In Japan, x-ray of the lungs was more common than elsewhere and more tumors were caught. Nonetheless, the real cancer and survival rates were not improved. In hind sight it seems some of these tumors would have disappeared if left untreated. The problem was both not being able to discern the difference and harming some with unnecessary, radical surgical intervention.
In too many cases, life style behaviour known to be dangerous with predictable consequences (either by choice or bland acceptance) persists. For some, change is too hard, for others they see it as a image they would rather not confront. For many, other routes are more attractive, i.e. medical miracles after a lifetime of neglect. The only benefit might be to remind some that the deleterious effects are being seen. Let's use some of the simpler, cheaper options first, e.g. educating the young before opting for the expensive, unproven "fix".
A balance must be struck. The question has to be asked whether the cost of monitoring is excessive. For example, will unnecessary treatments result based upon an incipient symptoms of a disease that would never appear in the lifetime of a monitored individual? In the end, the monitoring may be a better tool if tested on fewer individuals and the data collected to see how effective current, conventional medicine fared.
Remember, supposedly the guiding principle of Medicine is to do no harm, whereas pervasive monitoring could have the opposite effect.
> and forced all of them to begin offering Windows
Perhaps this should be reworded to more properly identify the "force" source. The buyers? Unlikely, since most vendors that have commented on return rates say they are about equal.
Where you may have some validity is to assert there is lack of mass market appeal. However, you miss a vital issue, most users will can care less what OS runs the device if the mobility applications are both functional and responsive. MS quick actions do not speak to the strength of its OS rather its vulnerability to competition in unexpected arenas.
Really, based upon the assertion of one vendor and sales people that know only Windows?
> they want "real" windows that runs all their software.
Like the assertions above, based upon flimsy "factual" foundations. Most vendors assert their returns are approximately equal. Moreover, your last interpretation shows you are ignorant of the limitations of the design. Netbooks are limited functionality devices with marginal hardware specification, not small laptop replacements you presume them to be.
Your worries are warranted, however, you can play a role by following the moderation guidelines and set your read level to -1, then catch and correct abuse.
Set your read level to -1. Others avoid any posts by ACs by reading only level one or higher. The option is yours, why hadn't you noticed? Are you predisposed to complain?
I am not faulting your logic, yes that's the way they won previously. However, that may not be an option they can afford for all their varied endeavors. Cash flow and profit expectations may dictate that some be dropped.
Regarding this story, Zune may not be one of the victims upon a financial basis. However, too frequent missteps, <i>e.g.</i> orphaning user content may deplete the potential buyer pool, NOT that the Zune is uncool. Indeed to some it is a means to differentiate themselves from the uncool mob, Zune could be seen as the cool choice. Zune has had the better graphics hardware from my observation of what was the last model. And as some have stated, some people like brown.
Regarding storing critical documents externally, under other's supervision, I too have my doubts.
Moreover, while I think Google's email service is probably the best offered, but I think in other areas they have problems that may not be easily correctable. I wish that I could assert I proved it here: http://bst-softwaredevs.com/data/searches/articles/google-being-gamed.html where an outside, objective observer might concur. However, I think I fell short of that goal.
RE: wasn't there some incident where they gave up Chinese dissidents to the Chinese government?
True, but use Yahoo in your search in place of Google. [By the way they still do not see anything wrong with their role in the prosecution of this case. A few links are provided to jog your memory.]
Unfortunately Obamba had to vote initially against FISA telecom immunity, because his hand was forced by those competing for the nomination. However, from his record his sentiment was too obviously aligned with those that misused powers beyond those granted by the Constitution. Though he seemed to think Iraq was an error, in other respects it was clear he was an establishment politician. Nonetheless, some of his supports still refuse to recognize that fact.
He is better than the W., but don't hold too high hopes for his actions or his team. One small step for the U.S. symbolically, but potentially too little and too late for the damage inflicted. We needed a giant to counter the effects of the Bush/Cheney team, aided and abetted by a corrupted courts and a quiescent Congress putting the comfort of its members first. All we have is hope, but even the drowning will clutch at straw. I guess it is time to do laps...
The very question leaves me in a quandry, here is an organization seeming devoid of functional intelligence trying to capture hints of intelligence in advance but with nefarious aims. If, indeed, it could work, at least, as an a priori probability 90% should on the basis of bad intentions point back to that department. But how could it point back to an intelligence void?
Nonetheless, on the scale of philosophical questions it surely ranks in the realm of importance as "How many angles can dance on the head of a pin?". Therefore, it should be funded into eternity for further study.
Do not become over comfortable with an apparent rational judgment from a state court. On the national level this will probably be reversed with alacrity.
It is not a revelation that the grid has to be upgraded, I read long ago it was a required investment. The problem is that it seems to be in none of the major players realm of interest or responsibility. Even as the grid stands, conventional power is not distributed efficiently.
Several months ago there was a big article on the need for new grid infrastructure to carry power from solar facilities in the Southwest (some via dc transmission) to areas of high demand. Moreover, did it escape the informed scribes attention that Pickens was in D.C. to get the feds to fund new investment in the grid? He needs it for his investment in wind power in the Texas panhandle to pay off. With all the business reporting it has, how was that missed? Too obvious?
This article meets the current low standards of reporting that has become endemic at the NYT. As they advised the recently former governor of New York state, you have screwed up so badly you should be gone! Well by the same standards, they too should follow the same example. Both by its actions and inactions, the NYT should exit too. Or more kindly, at least those at the top encouraging this type of reporting should remove themselves so that the vaunted reputation of the NYT may be regained.
RE: "Crackpot theories can be discussed elsewhere..."
I am not wedded to particular explanations, however, the recent certainty of government explanations that are later proved to be fatally flawed only to be followed by another propagated with the same level of certainty leave me skeptical of all official pronouncements.
While I think the National Institute of Standards was a class outfit, since the "Reagan Revolution" scientific studies have not been immune to political interference. Moreover, when more than one explanation can explain the observations the simplest is usual given the greater weight. Three years sounds a bit too much time and effort to create another, albeit more complex explanation for an unlikely coincidence leading to a weird physical outcome. An asymmetric heat source left unattended could still bring down a building vertically? That results in a symmetric final failure mode brought together by the happenstance of low probability set of failures. Truly astounding, if it really happened that way.
On principle, I have qualms about accepting these findings on little more than blind faith from sources that have proven to be unreliable.
I worry too that the one and only anthrax terrorist has been found and explained (via leaks) to the most credulous and receptive types, i.e. the establishment press corps. I would prefer the skeptical scientific types with relevant skills to evaluate the evidence. Moreover, when you see a key element blown one day to be replaced the next without mention the first was bogus (Washington Post, http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/18/anthrax/), I think we all should give a hearing to the supposed crackpots. I no longer trust anything said or supported by the "realists" and their unlimited credulity to all official explanations. I bring this up, because they too (the establishment press) attack conspiracy theorists, that fail to see the truth as easily as they.
RE: "Until they dig out and expel every agent that perverted their mission... "
I fear the cure may be worse than the disease. Anytime a program like this is put into play, it becomes a game to settle old scores having nothing to do with the supposed issue at hand. That is, too often it is the classic "punish the innocent" while giving the selected guilty another free pass.
It becomes a witch hunt. Believe me I would like to see what was proposed be carried out, but reality intrudes. Like a civil war the wounds fester for ages and the lies propagate until the very types supposedly eliminated are again in charge.
Cannot argue, but I had memory that last week we had a truce that lasted a century. Perhaps it is my memory is failing... Ah those that love war and the solidarity it brings. Good times are here again for some of us.
I have a theory, since it is obvious we will never win the "War Against Terror" we need an alternative to keep ourselves busy and afraid with another big, bad enemy of the scale of the Soviet Union. Then we all give up our rights without a grumble. Happy Days are here again, as we fight another Cold War (we understand those) or is it WWIV (ok, make it six).
The content is too breathless. The words fed us smell like the b.s. we had before on lesser security issues. This all makes me dubious. I find it hard to take this seriously. We have too much incompetence that is too wide spread. Those leading only value ever enlarging cash piles while strenuously waving patriotic flags. It is just too familiar. So it has to be a foreign threat not good old American (U.S.) incompetence?
Push this too far, we will be taking on an enemy so large it might mean those so used to sending the dispensable off to be killed or horribly injured may join the party. That is, this time it will be close up and very deadly for the even erstwhile avid supporters of the military, albeit previously from afar.
Also invading germany even though they didn't have anything to do with the bombing of Pearl harbor was a decent decision even though it opened us up to a war on two fronts... Invading Germany was not doing a good deed. Better read a bit more, before commenting. Germany declared war on the U.S. after the Japanese attack. Moreover, U.S. shipping was being sunk of the East coast by Germany U. boats, hence, attacking Germany was not an option as you perceive it to be. Lest you forget, Germany was a major military power that intended to attack when they were ready. Hitler committed two major blunders, they attacked the USSR late in the year and they declared war prematurely against the U.S. War was not an option.
Slashdot Mirror
may be prescribed.
In Japan, x-ray of the lungs was more common than elsewhere and more tumors were caught. Nonetheless, the real cancer and survival rates were not improved. In hind sight it seems some of these tumors would have disappeared if left untreated. The problem was both not being able to discern the difference and harming some with unnecessary, radical surgical intervention.
In too many cases, life style behaviour known to be dangerous with predictable consequences (either by choice or bland acceptance) persists. For some, change is too hard, for others they see it as a image they would rather not confront. For many, other routes are more attractive, i.e. medical miracles after a lifetime of neglect. The only benefit might be to remind some that the deleterious effects are being seen. Let's use some of the simpler, cheaper options first, e.g. educating the young before opting for the expensive, unproven "fix".
A balance must be struck. The question has to be asked whether the cost of monitoring is excessive. For example, will unnecessary treatments result based upon an incipient symptoms of a disease that would never appear in the lifetime of a monitored individual? In the end, the monitoring may be a better tool if tested on fewer individuals and the data collected to see how effective current, conventional medicine fared.
Remember, supposedly the guiding principle of Medicine is to do no harm, whereas pervasive monitoring could have the opposite effect.
> and forced all of them to begin offering Windows
Perhaps this should be reworded to more properly identify the "force" source. The buyers? Unlikely, since most vendors that have commented on return rates say they are about equal.
Where you may have some validity is to assert there is lack of mass market appeal. However, you miss a vital issue, most users will can care less what OS runs the device if the mobility applications are both functional and responsive. MS quick actions do not speak to the strength of its OS rather its vulnerability to competition in unexpected arenas.
> Linux share of netbooks is dropping fast ...
But still in the thirty percent range.
> People don't want them,
Really, based upon the assertion of one vendor and sales people that know only Windows?
> they want "real" windows that runs all their software.
Like the assertions above, based upon flimsy "factual" foundations. Most vendors assert their returns are approximately equal. Moreover, your last interpretation shows you are ignorant of the limitations of the design. Netbooks are limited functionality devices with marginal hardware specification, not small laptop replacements you presume them to be.
Your worries are warranted, however, you can play a role by following the moderation guidelines and set your read level to -1, then catch and correct abuse.
Set your read level to -1. Others avoid any posts by ACs by reading only level one or higher. The option is yours, why hadn't you noticed? Are you predisposed to complain?
I am not faulting your logic, yes that's the way they won previously. However, that may not be an option they can afford for all their varied endeavors. Cash flow and profit expectations may dictate that some be dropped.
Regarding this story, Zune may not be one of the victims upon a financial basis. However, too frequent missteps, <i>e.g.</i> orphaning user content may deplete the potential buyer pool, NOT that the Zune is uncool. Indeed to some it is a means to differentiate themselves from the uncool mob, Zune could be seen as the cool choice. Zune has had the better graphics hardware from my observation of what was the last model. And as some have stated, some people like brown.
RE ... at least it doesn't make me feel dumber for having watched it.
Reality is a harsh mistress, hence, I incredulous.
Chuck? Inane, at best. Moreover, I would not willing watch any show on ScrFi channel.
RE: Blame the cylons. Blame the dead government. Blame everybody
Reminds me of a president we had.
Regarding storing critical documents externally, under other's supervision, I too have my doubts.
Moreover, while I think Google's email service is probably the best offered, but I think in other areas they have problems that may not be easily correctable. I wish that I could assert I proved it here: http://bst-softwaredevs.com/data/searches/articles/google-being-gamed.html where an outside, objective observer might concur. However, I think I fell short of that goal.
RE: wasn't there some incident where they gave up Chinese dissidents to the Chinese government?
True, but use Yahoo in your search in place of Google. [By the way they still do not see anything wrong with their role in the prosecution of this case. A few links are provided to jog your memory.]
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/tech/news/article_1373666.php
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/10/16/yahoo.congress/index.html
http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2007/07/shi-taos-case-y.html
Unfortunately Obamba had to vote initially against FISA telecom immunity, because his hand was forced by those competing for the nomination. However, from his record his sentiment was too obviously aligned with those that misused powers beyond those granted by the Constitution. Though he seemed to think Iraq was an error, in other respects it was clear he was an establishment politician. Nonetheless, some of his supports still refuse to recognize that fact.
He is better than the W., but don't hold too high hopes for his actions or his team. One small step for the U.S. symbolically, but potentially too little and too late for the damage inflicted. We needed a giant to counter the effects of the Bush/Cheney team, aided and abetted by a corrupted courts and a quiescent Congress putting the comfort of its members first. All we have is hope, but even the drowning will clutch at straw. I guess it is time to do laps...
The very question leaves me in a quandry, here is an organization seeming devoid of functional intelligence trying to capture hints of intelligence in advance but with nefarious aims. If, indeed, it could work, at least, as an a priori probability 90% should on the basis of bad intentions point back to that department. But how could it point back to an intelligence void?
Nonetheless, on the scale of philosophical questions it surely ranks in the realm of importance as "How many angles can dance on the head of a pin?". Therefore, it should be funded into eternity for further study.
which is not about a president.
Do not become over comfortable with an apparent rational judgment from a state court. On the national level this will probably be reversed with alacrity.
It is not a revelation that the grid has to be upgraded, I read long ago it was a required investment. The problem is that it seems to be in none of the major players realm of interest or responsibility. Even as the grid stands, conventional power is not distributed efficiently.
Several months ago there was a big article on the need for new grid infrastructure to carry power from solar facilities in the Southwest (some via dc transmission) to areas of high demand. Moreover, did it escape the informed scribes attention that Pickens was in D.C. to get the feds to fund new investment in the grid? He needs it for his investment in wind power in the Texas panhandle to pay off. With all the business reporting it has, how was that missed? Too obvious?
This article meets the current low standards of reporting that has become endemic at the NYT. As they advised the recently former governor of New York state, you have screwed up so badly you should be gone! Well by the same standards, they too should follow the same example. Both by its actions and inactions, the NYT should exit too. Or more kindly, at least those at the top encouraging this type of reporting should remove themselves so that the vaunted reputation of the NYT may be regained.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7577493.stm
RE: "Crackpot theories can be discussed elsewhere ..."
I am not wedded to particular explanations, however, the recent certainty of government explanations that are later proved to be fatally flawed only to be followed by another propagated with the same level of certainty leave me skeptical of all official pronouncements.
While I think the National Institute of Standards was a class outfit, since the "Reagan Revolution" scientific studies have not been immune to political interference. Moreover, when more than one explanation can explain the observations the simplest is usual given the greater weight. Three years sounds a bit too much time and effort to create another, albeit more complex explanation for an unlikely coincidence leading to a weird physical outcome. An asymmetric heat source left unattended could still bring down a building vertically? That results in a symmetric final failure mode brought together by the happenstance of low probability set of failures. Truly astounding, if it really happened that way.
On principle, I have qualms about accepting these findings on little more than blind faith from sources that have proven to be unreliable.
I worry too that the one and only anthrax terrorist has been found and explained (via leaks) to the most credulous and receptive types, i.e. the establishment press corps. I would prefer the skeptical scientific types with relevant skills to evaluate the evidence. Moreover, when you see a key element blown one day to be replaced the next without mention the first was bogus (Washington Post, http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/08/18/anthrax/), I think we all should give a hearing to the supposed crackpots. I no longer trust anything said or supported by the "realists" and their unlimited credulity to all official explanations. I bring this up, because they too (the establishment press) attack conspiracy theorists, that fail to see the truth as easily as they.
It might be worth the aggravation, until the legislation is annulled due to " ... unforeseen misapplication" of the law.
RE: "Until they dig out and expel every agent that perverted their mission ... "
I fear the cure may be worse than the disease. Anytime a program like this is put into play, it becomes a game to settle old scores having nothing to do with the supposed issue at hand. That is, too often it is the classic "punish the innocent" while giving the selected guilty another free pass.
It becomes a witch hunt. Believe me I would like to see what was proposed be carried out, but reality intrudes. Like a civil war the wounds fester for ages and the lies propagate until the very types supposedly eliminated are again in charge.
Cannot argue, but I had memory that last week we had a truce that lasted a century. Perhaps it is my memory is failing ... Ah those that love war and the solidarity it brings. Good times are here again for some of us.
I have a theory, since it is obvious we will never win the "War Against Terror" we need an alternative to keep ourselves busy and afraid with another big, bad enemy of the scale of the Soviet Union. Then we all give up our rights without a grumble. Happy Days are here again, as we fight another Cold War (we understand those) or is it WWIV (ok, make it six).
The content is too breathless. The words fed us smell like the b.s. we had before on lesser security issues. This all makes me dubious. I find it hard to take this seriously. We have too much incompetence that is too wide spread. Those leading only value ever enlarging cash piles while strenuously waving patriotic flags. It is just too familiar. So it has to be a foreign threat not good old American (U.S.) incompetence?
Push this too far, we will be taking on an enemy so large it might mean those so used to sending the dispensable off to be killed or horribly injured may join the party. That is, this time it will be close up and very deadly for the even erstwhile avid supporters of the military, albeit previously from afar.
not if you can make them pay a second (or third or ...) time.
That could be a Cash Cow, for the indigent parts of a struggling company.
Using Flashblock, it really isn't that bad.
The first link matches the second link; if they really differed, perhaps that was where the spoilers were to be found.
1st link: http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/last-night-the.html
2nd link: http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/last-night-the.html