I would like to see another column added, which would tally the market cap or net worth or some other statistic relating how much money these corporations have. What are we up against? It looks like a lot...
1. That's power usage during game play. 2. What year is the article posted? I can't find a date listed. The newer Xbox360 and PS3 models are more efficient than the older models.
I live in a US city that's not in the top 10. Is it big? By some standards, I guess. What does it matter? Part of my decision to live where I am revolves around transportation costs, rent, and so forth. These are supposedly "market driven." I can live elsewhere, if the cost of living or some other factor there suits me more. People who choose to live in a rural place should pay for the consequence that mail is more expensive to deliver, just like people in NYC pay high rent.
Oh, then we should make sending mail free, as a public service. Wait, that's not what you meant? Of course it's a public service, but that doesn't mean we can't use a more rational means to support it.
They can still take a few cues from business. For example, charge more for rural delivery. Why should a letter to Middle-of-Nowhere Alaska cost the same as one to New York City? To put this another way, why should peope who live in NYC subsidize mail delivery to Alaska?
I could read PDFs in full-screen. 14" diagonal is about equivalent to 8.5"x11". As a scientist, half of what I do seems to be reading articles in PDF format.
Similarly, if someone moderates a comment up, it gains visibility, creating a feedback loop.
Maybe we need a logarithmic moderation point system. That is, going from 1 to 2 requires 1 mod point, 2 to 3 requires 2 points, 3 to 4 requires 4 points, and 4 to 5 requires 8 points. This allows for more dynamic range in differentiating a 3 from a 5, but doesn't make the apparent value skyrocket, like it would in a linear system. A 5 would still look like a 5, but be spaced out 12 points from a 3 instead of 2 points. It also would make it harder to "bury" a post. Once thing many have noticed, myself included, is that there are more +5 posts than +4 or +3, so this system would (potentially) curtail that somewhat.
I'm sure this idea has its own flaws, but it's worth something.
I've never been to Thailand, so maybe they really are enamored with the king. However, when it's illegal to say otherwise, who won't say they love the king? This reminds me of Napoleon Bonaparte's election, where voting consisted of checking yes or no to the question "Do you vote for Napoleon? Sign here."
Not only that, but the captivating example of Mr. Fikri is made up. I bet their system will never work as intended, but rather drain billions of dollars from taxpayers (which is arguably what was really intended). In the end, the system will be used to catch petty criminals and to further erode our rights, while the risks of terrorism remain less than of car accidents.
I agree. Lawyers are trained to argue an opinion regardless of its validity. People who learn to debate are rewarded on their ability to argue, not on whether or not they are right. It shouldn't be surprising, then, that we are surrounded by people in government and politics promoting ideologies and denying facts all the time.
If they lose customers, but get more money per customer, it can work to Netflix's advantage big time. Their costs are mostly on bandwidth, and if they lose 1 million customers, that's 1 million fewer people to feed data to. That amounts to major cost cutting, so even if revenues drop a little but are offset by lower costs then they win.
You don't have to play the game. There's a free market of video games out there, and it's large. If a developer uses these transactions and becomes unpopular for it, they'll get a bad reputation and people will stop buying the games.
One is unconcerned with the principle, the other differs from an accepted societal norm. The latter could change depending on the society, the former doesn't care.
Since you're in the middle of nowhere, the cost of losing your car is ever so much greater. Therefore, it makes sense to protect your car. Cost/benefit.
Polymorphic Software
Prerequisite: Industrial Base, Information Networks
Technology: Advanced Subatomic Theory, Optical Computers, Adaptive Doctrine
Special Ability: Heavy Artillery
Improves Probe Team success rate.
Track and Level: Discover 2
"Technological advance is an inherently iterative process. One does not simply take sand from the beach and produce a Dataprobe. We use crude tools to fashion better tools, and then our better tools to fashion more precise tools, and so on. Each minor refinement is a step in the process, and all of the steps must be taken."
-- Chairman Sheng-ji Yang,
"Looking God in the Eye"
I've had an app called "Congress" installed for a while. It allows you to do this for all members of congress, it lists all recent legislation, you can see where and what shape districts are... It's a good step in making our government more accessible. Communication with our representatives should be accessible.
What terribly useless degree did I get? I got a B.S. in biology. I have a Masters in genetics. I'm currently in a top PhD program in biology. I have two publications, both from undergraduate research. But my qualifications have no relation to my argument - I learned that in philosophy 101, reasoning & argument.
The more relevant point: I went to a small liberal arts school. I took classes in music, English, philosophy, the sciences, foreign languages, economics... and I'm a more informed, well-rounded person because of it. I'm also a better critical thinker, and I can write coherently and express ideas (something not taken for granted these days, unfortunately). If I choose to go the academic route, the pay will pale with respect to the amount of time and effort I'll put in, and I'll be okay with that because I enjoy the subject.
Of course you're going to learn skills and knowledge that pertain to your field of interest while in college. My point is I didn't go to college to become a biologist, I went to college and came out prepared to become a biologist (hence the graduate school afterwards), and also an educated member of society. The field of biology is poised to undergo some of the biggest changes yet, and any set of skills that I'll learn today (microarrays, sequencing gels, etc.) are bound to be out of date in 20 years. Those aren't the important skills that I learned, but that's what a vocational training teaches.
The point of getting a degree from college isn't to learn vocational skills, it's to more generally broaden yourself and to learn how to learn. The whole notion that your degree should directly influence your earnings is reflective of how today many people go to college to get vocational training. If you want to teach mathematics, you shouldn't get an education degree in college, you should get a mathematics degree, and then go on to teaching from there. If you want to go into business, learn some more fundamental skills like statistics and critical thinking, intern over your summers, and then go to business school for your MBA.
Perhaps even more troubling is the notion that the sole goal in life is to make more money. What about doing a job that you enjoy, even if it pays less?
Slashdot Mirror
Stop giving money to the oil companies, and then maybe solar can compete. I'm not surpised at the turmoil at all.
I would like to see another column added, which would tally the market cap or net worth or some other statistic relating how much money these corporations have. What are we up against? It looks like a lot...
1. That's power usage during game play. 2. What year is the article posted? I can't find a date listed. The newer Xbox360 and PS3 models are more efficient than the older models.
I live in a US city that's not in the top 10. Is it big? By some standards, I guess. What does it matter? Part of my decision to live where I am revolves around transportation costs, rent, and so forth. These are supposedly "market driven." I can live elsewhere, if the cost of living or some other factor there suits me more. People who choose to live in a rural place should pay for the consequence that mail is more expensive to deliver, just like people in NYC pay high rent.
Oh, then we should make sending mail free, as a public service. Wait, that's not what you meant? Of course it's a public service, but that doesn't mean we can't use a more rational means to support it.
They can still take a few cues from business. For example, charge more for rural delivery. Why should a letter to Middle-of-Nowhere Alaska cost the same as one to New York City? To put this another way, why should peope who live in NYC subsidize mail delivery to Alaska?
Bush won because the judges said so. That's how it officially went. The votes hadn't all been tallied yet.
I could read PDFs in full-screen. 14" diagonal is about equivalent to 8.5"x11". As a scientist, half of what I do seems to be reading articles in PDF format.
Similarly, if someone moderates a comment up, it gains visibility, creating a feedback loop.
Maybe we need a logarithmic moderation point system. That is, going from 1 to 2 requires 1 mod point, 2 to 3 requires 2 points, 3 to 4 requires 4 points, and 4 to 5 requires 8 points. This allows for more dynamic range in differentiating a 3 from a 5, but doesn't make the apparent value skyrocket, like it would in a linear system. A 5 would still look like a 5, but be spaced out 12 points from a 3 instead of 2 points. It also would make it harder to "bury" a post. Once thing many have noticed, myself included, is that there are more +5 posts than +4 or +3, so this system would (potentially) curtail that somewhat.
I'm sure this idea has its own flaws, but it's worth something.
I've never been to Thailand, so maybe they really are enamored with the king. However, when it's illegal to say otherwise, who won't say they love the king? This reminds me of Napoleon Bonaparte's election, where voting consisted of checking yes or no to the question "Do you vote for Napoleon? Sign here."
Not only that, but the captivating example of Mr. Fikri is made up. I bet their system will never work as intended, but rather drain billions of dollars from taxpayers (which is arguably what was really intended). In the end, the system will be used to catch petty criminals and to further erode our rights, while the risks of terrorism remain less than of car accidents.
All you had to do was to set course on a certain diagonal, and you could escape it indefinitely.
I agree. Lawyers are trained to argue an opinion regardless of its validity. People who learn to debate are rewarded on their ability to argue, not on whether or not they are right. It shouldn't be surprising, then, that we are surrounded by people in government and politics promoting ideologies and denying facts all the time.
If they lose customers, but get more money per customer, it can work to Netflix's advantage big time. Their costs are mostly on bandwidth, and if they lose 1 million customers, that's 1 million fewer people to feed data to. That amounts to major cost cutting, so even if revenues drop a little but are offset by lower costs then they win.
You don't have to play the game. There's a free market of video games out there, and it's large. If a developer uses these transactions and becomes unpopular for it, they'll get a bad reputation and people will stop buying the games.
One is unconcerned with the principle, the other differs from an accepted societal norm. The latter could change depending on the society, the former doesn't care.
I felt it in Baltimore. I could hear the glassware in the lab shaking. At first I thought it was from a nearby construction site.
Doonesbury provides a simple statistic: http://doonesbury.com/strip/archive/2011/08/21.
Since you're in the middle of nowhere, the cost of losing your car is ever so much greater. Therefore, it makes sense to protect your car. Cost/benefit.
Polymorphic Software
Prerequisite: Industrial Base, Information Networks
Technology: Advanced Subatomic Theory, Optical Computers, Adaptive Doctrine
Special Ability: Heavy Artillery
Improves Probe Team success rate.
Track and Level: Discover 2
"Technological advance is an inherently iterative process. One does not simply take sand from the beach and produce a Dataprobe. We use crude tools to fashion better tools, and then our better tools to fashion more precise tools, and so on. Each minor refinement is a step in the process, and all of the steps must be taken."
-- Chairman Sheng-ji Yang,
"Looking God in the Eye"
That's a fair point about not losing our know-how. But then why build 12 submarines and 100 bombers? Why not 2 and 20?
Mod parent up
I've had an app called "Congress" installed for a while. It allows you to do this for all members of congress, it lists all recent legislation, you can see where and what shape districts are... It's a good step in making our government more accessible. Communication with our representatives should be accessible.
What terribly useless degree did I get? I got a B.S. in biology. I have a Masters in genetics. I'm currently in a top PhD program in biology. I have two publications, both from undergraduate research. But my qualifications have no relation to my argument - I learned that in philosophy 101, reasoning & argument.
The more relevant point: I went to a small liberal arts school. I took classes in music, English, philosophy, the sciences, foreign languages, economics... and I'm a more informed, well-rounded person because of it. I'm also a better critical thinker, and I can write coherently and express ideas (something not taken for granted these days, unfortunately). If I choose to go the academic route, the pay will pale with respect to the amount of time and effort I'll put in, and I'll be okay with that because I enjoy the subject.
Of course you're going to learn skills and knowledge that pertain to your field of interest while in college. My point is I didn't go to college to become a biologist, I went to college and came out prepared to become a biologist (hence the graduate school afterwards), and also an educated member of society. The field of biology is poised to undergo some of the biggest changes yet, and any set of skills that I'll learn today (microarrays, sequencing gels, etc.) are bound to be out of date in 20 years. Those aren't the important skills that I learned, but that's what a vocational training teaches.
The point of getting a degree from college isn't to learn vocational skills, it's to more generally broaden yourself and to learn how to learn. The whole notion that your degree should directly influence your earnings is reflective of how today many people go to college to get vocational training. If you want to teach mathematics, you shouldn't get an education degree in college, you should get a mathematics degree, and then go on to teaching from there. If you want to go into business, learn some more fundamental skills like statistics and critical thinking, intern over your summers, and then go to business school for your MBA.
Perhaps even more troubling is the notion that the sole goal in life is to make more money. What about doing a job that you enjoy, even if it pays less?