Possibly depends where you are, in central London probably about half the places I buy lunch from, and all the black cabs, take it. Point is, it's distributed enough to prove that it does work.
Unless I'm missing something, don't we already have this widely deployed and used on credit cards? Nearly every debit and credit card in the UK issued now have contactless NFC in them, and lots of places take them. Isn't NFC-on-phone essentially the same thing?
The point is, the only ones claiming monopolies on search are Google's competitors, who casually happen to also run search engines.
The reality is a search engine is just a link to a destination, so unless you are preventing use of other search engines (which is basically impossible) then it's impossible to actually exert monopoly influence on search.
Why would you go through the hassle of making a complain unless you had some interest in it? It's pretty normal that the person making a complaint feels they're being wronged somehow, as oppose to some random guy.
I don't think you really 'get'what it is, there's very little like having a ubiquitous platform that has many hobbiests all clustered around it providing support and enthusiasm.
But that's ok, you don't have to get it, and can continue to not buy it. The rest of us will be having fun with our toys...
With what, money borrowed from China? The US isn't all-powerful, they rely on the cooperation of other nations, we all do. Push it too far and they'll find out.
Selective availability can be turned on by geographic region, in order to degrade the civilian signal. This allows you to only degrade the middle-east, while still maintaining precision position determination for the rest of the world. If the US wants to deny position determination, they would just jam Galileo. I supposed the EU could always send the US a sternly worded letter if that were to occur.
You don't see the difference between the US changing the delivered accuracy of a system they own, and intentionally screwing with others (ie getting close to an act of war)?
Facebook. Amazon has their marketplace and the Kindle. Google has a huge collection of services and the Nexus. Apple has the entire Mac/iStuff ecosystem. Facebook has...Farmville.
...and a pretty comprehensive way of sharing news, photos, organising events, to an extended group of contacts. Why do we constantly have to go through this "Facebook is useless" rubbish? It may be morally questionable. *You* may not use it. But it has a use, and lots of normal intelligent people think so.
Yes, understood, I'm mainly trying to counter Kohath's bizarre assertion that the school system is such a sprawling bureaucracy that homeschooling is cheaper even if you hire your own teacher. There's no way it can be as inefficient as he has decided.
Though, I still say it's an possibility only open to the few, you need to be rich enough to hire someone qualified, or rich enough (less so) to cope with potential lost income, and have a parent or someone available willing to do it and who has the intelligence and skills to teach. And that's not many.
Since you have failed even to attempt some figures to back up your blanket assertions, let's try:
- Rough cost of a teacher... say $40,000.
- Median income for USA household $50,000.
So... out of possibility for the vast majority of households, ie all those below the median and a good number around and above the median. Only the top 20% of households earn more than $88,000, which is the sort of figure you'd need to hire someone to teach your precious darlings and deal with every other bill.
This "huge inefficient system" cannot possibly be anywhere near as much as homeschooling, since the cost of homeschooling is far more expensive than the majority of household's income. (Also, common sense, even with all those "unrequired" people, there are still far more students than staff)
Ah, cool, thanks, you *are* full of bullshit. I wasn't sure.
Perhaps the system you dislike is incredibly inefficient, but since your alternative seems to be "hire a fulltime teacher" which only very few would be able to do (at a cost of what, about $40,000/year?) then you are NOT providing any sort of alternative.
But how would this education work? At some point you're going to tend towards a school again, ie put several students in with one teacher (to make it economically viable) and rotate the (many) students around a smaller number of specialised teachers. And somebody will have to run this, put it in a building with all the admin that is required of running a public building with hundreds of people in it. And then when your students emerge, they will want to have been through a balanced syllabus, which will have to be assessed somehow in a way that is recognised nationwide, so that will have to be standardised somehow, all of which sounds very much like something that a government should be doing.
Not to say that's a perfect system, but handwavingly pronouncing that the current way is bad (with no specifics other than vague fear-driven generalisations), and that anyone could do it better themselves doesn't convince me.
What's a "school system"? I thought a school was a teacher, teaching students something they want to learn. Anyone can hire a teacher to teach anything they want. This "school system" concept you're talking about seems to be a lot of extra nonsense that's only loosely related to teaching or learning. Why do we need to give up our freedom to have a "system" when teachers can teach and students can learn at least as well without it (and for a lot less money)?
Eeesh... It's genuinely frightening that you think that's a workable system...
Smokers get put into a different risk pool than non-smokers - so you're not paying for their insurance . ..
. . . unless you're referring to government health care. In which case maybe you shouldn't be paying for their insurance . ..
. . . by not accepting government health care. This is one of the many reasons why government health care is inappropriate.
Hah... classic. You would rather have a system where you get your freedoms curtailed by a profit-hungry insurance company than a universal government-run healthcare. (and yes, this is about your freedom to do legal things. Everybody has to earn money, so everybody needs a job)
This however, is fast, noisy, pushes science/engineering to its limits, and shoots a massive jet of fire out the back, what's not to love? It gets kids excited,
Fuck, *I* get excited at this. When did we become so boring on this site that we have to defend anything that's not a perfect virtuous environmental project?
Does it provide new insights into the science invlved, such as aerodynamics?
Actually, yes. It's extremely difficult to keep a car level with that much thrust, and not flying or burying itself. Also, before ThrustSSC nobody really knew what would happen with the sonic boom and how it would interact with the ground, reflect back onto the car, etc.
Also... it's *awesome*! Do we stop doing cool stuff because there's no immediate benefit??
Absolutely agree. I'm a developer, and of the few women developers I've worked with, they *all* underestimate themselves. Conversely, many of the men overestimate themselves, but in the job market, arrogance counts. Companies will pay you the minimum they can get away with, and if you have the attitude that you are lucky to have a job you'll be taken advantage of. If you swagger around believing you can walk out into something better any day, it actually tends to rub off on others, and creates a gentle pressure for the company to keep you happy.
I think it's often not sexism, but business. Of course, the fact we bring girls up to not believe in themselves is a bigger problem.
So get one at a company that doesn't do this. Most (the overwhelming majority of) companies do NOT ask for your FB password. Pick one of those. If everyone does, the companies that ask for FB passwords will either go out of business or change their policy.
I changed jobs about 5 months ago, interviewed at 6 companies, and was never once asked for a FB password. It isn't that hard to find a job at a company that doesn't do this.
People need to grow a fucking backbone.
What the hell is wrong with you? Is it really so impossible for you to imagine not everyone is in the same position as you? There simply aren't enough jobs to go around, and some people around the bottom of the pile are in the position of supporting a family, bills, etc and have very limited options.
Slashdot Mirror
Possibly depends where you are, in central London probably about half the places I buy lunch from, and all the black cabs, take it. Point is, it's distributed enough to prove that it does work.
Unless I'm missing something, don't we already have this widely deployed and used on credit cards? Nearly every debit and credit card in the UK issued now have contactless NFC in them, and lots of places take them. Isn't NFC-on-phone essentially the same thing?
The point is, the only ones claiming monopolies on search are Google's competitors, who casually happen to also run search engines.
The reality is a search engine is just a link to a destination, so unless you are preventing use of other search engines (which is basically impossible) then it's impossible to actually exert monopoly influence on search.
Why would you go through the hassle of making a complain unless you had some interest in it? It's pretty normal that the person making a complaint feels they're being wronged somehow, as oppose to some random guy.
I always love this argument.... Why do you *want* a corporation to be making money out of you??
I don't think you really 'get'what it is, there's very little like having a ubiquitous platform that has many hobbiests all clustered around it providing support and enthusiasm.
But that's ok, you don't have to get it, and can continue to not buy it. The rest of us will be having fun with our toys...
With what, money borrowed from China? The US isn't all-powerful, they rely on the cooperation of other nations, we all do. Push it too far and they'll find out.
Selective availability can be turned on by geographic region, in order to degrade the civilian signal. This allows you to only degrade the middle-east, while still maintaining precision position determination for the rest of the world. If the US wants to deny position determination, they would just jam Galileo. I supposed the EU could always send the US a sternly worded letter if that were to occur.
You don't see the difference between the US changing the delivered accuracy of a system they own, and intentionally screwing with others (ie getting close to an act of war)?
No, it isn't. It's just that unlike GPS, the precise part is open to the general public.
Still a pretty good reason for launching then... since if public GPS can't be accurate... the public can't have accurate GPS...
Facebook. Amazon has their marketplace and the Kindle. Google has a huge collection of services and the Nexus. Apple has the entire Mac/iStuff ecosystem. Facebook has...Farmville.
...and a pretty comprehensive way of sharing news, photos, organising events, to an extended group of contacts. Why do we constantly have to go through this "Facebook is useless" rubbish? It may be morally questionable. *You* may not use it. But it has a use, and lots of normal intelligent people think so.
Does anyone know anybody that wasn't able to buy a 3TB hard drive at retail due to BackBlaze's purchases?
Err... how would you know?
Yes, understood, I'm mainly trying to counter Kohath's bizarre assertion that the school system is such a sprawling bureaucracy that homeschooling is cheaper even if you hire your own teacher. There's no way it can be as inefficient as he has decided.
Though, I still say it's an possibility only open to the few, you need to be rich enough to hire someone qualified, or rich enough (less so) to cope with potential lost income, and have a parent or someone available willing to do it and who has the intelligence and skills to teach. And that's not many.
Since you have failed even to attempt some figures to back up your blanket assertions, let's try:
- Rough cost of a teacher... say $40,000.
- Median income for USA household $50,000.
So... out of possibility for the vast majority of households, ie all those below the median and a good number around and above the median. Only the top 20% of households earn more than $88,000, which is the sort of figure you'd need to hire someone to teach your precious darlings and deal with every other bill.
This "huge inefficient system" cannot possibly be anywhere near as much as homeschooling, since the cost of homeschooling is far more expensive than the majority of household's income. (Also, common sense, even with all those "unrequired" people, there are still far more students than staff)
Ah, cool, thanks, you *are* full of bullshit. I wasn't sure.
Perhaps the system you dislike is incredibly inefficient, but since your alternative seems to be "hire a fulltime teacher" which only very few would be able to do (at a cost of what, about $40,000/year?) then you are NOT providing any sort of alternative.
And what of those people who can't afford to hire an entire teacher for their child? I suppose they don't matter?
But how would this education work? At some point you're going to tend towards a school again, ie put several students in with one teacher (to make it economically viable) and rotate the (many) students around a smaller number of specialised teachers. And somebody will have to run this, put it in a building with all the admin that is required of running a public building with hundreds of people in it. And then when your students emerge, they will want to have been through a balanced syllabus, which will have to be assessed somehow in a way that is recognised nationwide, so that will have to be standardised somehow, all of which sounds very much like something that a government should be doing.
Not to say that's a perfect system, but handwavingly pronouncing that the current way is bad (with no specifics other than vague fear-driven generalisations), and that anyone could do it better themselves doesn't convince me.
What's a "school system"? I thought a school was a teacher, teaching students something they want to learn. Anyone can hire a teacher to teach anything they want. This "school system" concept you're talking about seems to be a lot of extra nonsense that's only loosely related to teaching or learning. Why do we need to give up our freedom to have a "system" when teachers can teach and students can learn at least as well without it (and for a lot less money)?
Eeesh... It's genuinely frightening that you think that's a workable system...
Smokers get put into a different risk pool than non-smokers - so you're not paying for their insurance . . .
. . . unless you're referring to government health care. In which case maybe you shouldn't be paying for their insurance . . .
. . . by not accepting government health care. This is one of the many reasons why government health care is inappropriate.
Hah... classic. You would rather have a system where you get your freedoms curtailed by a profit-hungry insurance company than a universal government-run healthcare. (and yes, this is about your freedom to do legal things. Everybody has to earn money, so everybody needs a job)
Land of the free - my arse.
This however, is fast, noisy, pushes science/engineering to its limits, and shoots a massive jet of fire out the back, what's not to love? It gets kids excited,
Fuck, *I* get excited at this. When did we become so boring on this site that we have to defend anything that's not a perfect virtuous environmental project?
Does it provide new insights into the science invlved, such as aerodynamics?
Actually, yes. It's extremely difficult to keep a car level with that much thrust, and not flying or burying itself. Also, before ThrustSSC nobody really knew what would happen with the sonic boom and how it would interact with the ground, reflect back onto the car, etc.
Also... it's *awesome*! Do we stop doing cool stuff because there's no immediate benefit??
No reason why a car specifically has to be wheel-driven, but if you want to make that distinction then there is one for that too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel-driven_land_speed_record
Not as awesome, though.
No... that white is adjusted by our brain to what is most appropriate 'white' for the current light source.
"The EU is behind more positive changes in IT"
Name one mainstream application platform, development environment, or key technology
I'll name three, off the top of my head:
1. The World Wide Web
2. Linux
3. The ARM CPU
Dear cavreader,
Kindly fuck off.
Sincerely,
500 million EU citizens.
Absolutely agree. I'm a developer, and of the few women developers I've worked with, they *all* underestimate themselves. Conversely, many of the men overestimate themselves, but in the job market, arrogance counts. Companies will pay you the minimum they can get away with, and if you have the attitude that you are lucky to have a job you'll be taken advantage of. If you swagger around believing you can walk out into something better any day, it actually tends to rub off on others, and creates a gentle pressure for the company to keep you happy.
I think it's often not sexism, but business. Of course, the fact we bring girls up to not believe in themselves is a bigger problem.
So get one at a company that doesn't do this. Most (the overwhelming majority of) companies do NOT ask for your FB password. Pick one of those. If everyone does, the companies that ask for FB passwords will either go out of business or change their policy.
I changed jobs about 5 months ago, interviewed at 6 companies, and was never once asked for a FB password. It isn't that hard to find a job at a company that doesn't do this.
People need to grow a fucking backbone.
What the hell is wrong with you? Is it really so impossible for you to imagine not everyone is in the same position as you? There simply aren't enough jobs to go around, and some people around the bottom of the pile are in the position of supporting a family, bills, etc and have very limited options.