
That makes:
x: time (from 8 am to 4 pm, eastern time)
y: shares traded at time x (multiplier? could be x10^1, x10^7, or who knows)
chart title: the specific day depicted
Not going to lie, I thought they were going to review a thinclient...kind of seems like a better idea, with the space constraints.
Without him and the generation of astronomers he inspired, there'd be so much more about this universe to learn.