It is also bad math. Just about every paragraph assumes that the rate of X was always the same as it is now without using any historical data to make that argument.
Imagine you run a movie theater. You hire a guy to stand at the door and instruct him that when people come up and say "Can I pretty please watch this movie that is playing in theater 3 right now" he should say yes, open the door, and let them in.
Now imagine that you send legal threats to the people who asked and were granted admission, and your argument is "I didn't mean to tell my employee to let you in."
---
Imagine you run a movie streaming company. You buy a web server and instruct it that when people send a request asking to stream the movie at/foo/bar.mpg it should say yes, and start streaming the movie?
Now imagine that you send legal threats to the people who asked and were granted access to the stream, and your argument is "I didn't mean to configure my web server to give you the stream."
---
Hacking would be when you tap the employee on the shoulder from behind, hit him with a bat when he turns around, and go watch the movie.
Is there compelling evidence either for or against [the ability to make] genetic determination of homosexuality?
On the issue of psychological well-being - I don't think you can have any kind of scientific study of the effects on psychological well-being without a solid definition of psychological well-being, and I don't think you'll have enough people agree on a definition to make any results widely accepted. Half the people will want to stick in something about being tolerant and accepting of other people's beliefs about such things as homosexuality, and the other half will want to stick in something about holding on to one's beliefs about such things in the face of the acceptance by the other half. It sounds like a good topic for a flame war, so lets drop that for now.
I spent about half an hour on the phone with them to complain when I first noticed this last week. Nobody that they let us unimportant residential customers talk to even knew what a DNS server was, but the rep talked with me until she got enough down on paper that she could use to file a complaint to the higher-ups. Hopefully if enough people do this, they will stop.
Oh, wait, they have a government granted monopoly. My only alternatives are slow and really slow.
Call and complain to your elected representatives.
I also had a case where you would have found my seat out and my floorboards soaked. I left my passenger window open one day and it rained. Hard. Soaked seat and floorboards. A short time later, I took the seat out to replace the broken seatbelt, and it was out for some time.
That you mentioned India might come up with a solution reminds me of a book I read that discusses in the context of game theory (primarily Prisoner's Dilemma) why people (Indians in particular) make poor decisions as far as society is concerned to maximize personal returns.
"Games Indians Play" by V. Raghunathan ISBN: 9780670999408
They probably did a cost analysis and determined that it was cheaper to deal with the lawsuits than to upgrade their infrastructure. There is little risk of losing their customers, because in most markets they have no competition.
You can buy your natural gas from one provider and have it delivered by the one with the local monopoly on the pipes. Why can't we do this with internet connections?
A religion is a bunch of ideas. A bunch of ideas is not an establishment.
"The Orthodox Church In America" is an establishment of a set of religion ideas (Christianity) as "The United States of America" is an establishment of a set of political ideas (democracy).
Calling it a theory implies that it might not be true, which implies that something else might be true, which implies that an unscientific religious belief might be true, which implies that religion X might be true, which might constitute state support of religion X.
Of course, there is nothing prohibiting state support for religion X, only state support for "an establishment" of religion X.[1] But we are too dumb to tell the difference between "Christianity" and "The Orthodox Church In America" or the "Westboro Baptist Church", so we must not have the government, or anything government sanctioned or funded, do anything that might imply something that might imply something that might imply something that might imply something that might say that a particular religious belief is true, because next thing you know, the pope will be calling the shots. Really, that is what will happen. Screw the definitions of words, and established scientific terminology, we have to protect Amerika from the religious fanatics!
Honestly, I have no idea what the problem is, but a lot of people have their panties all up in a bunch.
[1] Don't believe me? Go read the constitution. Don't like it? Contact your government representatives. Don't flame me, I didn't write the constitution, nor do I necessarily agree with it[2]. [2] If you want to know what I think, I think the government should get out of the public education business.
The idea of word-of-mouth advertising doesn't mean much to you, does it?
Nope. Most talkers are ignorant an/or stupid, and most listeners are more convinced by glitzy advertisements and too-good-to-be-true-because-they're-not deals than by other customers. It seems that most large companies agree with me.
Based on the number of posters on./ full of complaints that big-company-x has terrible products and terrible customer service, but they just can't convince their friends and family, I'd say they agree with me too.
Aha, but there is the reason why nobody uses his system. His system is designed to reduce effort and increase results. This means that the users will have to visit the site less, and stop using it earlier. This means fewer page hits, fewer users, fewer subscribers. This means less profit. The dating services are not in the business of hooking people up, they are in the business of selling subscriptions and advertisements. You get more page hits (more ads) and more subscription fees by _not_ doing a good job of hooking people up.
There are only a few problems with this: 1) Non-ancestor relationships and references (i.e., having the same node as multiple locations in the XML document) are not covered by XML, but are possible with objects.
You can with refids and keys.
but with a more effecient format (binary)
It is wonderful to be able to easily read and edit the data in a text editor. If you want it more compact for storage and transmission, compress it. I understand that a binary format could lead to more efficient processing and parsing, but I think the benefits of readable text outweigh the efficiency.
You are misunderstanding the whole idea of the incentive. There is incentive to create something in the first place because even though you won't see a return for some amount of time while you are doing the work, you will get a return for some time after you've done the work. After the work is done, the incentive is for the *next* project, not the previous.
Should the programmer get money every time is program is used? For the rest of his life?
What does that question have to do with anything? If I buy a record, the artist does not get paid for each of the thousands of times I play it during his lifetime.
Answer:
It depends on the contract he negotiated with the purchaser. If the purchaser agreed to pay each time the program runs, that is none of our business.
Slashdot Mirror
You didn't get very far before breaking your own rule.
It is also bad math. Just about every paragraph assumes that the rate of X was always the same as it is now without using any historical data to make that argument.
Imagine you run a movie theater. You hire a guy to stand at the door and instruct him that when people come up and say "Can I pretty please watch this movie that is playing in theater 3 right now" he should say yes, open the door, and let them in.
/foo/bar.mpg it should say yes, and start streaming the movie?
Now imagine that you send legal threats to the people who asked and were granted admission, and your argument is "I didn't mean to tell my employee to let you in."
---
Imagine you run a movie streaming company. You buy a web server and instruct it that when people send a request asking to stream the movie at
Now imagine that you send legal threats to the people who asked and were granted access to the stream, and your argument is "I didn't mean to configure my web server to give you the stream."
---
Hacking would be when you tap the employee on the shoulder from behind, hit him with a bat when he turns around, and go watch the movie.
Is there compelling evidence either for or against [the ability to make] genetic determination of homosexuality?
On the issue of psychological well-being - I don't think you can have any kind of scientific study of the effects on psychological well-being without a solid definition of psychological well-being, and I don't think you'll have enough people agree on a definition to make any results widely accepted. Half the people will want to stick in something about being tolerant and accepting of other people's beliefs about such things as homosexuality, and the other half will want to stick in something about holding on to one's beliefs about such things in the face of the acceptance by the other half. It sounds like a good topic for a flame war, so lets drop that for now.
What scientific material about homosexuality might be taught that would be controversial?
(I'm not flaming or flame-baiting, I'm just curious. I am quite ignorant about the subject.)
Sadly, the GP is correct. Might makes right. That is the way it has always been, and the way it will always be.
The Democrats got the majority in both houses. They can end the wars. But they don't. It won't be better for us, it will be more of the same.
I spent about half an hour on the phone with them to complain when I first noticed this last week. Nobody that they let us unimportant residential customers talk to even knew what a DNS server was, but the rep talked with me until she got enough down on paper that she could use to file a complaint to the higher-ups. Hopefully if enough people do this, they will stop.
Oh, wait, they have a government granted monopoly. My only alternatives are slow and really slow.
Call and complain to your elected representatives.
Damn religious zealots. When I forget to pick up my wine for communion on Saturday, I'm SOL the next morning.
I also had a case where you would have found my seat out and my floorboards soaked. I left my passenger window open one day and it rained. Hard. Soaked seat and floorboards. A short time later, I took the seat out to replace the broken seatbelt, and it was out for some time.
That you mentioned India might come up with a solution reminds me of a book I read that discusses in the context of game theory (primarily Prisoner's Dilemma) why people (Indians in particular) make poor decisions as far as society is concerned to maximize personal returns.
"Games Indians Play" by V. Raghunathan
ISBN: 9780670999408
They probably did a cost analysis and determined that it was cheaper to deal with the lawsuits than to upgrade their infrastructure. There is little risk of losing their customers, because in most markets they have no competition.
You can buy your natural gas from one provider and have it delivered by the one with the local monopoly on the pipes. Why can't we do this with internet connections?
There is no security guard. If my computer is turned on, I stay with it. If somebody starts breaking into my house, I turn the computer off.
No. I was alerted by your impending arrival 30 seconds beforehand, so I shut it off.
If you got to the machine before powering down you can read the memory anyway. This is to protect against reads _after_ the machine is shut down.
But, presumably, the battery (or more likely, a capacitor) would be integral to the memory unit.
A religion is a bunch of ideas. A bunch of ideas is not an establishment.
"The Orthodox Church In America" is an establishment of a set of religion ideas (Christianity) as "The United States of America" is an establishment of a set of political ideas (democracy).
Calling it a theory implies that it might not be true, which implies that something else might be true, which implies that an unscientific religious belief might be true, which implies that religion X might be true, which might constitute state support of religion X.
Of course, there is nothing prohibiting state support for religion X, only state support for "an establishment" of religion X.[1] But we are too dumb to tell the difference between "Christianity" and "The Orthodox Church In America" or the "Westboro Baptist Church", so we must not have the government, or anything government sanctioned or funded, do anything that might imply something that might imply something that might imply something that might imply something that might say that a particular religious belief is true, because next thing you know, the pope will be calling the shots. Really, that is what will happen. Screw the definitions of words, and established scientific terminology, we have to protect Amerika from the religious fanatics!
Honestly, I have no idea what the problem is, but a lot of people have their panties all up in a bunch.
[1] Don't believe me? Go read the constitution. Don't like it? Contact your government representatives. Don't flame me, I didn't write the constitution, nor do I necessarily agree with it[2].
[2] If you want to know what I think, I think the government should get out of the public education business.
Ignore that. I misread your post.
Are you saying that a rotor system powered by the falling weight produces _more_ energy than the falling weight can supply?
Based on the number of posters on
"Wants To Make A Million Bucks"
Aha, but there is the reason why nobody uses his system. His system is designed to reduce effort and increase results. This means that the users will have to visit the site less, and stop using it earlier. This means fewer page hits, fewer users, fewer subscribers. This means less profit. The dating services are not in the business of hooking people up, they are in the business of selling subscriptions and advertisements. You get more page hits (more ads) and more subscription fees by _not_ doing a good job of hooking people up.
You are misunderstanding the whole idea of the incentive. There is incentive to create something in the first place because even though you won't see a return for some amount of time while you are doing the work, you will get a return for some time after you've done the work. After the work is done, the incentive is for the *next* project, not the previous.
It is more than visual clues. There is a huge sound quality loss over the phone, and your brain has to work a lot harder to process the information.
Answer:
It depends on the contract he negotiated with the purchaser. If the purchaser agreed to pay each time the program runs, that is none of our business.