Your article is probably correct. Too bad you had to try so hard to make it "edgy" with the language. I don't have anything against using fuck or whatever, but overusing obscenity ends up making the words useless and powerless distractions from the actual point of your message. And it makes you sound like a fucking teenager.
And I agree- they definitely better not put a clock on it.
Yeah I know TiVO is big, my friends have them. I also see MCE and some Linux solutions. The first is proprietary and the other two require work on my end to have something that both looks decent and might actually work.
So you dismissed the TiVo because it's proprietary and yet would like a DVR from Apple? I seriously doubt whatever Apple releases will be any less proprietary than TiVo...
It's not just Flash though. Even if none of the pages you open have Flash on them, if you open a few tabs and leave the browser window open for a while it will soon eat up as much RAM as it can. 150-200+ MB. Besides, even if it were the Flash plugin, there is apparently some sort of sandboxing in IE that keeps it from sucking up all the memory. There's no reason why the plugin should perform any differently in FF than in IE.
How is this impressive, when Joe Kittinger rode a balloon up to 102,800 feet (31.3km) and then parachuted out of it, breaking the speed of sound with just his body?
Re:You don't understand Google's ad ranking
on
Who's Afraid of Google?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
a company that paid searchers for clicking on the advertisements would be offering a less valuable product to the company buying the advertising. this business model has been tried before (alladvantage.com) and failed. they get flooded with people clicking just for the money and not actually interested in purchasing anything, and you're paying for all of them, vs paying the same amount per click for people who aren't just clicking for money, but are actually interested in making a purchase.
I mean, I'm all for competition, but I can't say that I think the price legos deliver at, around 1c US per brick in the generic bins of bricks is, you know, out of line.
I'd like to know where you get a 1000-piece lego set for $10. They seem to be locked at $15.
Come down to Houston! There's plenty of adventure here, as well as places to just hang out, without having to live in some cookie-cutter McMansion or drive 500 miles/wk. Ft Worth sucks.
In the inner-city, you have no guarantee that you'll see like-minded people, an exhibit or film that's worth the $$, or eat food that will not disappoint or make you ill.
This is true, but there are no guarantees about that anywhere. However, a big city offers a lot more opportunities for that food, exhibit, or film to be worthwhile. In your small town, if none of the few restaurants in town satisfy you, you're just screwed, but in a city there are always new places to try.
Live in the city. Work in the city. Demand less cluttery crap and the space cluttery crap requires.
Funny, that is what I think of in metro areas. Plus all the people going to these places.
That's suburbia. The outer edges of large cities and large numbers of rural areas are practically all the same suburban McWorld. In real urban areas the property values tend to be too high and the existing local competition too stif for big corporate chains to consider it worth the risk when there are miles and miles of brand-spankin' new families in their generic houses out there in the middle of nowhere on their cheap land waiting for establishments to frequent. New local establishments hardly stand a chance when competing against the marketing and brand recognition of the corporate places.
I live in the middle of Houston and don't own a car- there are at least 4 coffee shops, none of which are Starbucks, and a whole bunch of great restaurants, none of which are a Chili's, all within walking distance of my apartment. Double the number of places if traveling by bike. I can get to work by bus in 15-20 min. I can go through everyday life and never have to think about parking, the cost of gas, car insurance, or repairs. And Houston isn't even a very good city as far as sprawl and mass-transit go. Places that did more of their development pre-WWII/suburbia, like New York City, Chicago, DC, etc, are much denser and tend to offer even more within walking distance.
The big thing is that it's better for you to be surrounded by your fellow people on a daily basis than being as isolated as one tends to be in the suburban/rural lifestyle, and that a larger population means a higher probability of their being a viable market for something with limited appeal. If you like something that only 1 in 1,000 people find interesting, you may have a hard time finding it in a town of 5,000 people -a business catering to you and the 4 others in town who find that product interesting just wouldn't work- but in a city of 5,000,000 there would be 4,999 other people interested in that product. Places like NYC have businesses which cater to the most obscure tastes.
Let's not also forget about the advantages for dating. Say there is maybe 1% of the available female population my age that I am attracted to, and probably an even smaller percentage of those for whom the feeling is mutual. I stand a significantly better chance of meeting someone and hitting it off in a town full of thousands of people my age than in some tiny hamlet.
I'm not saying living in a rural area is without merit- having space, peace and quiet, cleaner air, being able to see the stars -all wonderful things. It just depends on where you are in life and what you're looking for. My main intention was to respond to the OP's questioning of the urban life as though there was nothing good about it.
I don't know about you, but I like having things to do besides go to chain restaurants, mega multiplexes and Wal-Mart. Having a huge house full of electronic crap doesn't interest me, either. I want to live somewhere where I can see artwork, theater, museums, etc., where I'm surrounded by a variety of interesting people my age to talk to. Not to mention somewhere with lots of businesses, so that if I lose my present job I'm not stuck in the middle of nowhere. What good is a big cookie-cutter house in BFE when there's little to no cultural activity going on out there?
it still benefits the consumers, does it not, if the huge amounts of money going to lawyers and the bad publicity act as a disincentive to such behavior?
I would think that after testing positive, and thus being fully aware of the horrible fear that likely accompanies such a diagnosis, anyone with an ounce of love for humanity would do everything in their power to keep others from going through the same thing.
Ooh- while we're going pie-in-the sky, maybe we could get the UN to implement the tax and have it develop a worldwide internet infrastructure! Then the companies can't escape paying it, and it will bring the internet everywhere! As far as who counts as a business, basically any taxable revenue over the internet could be taxed at a certain percentage. I dunno... that's for the gov't bigwigs to figure out. Imagine how cool it would be to have a VOIP-like phone that worked anywhere in the world for free!
What if we had a wireless internet infrastructure fee that was charged to businesses operating over the internet and then applied toward building a national wireless network? Maybe that smacks of big government scariness, but it seems like the only way to get widespread internet coverage beyond waiting for every municipality to do it one by one or waiting for the cellular companies to do it. Universal high-speed wireless internet access would do so much in the way of communication and the economy, it would be worth it.
Oh, I know. I was just pointing out that the issue is not one of having to support 3rd party hardware. They already support a wide variety of 3rd party hardware. Like you said- they're a hardware company. And that's smart- software can easily be copied and made available to the world for free in no time, and you're constantly having to fight that if you're in the software business. But if you just use it to sell your hardware and can keep running your software on others' hardware non-trivial, far fewer people are as inclined to take a physical object from a store than are inclined to copy files.
Couldn't they just have a "OSX Certified" hardware program, where vendors get to put a logo on the product once it meets some rigorous testing requirements? This isn't a big issue. They don't have to promise to support everything. Most new stuff is USB anyway, and is thus probably already supported. How often do you think the average computer owner puts a new PCI card in their computer? How about never?
Sure, you can act against them. Something has to be done. But deciding that they're just idiots who deserve what they get is to ignore the fact that they're ordinary people like you and me who did what their experience told them was the thing to do in their situation. You can't say that you wouldn't do the exact same thing, because you haven't lived their life. To believe anyone is inferior for behaving the way they do is to ignore your good fortune in being presented with a set of experiences that lead you to act in a way more compatible with societal mores.
Anyway, as the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of the cure. There are certainly social mechanisms that could be implemented to help integrate people into society that would be less costly than dealing with rioting and then subsequent imprisonment.
Precisely. In other words, people do things because they want to. Why did that guy do that thing? Because he wanted to.
Okay, you're missing my point- does one choose to want to do something? You decide to do something (and thus WANT to do it) because you percieve it as being productive toward achieving some goal (as well as perceiving it as not being disruptive of any other goals you have, unless that disruption is a price you deem worth paying). Whether or not it is actually productive is irrelevant. If the sum of your experience tells you, for some reason or another, you WILL do it.
That's what I mean by rationalization. Not externally rational. I'm not talking about justifying it to other people. The point is that whatever the behavior, it is the apparent rational choice to the actor based on their experience, regardless of how evil or unjustified it is. You can't fault someone for what their experience tells them, you can only hope to create a world where people are more likely to have experiences that inform them well and lead them to make externally rational decisions that are productive to the society as a whole.
I hope you're kidding. That has to be the most retarded reason I've ever heard for breaking up with someone. If I were her, I'd break up with you just on principle for issuing an ultimatum like that.
I don't know if "driven" is the right word to use, but I think when people do bad things, it tends to be because they find themselves in a position where it seems like the best option for them. Consider the bad things you've done in your life, and tell me that you didn't have an entirely logical rationalization for them. You may know something is a bad thing to do, but end up doing it because you got it in your head somehow that it will achieve something more important. People don't make decisions so much as consider the information that they have at hand and do what seems like the best thing to do. They may be woefully misinformed by bad experiences and whatnot, and thus totally misguided in their actions, but it's not something that can be helped.
I'm sure if you saw all the people of your kind living in poverty on the outskirts of town and treated like second-class citizens, saw no opportunity to improve your standing in the world, and then saw that some people like you were killed while running away from the cops who harass you on a regular basis, you might be inclined to riot as well.
Is that the best course of action? It's hard to say- they certainly have drawn attention to their plight. It may not achieve the results they desire, but they may not know any better. Don't be so quick to judge.
Slashdot Mirror
Your article is probably correct. Too bad you had to try so hard to make it "edgy" with the language. I don't have anything against using fuck or whatever, but overusing obscenity ends up making the words useless and powerless distractions from the actual point of your message. And it makes you sound like a fucking teenager.
And I agree- they definitely better not put a clock on it.
Yeah I know TiVO is big, my friends have them. I also see MCE and some Linux solutions. The first is proprietary and the other two require work on my end to have something that both looks decent and might actually work.
So you dismissed the TiVo because it's proprietary and yet would like a DVR from Apple? I seriously doubt whatever Apple releases will be any less proprietary than TiVo...
It's not just Flash though. Even if none of the pages you open have Flash on them, if you open a few tabs and leave the browser window open for a while it will soon eat up as much RAM as it can. 150-200+ MB. Besides, even if it were the Flash plugin, there is apparently some sort of sandboxing in IE that keeps it from sucking up all the memory. There's no reason why the plugin should perform any differently in FF than in IE.
How is this impressive, when Joe Kittinger rode a balloon up to 102,800 feet (31.3km) and then parachuted out of it, breaking the speed of sound with just his body?
a company that paid searchers for clicking on the advertisements would be offering a less valuable product to the company buying the advertising. this business model has been tried before (alladvantage.com) and failed. they get flooded with people clicking just for the money and not actually interested in purchasing anything, and you're paying for all of them, vs paying the same amount per click for people who aren't just clicking for money, but are actually interested in making a purchase.
I mean, I'm all for competition, but I can't say that I think the price legos deliver at, around 1c US per brick in the generic bins of bricks is, you know, out of line.
I'd like to know where you get a 1000-piece lego set for $10. They seem to be locked at $15.
any sufficiently idiotic Presidency is indistinguishable from magic.
Come down to Houston! There's plenty of adventure here, as well as places to just hang out, without having to live in some cookie-cutter McMansion or drive 500 miles/wk. Ft Worth sucks.
In the inner-city, you have no guarantee that you'll see like-minded people, an exhibit or film that's worth the $$, or eat food that will not disappoint or make you ill.
This is true, but there are no guarantees about that anywhere. However, a big city offers a lot more opportunities for that food, exhibit, or film to be worthwhile. In your small town, if none of the few restaurants in town satisfy you, you're just screwed, but in a city there are always new places to try.
Live in the city. Work in the city. Demand less cluttery crap and the space cluttery crap requires.
Funny, that is what I think of in metro areas. Plus all the people going to these places.
That's suburbia. The outer edges of large cities and large numbers of rural areas are practically all the same suburban McWorld. In real urban areas the property values tend to be too high and the existing local competition too stif for big corporate chains to consider it worth the risk when there are miles and miles of brand-spankin' new families in their generic houses out there in the middle of nowhere on their cheap land waiting for establishments to frequent. New local establishments hardly stand a chance when competing against the marketing and brand recognition of the corporate places.
I live in the middle of Houston and don't own a car- there are at least 4 coffee shops, none of which are Starbucks, and a whole bunch of great restaurants, none of which are a Chili's, all within walking distance of my apartment. Double the number of places if traveling by bike. I can get to work by bus in 15-20 min. I can go through everyday life and never have to think about parking, the cost of gas, car insurance, or repairs. And Houston isn't even a very good city as far as sprawl and mass-transit go. Places that did more of their development pre-WWII/suburbia, like New York City, Chicago, DC, etc, are much denser and tend to offer even more within walking distance.
The big thing is that it's better for you to be surrounded by your fellow people on a daily basis than being as isolated as one tends to be in the suburban/rural lifestyle, and that a larger population means a higher probability of their being a viable market for something with limited appeal. If you like something that only 1 in 1,000 people find interesting, you may have a hard time finding it in a town of 5,000 people -a business catering to you and the 4 others in town who find that product interesting just wouldn't work- but in a city of 5,000,000 there would be 4,999 other people interested in that product. Places like NYC have businesses which cater to the most obscure tastes.
Let's not also forget about the advantages for dating. Say there is maybe 1% of the available female population my age that I am attracted to, and probably an even smaller percentage of those for whom the feeling is mutual. I stand a significantly better chance of meeting someone and hitting it off in a town full of thousands of people my age than in some tiny hamlet.
I'm not saying living in a rural area is without merit- having space, peace and quiet, cleaner air, being able to see the stars -all wonderful things. It just depends on where you are in life and what you're looking for. My main intention was to respond to the OP's questioning of the urban life as though there was nothing good about it.
I don't know about you, but I like having things to do besides go to chain restaurants, mega multiplexes and Wal-Mart. Having a huge house full of electronic crap doesn't interest me, either. I want to live somewhere where I can see artwork, theater, museums, etc., where I'm surrounded by a variety of interesting people my age to talk to. Not to mention somewhere with lots of businesses, so that if I lose my present job I'm not stuck in the middle of nowhere. What good is a big cookie-cutter house in BFE when there's little to no cultural activity going on out there?
it still benefits the consumers, does it not, if the huge amounts of money going to lawyers and the bad publicity act as a disincentive to such behavior?
Somehow I can't believe there were no lawschool students in the hub. Seems as if they liked gratis pr()n but not the pro bono work. Shame on them!
They were more pro boner than pro bono, I guess...
Ok, I apologize, that was retarded...
midgets
African ducks are non-migratory.
I would think that after testing positive, and thus being fully aware of the horrible fear that likely accompanies such a diagnosis, anyone with an ounce of love for humanity would do everything in their power to keep others from going through the same thing.
Ooh- while we're going pie-in-the sky, maybe we could get the UN to implement the tax and have it develop a worldwide internet infrastructure! Then the companies can't escape paying it, and it will bring the internet everywhere! As far as who counts as a business, basically any taxable revenue over the internet could be taxed at a certain percentage. I dunno... that's for the gov't bigwigs to figure out. Imagine how cool it would be to have a VOIP-like phone that worked anywhere in the world for free!
What if we had a wireless internet infrastructure fee that was charged to businesses operating over the internet and then applied toward building a national wireless network? Maybe that smacks of big government scariness, but it seems like the only way to get widespread internet coverage beyond waiting for every municipality to do it one by one or waiting for the cellular companies to do it. Universal high-speed wireless internet access would do so much in the way of communication and the economy, it would be worth it.
Oh, I know. I was just pointing out that the issue is not one of having to support 3rd party hardware. They already support a wide variety of 3rd party hardware. Like you said- they're a hardware company. And that's smart- software can easily be copied and made available to the world for free in no time, and you're constantly having to fight that if you're in the software business. But if you just use it to sell your hardware and can keep running your software on others' hardware non-trivial, far fewer people are as inclined to take a physical object from a store than are inclined to copy files.
D'oh! I want my OSX tablet, dammit!
Couldn't they just have a "OSX Certified" hardware program, where vendors get to put a logo on the product once it meets some rigorous testing requirements? This isn't a big issue. They don't have to promise to support everything. Most new stuff is USB anyway, and is thus probably already supported. How often do you think the average computer owner puts a new PCI card in their computer? How about never?
Has anyone tried it on a Tecra M4 Tablet convertible? I wonder if inkwell would work with the display. That would be schweeeeet!
Sure, you can act against them. Something has to be done. But deciding that they're just idiots who deserve what they get is to ignore the fact that they're ordinary people like you and me who did what their experience told them was the thing to do in their situation. You can't say that you wouldn't do the exact same thing, because you haven't lived their life. To believe anyone is inferior for behaving the way they do is to ignore your good fortune in being presented with a set of experiences that lead you to act in a way more compatible with societal mores.
Anyway, as the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of the cure. There are certainly social mechanisms that could be implemented to help integrate people into society that would be less costly than dealing with rioting and then subsequent imprisonment.
Precisely. In other words, people do things because they want to. Why did that guy do that thing? Because he wanted to.
Okay, you're missing my point- does one choose to want to do something? You decide to do something (and thus WANT to do it) because you percieve it as being productive toward achieving some goal (as well as perceiving it as not being disruptive of any other goals you have, unless that disruption is a price you deem worth paying). Whether or not it is actually productive is irrelevant. If the sum of your experience tells you, for some reason or another, you WILL do it.
That's what I mean by rationalization. Not externally rational. I'm not talking about justifying it to other people. The point is that whatever the behavior, it is the apparent rational choice to the actor based on their experience, regardless of how evil or unjustified it is. You can't fault someone for what their experience tells them, you can only hope to create a world where people are more likely to have experiences that inform them well and lead them to make externally rational decisions that are productive to the society as a whole.
I hope you're kidding. That has to be the most retarded reason I've ever heard for breaking up with someone. If I were her, I'd break up with you just on principle for issuing an ultimatum like that.
I don't know if "driven" is the right word to use, but I think when people do bad things, it tends to be because they find themselves in a position where it seems like the best option for them. Consider the bad things you've done in your life, and tell me that you didn't have an entirely logical rationalization for them. You may know something is a bad thing to do, but end up doing it because you got it in your head somehow that it will achieve something more important. People don't make decisions so much as consider the information that they have at hand and do what seems like the best thing to do. They may be woefully misinformed by bad experiences and whatnot, and thus totally misguided in their actions, but it's not something that can be helped.
I'm sure if you saw all the people of your kind living in poverty on the outskirts of town and treated like second-class citizens, saw no opportunity to improve your standing in the world, and then saw that some people like you were killed while running away from the cops who harass you on a regular basis, you might be inclined to riot as well.
Is that the best course of action? It's hard to say- they certainly have drawn attention to their plight. It may not achieve the results they desire, but they may not know any better. Don't be so quick to judge.