I really hope Darl can turn this around pretty fast.
Hope turns men into fools. You should have cut and run a long time ago, and yet still you hang on. Hello, it's going to be DE-LISTED. So unless you want to try to sell your stock in the classifieds, I'd accept my losses and get out while I can. 10 cents on the dollar is better than zero.
and being as it is so cheap, the risk is fairly minimal.
I beg to differ: this doesn't make sense. Because if you're only going to buy 100 shares for say $20 then I agree the "risk" is minimal. After all, the most you can lose is $20. Wow big deal. However you'll have a hard time paying your $14 ($7 each way) commission on that.
So if you're going to go in for a fair chunk of change - say $20k or so (around 100k shares), I wouldn't consider losing 50% ($10k) or even 5% ($1k) "minimal" risk. Yeah ok shorting the stuff makes sense, but if you get caught on the wrong side for some reason (like you said, it went up 50% somehow) it won't take very long for you to shit your pants.
If you play with a stock from a company with non-existent fundamentals like SCO, don't complain if you get burned. You will probably get better odds on the roulette table at your nearest casino.
NASDAQ delisted dot-com darling Salon.com (SALN), but its corpse has managed to shuffle around long enough to make it into the glorious Web 2.0 era. The SCO may also rise again.
Somehow I doubt it. Salon.com didn't start suing people with bogus claims. I'm sure certain influential and VERY large corporations will see it as their duty that SCO won't rise again...
If this is really true, than this time I must side with thompson (normally I wouldn't), because it is clearly to mok him..
Idiots like you are turning the United States into the biggest collection of pussies EVER. See, in a FREE country you can make fun of whoever you want. You just can't make things up and/or lie about someone. Yes they are making fun of him. He bloody well deserves it - this (new) frivolous lawsuit merely underlines the fact that this man should have had his bar license pulled a LONG time ago.
Oh, and it's spelled THREAT and MOCK, and I find it rather childish that you can't spell these simple words.
but what concerns me is that this "number" could very well become another excuse for the government to pursue "solutions" that are even more invasive than our current crop of 9/11-related idiocy.
Everyone knows those cyber-terrorists are building weapons of mass destruction. You are either with us or against us, you liberal cyber-terrorist facilitator...
You know, the scary thing is it's almost not even funny anymore.
With cybercrime, the 'break-in' can happen from thousands of miles away without the perpetrator ever setting foot, or having ever previously set foot on the premises. There is no physical description, no chemical or biological evidence left behind.
The money has to go SOMEWHERE, otherwise there's no point. Follow the money.
1) Physicians are mostly trained to be healers (practitioners) not scientists.
I think that most physicians start out as "scientists", after all, most of us come from science majors. However the biggest mistake that medical students make is thinking in absolutes. Yes, anyone can memorize anatomy, or physiology, or pharmacology, etc. After all, there are only so many anatomic variations in the population, a person's nerves will always transmit a signal the same way, and warfarin/coumadin will always interact with pretty much any other medication you prescribe.
But something happens during the career. When you actually get a patient in front of you, suddenly all those absolutes go out the window. Everyone is different. Rarely will you see the "classic" or "textbook" or "tv medical show" presentation of a disease. Many patients come with very vague or mysterious complaints. An example, which happened in my practice a month or so ago- who would have guessed that a patient who was treated successfully 2 times elsewhere for a recurring skin infection actually had diabetes - which was CAUSING the infections? Only a physician. After all, if it was THAT easy who needs doctors - we have wikipedia. Right? WRONG.
So I must state that medicine IS a science. Filled with facts. You can memorize the pathology. You can study algorithms (they do exist) to reach diagnoses. Patient comes in with X, Y and Z, just follow the algorithm. And you'll be right, a lot of the time. But the SUCCESSFUL practice of medicine - how to APPLY the science, is an art. Just like Engineering is an art. Any fool can build a bridge, given enough scientific knowledge of materials and forces and tensile strengths, etc. But the guy who builds a good bridge (except in Minneapolis) where no one thought he could - he is an artist. Does that make him less of a scientist?
I agree with your second point. We're dealing with the normal curve ALL the time. Most patients will have response "X", but you'll get some with "A" and "Z" and there's always one with "4".
3) Dealing with inaccurate data requies advanced knowledge of matematical statistics and most medical doctors do not have a basic grasp of this field.
We don't need it. That's what we have peer review for - supposedly. To save us from all the BS and pet theories and make sure that only decent studies get published. It doesn't always work, though. But this is also why things like the Cochrane studies are important. Your average doc in the street doesn't need to battle with statistics. (S)He just needs to know if what (s)he's going to or what (s)he's been taught do WORKS. Studies like Cochrane let us look back and see if what we're doing actually WORKS or not. Despite whatever was published/hyped/etc.
I agree with points 4 and 5. Anyone who is going to publish must consult with a statistician. Medical practice is interdisciplinary. Why should medical research be any different?
I can't help thinking this is all diluting the presence of Open Office.
How many dark brown fizzy drinks are in your supermarket's "drinks" section? Some people like Coke. Some people like Pepsi. And some people like the "supermarket brand" cola. Now do you propose we eliminate a few brands because you have to do a few millisecond's worth of work in sorting out where your brand is on the shelf? OK. I say MY brand (not yours) is the one we keep. And on the other hand, have you even TRIED some of the "other" brands? Some of them are not bad at all!
I know my fingertips are a little charred around the edges
I wish I had mod points!
It's not just "defective by design". It's proprietary software, vendor "lock in", and forced upgrade paths with the triannual or quadrannual "Microsoft" tax. Along with the general complacency that comes out of Redmond, not to mention denial when SERIOUS problems are pointed out.
I've been thinking about leaving Windows for a while. I finally managed to get ubuntu working last weekend (turns out my install problems on my 64 bit AMD machine were solvable by the noapic nolapic command line option), yesterday I played my first DVD with xine. It took a bit of work, but it's done. Open office is ok - even better now that IBM is going to be behind it too. I guess as soon as wine/Cedega can run the newer games Windows is gone forever. And good riddance.
Then the free market can no longer express what the people want.
What the people want is their media for free. The "market" is no longer about bringing the content to the people, it's about preventing people from easily getting to the content. "Free" market rules, supply and demand rules no longer apply. How can they when a "good" can be perfectly reproduced an infinite number of times by anyone with a CD/DVD burner?
These problems will continue until the middlemen/publishers realize once and for all that they are obsolete in the information age and MOVE ON. Perhaps the music "industry" can still make money organizing concerts and advising their musicians on how to set up their online music distribution. And perhaps the movie industry will realize that there's a limit to how much they can expect to earn from a film and budget accordingly.
CHANGE IS GOOD. There is now a more efficient way of doing things. Instead of bundling CD's/DVD's into cases, putting them into trucks/planes, burning fuel to get them to a retail store, and paying for all those sales/marketing/retail people, you can send it directly to the purchaser for a trivial cost (after all, the "pirates" seem to be able to afford the bandwidth) over the internet. Yes, that means all those sales/marketing/retail people are out of a job. GOOD. THEIR JOBS ARE WASTEFUL compared to this new technology. It's time for them to adapt.
Instead the "industry" is fighting like hell to continue to produce waste - in fact, they are INCREASING it by making reproduction devices that conflict, DRM schemes that fail miserably and produce false positives, etc. Passing more waste onto the end user. Congratulations, idiots.
So how is that only after 3 days someone who is just sitting there using almost no muscles can die in such a short time?
They don't die of "exhaustion", they probably die of this. Consider that most are probably overweight and have a long history of a sedentary lifestyle.
. I have a $50 bet with a "nut case" friend of mine that NASA's moon landing was real (he is a real conspiracy theorist - I blame drugs). Once these babies are in position, they'll be able to take nice pictures of the Apollo mission sites.
You can't win an argument with a nutcase. He'll just say that the pics from the Japanese mission are fake, and probably create some conspiracy about the US paying the Japs to "keep the secret". Don't count on that $50.
PvP ship destruction is a resource sink but a money source for most players.
Actually, the premiums are around 1/4 or 1/5 of the insurance payout. The payout also does NOT scale completely with your ship's value. A raven which will cost you around 110M isk will cost around 30M to insure and pays out around 80M. So really all you're getting back for your 110M ship is 50M - half the ship value. Try seeing what a capital ship pays out - much less than what you paid for it.
Also remember that this does NOT include the cost of the modifications. When you buy a ship, you just have a vessel that can go from A to B, but has no offensive/defensive capabilities. These mods cost a LOT of money - and a decent set up will cost you MUCH more than the ship. Getting killed will destroy some of these mods, and the person who killed you will usually sell the rest off at a discount (in order to get his money faster), so this is another sink.
Slashdot Mirror
I really hope Darl can turn this around pretty fast.
Hope turns men into fools. You should have cut and run a long time ago, and yet still you hang on. Hello, it's going to be DE-LISTED. So unless you want to try to sell your stock in the classifieds, I'd accept my losses and get out while I can. 10 cents on the dollar is better than zero.
and being as it is so cheap, the risk is fairly minimal.
I beg to differ: this doesn't make sense. Because if you're only going to buy 100 shares for say $20 then I agree the "risk" is minimal. After all, the most you can lose is $20. Wow big deal. However you'll have a hard time paying your $14 ($7 each way) commission on that.
So if you're going to go in for a fair chunk of change - say $20k or so (around 100k shares), I wouldn't consider losing 50% ($10k) or even 5% ($1k) "minimal" risk. Yeah ok shorting the stuff makes sense, but if you get caught on the wrong side for some reason (like you said, it went up 50% somehow) it won't take very long for you to shit your pants.
If you play with a stock from a company with non-existent fundamentals like SCO, don't complain if you get burned. You will probably get better odds on the roulette table at your nearest casino.
NASDAQ delisted dot-com darling Salon.com (SALN), but its corpse has managed to shuffle around long enough to make it into the glorious Web 2.0 era. The SCO may also rise again.
Somehow I doubt it. Salon.com didn't start suing people with bogus claims. I'm sure certain influential and VERY large corporations will see it as their duty that SCO won't rise again...
That's when you try to buy it back.
Also, looking at the other guy (the one who bought your stock) and clicking your tongue while muttering "sucker" is valid at this point.
Encrypt, encrypt, encrypt.
Call the game "Blackwater"
I thought it was "Tossed-out" Thompson.
Satire is legal as long as it does not cause confusion about which one is real or official.
Uh oh. The bot in the game certainly acts more intelligent than JT. Now I'm confused. Perhaps Take-Two is in trouble after all...
If this is really true, than this time I must side with thompson (normally I wouldn't), because it is clearly to mok him..
Idiots like you are turning the United States into the biggest collection of pussies EVER. See, in a FREE country you can make fun of whoever you want. You just can't make things up and/or lie about someone. Yes they are making fun of him. He bloody well deserves it - this (new) frivolous lawsuit merely underlines the fact that this man should have had his bar license pulled a LONG time ago.
Oh, and it's spelled THREAT and MOCK, and I find it rather childish that you can't spell these simple words.
but what concerns me is that this "number" could very well become another excuse for the government to pursue "solutions" that are even more invasive than our current crop of 9/11-related idiocy.
Everyone knows those cyber-terrorists are building weapons of mass destruction. You are either with us or against us, you liberal cyber-terrorist facilitator...
You know, the scary thing is it's almost not even funny anymore.
With cybercrime, the 'break-in' can happen from thousands of miles away without the perpetrator ever setting foot, or having ever previously set foot on the premises. There is no physical description, no chemical or biological evidence left behind.
The money has to go SOMEWHERE, otherwise there's no point. Follow the money.
But, you can't say that google would get more legitimate clicks if they could eliminate the fake ones.
/sarcasm
No no no you just don't get it. See, if you click on the ad, you HAVE to buy the product/service. Otherwise you are committing fraud...
Someone needs to make a video like this.
Now please, leave Darl alone!
I just HAVE to say it:
:)
who on EARTH will steal a linux laptop???
just kidding, I use ubuntu myself
OK I feel I have to nit-pick a little.
1) Physicians are mostly trained to be healers (practitioners) not scientists.
I think that most physicians start out as "scientists", after all, most of us come from science majors. However the biggest mistake that medical students make is thinking in absolutes. Yes, anyone can memorize anatomy, or physiology, or pharmacology, etc. After all, there are only so many anatomic variations in the population, a person's nerves will always transmit a signal the same way, and warfarin/coumadin will always interact with pretty much any other medication you prescribe.
But something happens during the career. When you actually get a patient in front of you, suddenly all those absolutes go out the window. Everyone is different. Rarely will you see the "classic" or "textbook" or "tv medical show" presentation of a disease. Many patients come with very vague or mysterious complaints. An example, which happened in my practice a month or so ago- who would have guessed that a patient who was treated successfully 2 times elsewhere for a recurring skin infection actually had diabetes - which was CAUSING the infections? Only a physician. After all, if it was THAT easy who needs doctors - we have wikipedia. Right? WRONG.
So I must state that medicine IS a science. Filled with facts. You can memorize the pathology. You can study algorithms (they do exist) to reach diagnoses. Patient comes in with X, Y and Z, just follow the algorithm. And you'll be right, a lot of the time. But the SUCCESSFUL practice of medicine - how to APPLY the science, is an art. Just like Engineering is an art. Any fool can build a bridge, given enough scientific knowledge of materials and forces and tensile strengths, etc. But the guy who builds a good bridge (except in Minneapolis) where no one thought he could - he is an artist. Does that make him less of a scientist?
I agree with your second point. We're dealing with the normal curve ALL the time. Most patients will have response "X", but you'll get some with "A" and "Z" and there's always one with "4".
3) Dealing with inaccurate data requies advanced knowledge of matematical statistics and most medical doctors do not have a basic grasp of this field.
We don't need it. That's what we have peer review for - supposedly. To save us from all the BS and pet theories and make sure that only decent studies get published. It doesn't always work, though. But this is also why things like the Cochrane studies are important. Your average doc in the street doesn't need to battle with statistics. (S)He just needs to know if what (s)he's going to or what (s)he's been taught do WORKS. Studies like Cochrane let us look back and see if what we're doing actually WORKS or not. Despite whatever was published/hyped/etc.
I agree with points 4 and 5. Anyone who is going to publish must consult with a statistician. Medical practice is interdisciplinary. Why should medical research be any different?
I can't help thinking this is all diluting the presence of Open Office.
How many dark brown fizzy drinks are in your supermarket's "drinks" section? Some people like Coke. Some people like Pepsi. And some people like the "supermarket brand" cola. Now do you propose we eliminate a few brands because you have to do a few millisecond's worth of work in sorting out where your brand is on the shelf? OK. I say MY brand (not yours) is the one we keep. And on the other hand, have you even TRIED some of the "other" brands? Some of them are not bad at all!
I know my fingertips are a little charred around the edges
I wish I had mod points!
It's not just "defective by design". It's proprietary software, vendor "lock in", and forced upgrade paths with the triannual or quadrannual "Microsoft" tax. Along with the general complacency that comes out of Redmond, not to mention denial when SERIOUS problems are pointed out.
I've been thinking about leaving Windows for a while. I finally managed to get ubuntu working last weekend (turns out my install problems on my 64 bit AMD machine were solvable by the noapic nolapic command line option), yesterday I played my first DVD with xine. It took a bit of work, but it's done. Open office is ok - even better now that IBM is going to be behind it too. I guess as soon as wine/Cedega can run the newer games Windows is gone forever. And good riddance.
Then the free market can no longer express what the people want.
What the people want is their media for free. The "market" is no longer about bringing the content to the people, it's about preventing people from easily getting to the content. "Free" market rules, supply and demand rules no longer apply. How can they when a "good" can be perfectly reproduced an infinite number of times by anyone with a CD/DVD burner?
These problems will continue until the middlemen/publishers realize once and for all that they are obsolete in the information age and MOVE ON. Perhaps the music "industry" can still make money organizing concerts and advising their musicians on how to set up their online music distribution. And perhaps the movie industry will realize that there's a limit to how much they can expect to earn from a film and budget accordingly.
CHANGE IS GOOD. There is now a more efficient way of doing things. Instead of bundling CD's/DVD's into cases, putting them into trucks/planes, burning fuel to get them to a retail store, and paying for all those sales/marketing/retail people, you can send it directly to the purchaser for a trivial cost (after all, the "pirates" seem to be able to afford the bandwidth) over the internet. Yes, that means all those sales/marketing/retail people are out of a job. GOOD. THEIR JOBS ARE WASTEFUL compared to this new technology. It's time for them to adapt.
Instead the "industry" is fighting like hell to continue to produce waste - in fact, they are INCREASING it by making reproduction devices that conflict, DRM schemes that fail miserably and produce false positives, etc. Passing more waste onto the end user. Congratulations, idiots.
if he can make a song out of my manifesto O:)
MY manifesto. I just stole it. Neener neener neener.
So how is that only after 3 days someone who is just sitting there using almost no muscles can die in such a short time?
They don't die of "exhaustion", they probably die of this. Consider that most are probably overweight and have a long history of a sedentary lifestyle.
could you plant for $1300? That's something many environmental types love to ignore.
but if i plant trees then there will be too much shade to run my solar PC, you insensitive clod!
me, it's been a while - maybe I should look up avogadro's number before hitting submit. 6.022 x 10^26 atoms is 1000 moles
Then a kilogram is 1000 moles of Hydrogen, or 6.023 x 10^27 Hydrogen atoms.
. I have a $50 bet with a "nut case" friend of mine that NASA's moon landing was real (he is a real conspiracy theorist - I blame drugs). Once these babies are in position, they'll be able to take nice pictures of the Apollo mission sites.
You can't win an argument with a nutcase. He'll just say that the pics from the Japanese mission are fake, and probably create some conspiracy about the US paying the Japs to "keep the secret". Don't count on that $50.
PvP ship destruction is a resource sink but a money source for most players.
Actually, the premiums are around 1/4 or 1/5 of the insurance payout. The payout also does NOT scale completely with your ship's value. A raven which will cost you around 110M isk will cost around 30M to insure and pays out around 80M. So really all you're getting back for your 110M ship is 50M - half the ship value. Try seeing what a capital ship pays out - much less than what you paid for it.
Also remember that this does NOT include the cost of the modifications. When you buy a ship, you just have a vessel that can go from A to B, but has no offensive/defensive capabilities. These mods cost a LOT of money - and a decent set up will cost you MUCH more than the ship. Getting killed will destroy some of these mods, and the person who killed you will usually sell the rest off at a discount (in order to get his money faster), so this is another sink.