I've never seen a netbook you could stick an optical disk into. Even if you did find one (and the disk is bigger than many netbooks), why are you carrying around DVDs anyway? I don't know anyone who does that, but I know several people who know how to rip DVDs, many more who know how to download movies via torrents, and even a few who buy digital copies from places like iTunes. No streaming required.
How often do you type something into Google when you're browsing the web? Occasionally, and very little. The vast majority of the time, most people spend reading or clicking links or the back button. A virtual keyboard is just fine for tapping in a few things, and a physical keyboard is actually a liability because it does nothing useful for the majority of the activity except take up space.
But you don't have to believe me. There have been lots of usage studies and surveys. People who own tablets use their notebooks and especially their netbooks much less, particularly for things like web browsing and movie watching.
I'm not sure about the draconian US, but most places intercepting a radio transmission not intended for you is not illegal. Judging by the availability of radio scanners in the US it isn't in most states either.
USING the information contained in a radio broadcast not intended for you is usually illegal. But if you're using a protocol that is specifically designed for discoverability, you're going to have a hard time arguing that Google is supposed to know your broadcast is not intended for general reception.
If you want to use public radio spectrum in a public space then you have to accept some loss of privacy. If you want to keep that privacy then stop broadcasting into public airspace - either stop broadcasting entirely or shield your property.
Here's a suggestion: stop broadcasting information you consider sensitive. If you want your neighbours to know which AP is yours then climb out of the basement, go over there, and tell them.
The reason netbooks got it so badly is because most people are NOT better served by them. Most people want a portable device to read, watch videos, browse the web, play games and perhaps write an occasional email or Facebook post. A tablet does all of those better except perhaps writing. Perhaps - I much prefer typing on a tablet to the tiny keys of a netbook. And for actual mobile use (you know, when there isn't a table handy to put it on) the tablet wins hands down in everything.
It's got an earpiece speaker, a bottom speaker (maybe the OP thought it was stereo, meaning two bottom speakers), the regular speaking mic and a noise cancellation mic. So two speakers and two microphones.
He was a rich prick who made great products and built a very successful company. As opposed to all the other rich pricks who shuffle numbers and run previously successful companies into the ground.
Worship, no? Delude myself that Zunes are better than iPods because I hate Steve Jobs? No.
Interesting. If you're correct, that's a pretty major difference between the Apple ecosystem and Android. When iOS 4 was released my sister, who has an ancient dumb phone she never turns on and just carries in the car for emergencies when she's not off tramping through the woods somewhere with no reception anyway, called to ask why her ancient iPod touch wouldn't update. She was disappointed when I told her it was too old.
Apple releases major, desirable features with each major OS release. Are you saying Android doesn't?
Google does. But because of the manufacturers and carriers (not google) android phones are generally not update as reliably as Apple's phones, and so customers are missing desirable features.
Read more carefully. The rows are time elapsed after the phone was introduced. The bar after the phone indicates its update status for three years after introduction, not to the present.
I don't think you read the article correctly. I didn't see any mention of "twisting" the historical data. In fact, the article goes to great length to mention that he's using "perfect" data, i.e. noise free.
He was talking about building a model then using historical data to choose values for it's parameters. Presumably, if he weren't working with a toy model, he might also use historical data to estimate which parameters are important and which can be discarded. Exactly as you describe.
Yes, he's discovered ill posed problems, parameter sensitivity, extrapolation beyond the end of a curve and variety of fairly simple concepts that are already known AND gone on to generalize his findings to all models with zero evidence, but he is talking about the (broadly) same kind of modelling you are.
And if you want to play the qualification game, yes I do make models for a living and I'm considerably beyond a masters degree.
A horrible article from Scientific American. Some guy decides to play with a model, notices that it's unstable (without calling it that), assumes ALL models, EVERYWHERE are unstable, and gets written up in SciAm.
No, a house being an investment is a fairly new idea (delusion) and it's getting us screwed. The house you live in, aside from special circumstances like buying a house in an area you think is about to be developed and then selling it, or buying a house, doing a bunch of renos and then selling it, is not an investment. It can be a great place to park money long term, like gold normally is, and it can help reduce your living expenses a bit, and gives you a lot of freedom, but it's not an investment.
An economist described it this way once: you buy house A for $150k and live in it for a while. When you decide to move, you sell that house for $250k (nice profit!). This seems like a great investment idea, so you immediately "invest" that money in another house, B, for $250k. You move a few times, making a profit on each sale. Eventually you decide you're done investing and sell your last investment house for half a million dollars. Now you go looking for a decent place to live and enjoy your earnings. Except you can't find any houses you like for less than $500k... including house A. You need a place to live, so you buy a house, and find that your net profit is zero dollars, minus lawyer and inspection fees.
The idea that a house not only can, but SHOULD make you money is what leads to housing bubbles. Everyone wants to make a profit when they sell their house, and everyone buying a house thinks they're GOING to make a profit, which leads housing prices to shoot up. Eventually the market corrects and housing prices either stagnate for a while (falling relative to inflation) or actually fall, and everyone calls it a crash or bubble bursting or something. Long term historical housing prices grow fairly slowly at an average rate that's pretty close to the average inflation rate. Any mismatch in those two rates means we're all getting poorer and someday won't even be able to afford places to live.
A Playbook isn't a tablet, it's a bigger screen for your Blackberry. Except it's SOLD as a tablet, and it's trying to compete against tablets that can actually function without another device.
You seem to confuse "integration" and "dependence."
Yeah, because webmail is such a wonderful user experience, even on a full size screen with a mouse and keyboard where it's DESIGNED to be used.
Seriously, not having an e-mail client is inexcusable and "just use webmail!" is about as silly as when Jobs said "just use web apps!" Except Jobs was either kidding or realized his mistake and fixed it.
Slashdot Mirror
The average person likely has no idea that external optical drives exist, and certainly doesn't own (or want) one.
I've never seen a netbook you could stick an optical disk into. Even if you did find one (and the disk is bigger than many netbooks), why are you carrying around DVDs anyway? I don't know anyone who does that, but I know several people who know how to rip DVDs, many more who know how to download movies via torrents, and even a few who buy digital copies from places like iTunes. No streaming required.
How often do you type something into Google when you're browsing the web? Occasionally, and very little. The vast majority of the time, most people spend reading or clicking links or the back button. A virtual keyboard is just fine for tapping in a few things, and a physical keyboard is actually a liability because it does nothing useful for the majority of the activity except take up space.
But you don't have to believe me. There have been lots of usage studies and surveys. People who own tablets use their notebooks and especially their netbooks much less, particularly for things like web browsing and movie watching.
I'm not sure about the draconian US, but most places intercepting a radio transmission not intended for you is not illegal. Judging by the availability of radio scanners in the US it isn't in most states either.
USING the information contained in a radio broadcast not intended for you is usually illegal. But if you're using a protocol that is specifically designed for discoverability, you're going to have a hard time arguing that Google is supposed to know your broadcast is not intended for general reception.
If you want to use public radio spectrum in a public space then you have to accept some loss of privacy. If you want to keep that privacy then stop broadcasting into public airspace - either stop broadcasting entirely or shield your property.
Don't broadcast things that you don't want people to see.
Here's a suggestion: stop broadcasting information you consider sensitive. If you want your neighbours to know which AP is yours then climb out of the basement, go over there, and tell them.
And Google got in trouble for it. Still, if you're spewing secrets out into the air, you really should assume someone's listening to them.
The reason netbooks got it so badly is because most people are NOT better served by them. Most people want a portable device to read, watch videos, browse the web, play games and perhaps write an occasional email or Facebook post. A tablet does all of those better except perhaps writing. Perhaps - I much prefer typing on a tablet to the tiny keys of a netbook. And for actual mobile use (you know, when there isn't a table handy to put it on) the tablet wins hands down in everything.
It's got an earpiece speaker, a bottom speaker (maybe the OP thought it was stereo, meaning two bottom speakers), the regular speaking mic and a noise cancellation mic. So two speakers and two microphones.
This laser is focused into a space considerably smaller than the surface of the sun.
I believe the ELI is proposed to work at more or less visible wavelengths. It is literally visible light.
I fly an airline that provides excellent service, is friendly, accommodating, has more legroom than their big competitor AND usually costs less.
He was a rich prick who made great products and built a very successful company. As opposed to all the other rich pricks who shuffle numbers and run previously successful companies into the ground.
Worship, no? Delude myself that Zunes are better than iPods because I hate Steve Jobs? No.
I explicitly mentioned inflation a few times. Care to be more specific?
Interesting. If you're correct, that's a pretty major difference between the Apple ecosystem and Android. When iOS 4 was released my sister, who has an ancient dumb phone she never turns on and just carries in the car for emergencies when she's not off tramping through the woods somewhere with no reception anyway, called to ask why her ancient iPod touch wouldn't update. She was disappointed when I told her it was too old.
Apple releases major, desirable features with each major OS release. Are you saying Android doesn't?
Google does. But because of the manufacturers and carriers (not google) android phones are generally not update as reliably as Apple's phones, and so customers are missing desirable features.
Read more carefully. The rows are time elapsed after the phone was introduced. The bar after the phone indicates its update status for three years after introduction, not to the present.
I don't think you read the article correctly. I didn't see any mention of "twisting" the historical data. In fact, the article goes to great length to mention that he's using "perfect" data, i.e. noise free.
He was talking about building a model then using historical data to choose values for it's parameters. Presumably, if he weren't working with a toy model, he might also use historical data to estimate which parameters are important and which can be discarded. Exactly as you describe.
Yes, he's discovered ill posed problems, parameter sensitivity, extrapolation beyond the end of a curve and variety of fairly simple concepts that are already known AND gone on to generalize his findings to all models with zero evidence, but he is talking about the (broadly) same kind of modelling you are.
And if you want to play the qualification game, yes I do make models for a living and I'm considerably beyond a masters degree.
Well call that an ill posed problem. It's even less new than chaos.
A horrible article from Scientific American. Some guy decides to play with a model, notices that it's unstable (without calling it that), assumes ALL models, EVERYWHERE are unstable, and gets written up in SciAm.
No, a house being an investment is a fairly new idea (delusion) and it's getting us screwed. The house you live in, aside from special circumstances like buying a house in an area you think is about to be developed and then selling it, or buying a house, doing a bunch of renos and then selling it, is not an investment. It can be a great place to park money long term, like gold normally is, and it can help reduce your living expenses a bit, and gives you a lot of freedom, but it's not an investment.
An economist described it this way once: you buy house A for $150k and live in it for a while. When you decide to move, you sell that house for $250k (nice profit!). This seems like a great investment idea, so you immediately "invest" that money in another house, B, for $250k. You move a few times, making a profit on each sale. Eventually you decide you're done investing and sell your last investment house for half a million dollars. Now you go looking for a decent place to live and enjoy your earnings. Except you can't find any houses you like for less than $500k... including house A. You need a place to live, so you buy a house, and find that your net profit is zero dollars, minus lawyer and inspection fees.
The idea that a house not only can, but SHOULD make you money is what leads to housing bubbles. Everyone wants to make a profit when they sell their house, and everyone buying a house thinks they're GOING to make a profit, which leads housing prices to shoot up. Eventually the market corrects and housing prices either stagnate for a while (falling relative to inflation) or actually fall, and everyone calls it a crash or bubble bursting or something. Long term historical housing prices grow fairly slowly at an average rate that's pretty close to the average inflation rate. Any mismatch in those two rates means we're all getting poorer and someday won't even be able to afford places to live.
A Playbook isn't a tablet, it's a bigger screen for your Blackberry. Except it's SOLD as a tablet, and it's trying to compete against tablets that can actually function without another device.
You seem to confuse "integration" and "dependence."
Yeah, because webmail is such a wonderful user experience, even on a full size screen with a mouse and keyboard where it's DESIGNED to be used.
Seriously, not having an e-mail client is inexcusable and "just use webmail!" is about as silly as when Jobs said "just use web apps!" Except Jobs was either kidding or realized his mistake and fixed it.
Riiight. Care to actually elaborate on this alleged tight integration with the cell network?
Fission, not fusion.