This is one advantage to working in more "traditional" engineering industries than software: in tech, they can ditch the institutional knowledge and just ship arbitrarily broken crap, but in, say, chemical engineering, if you don't keep around the people who know how stuff works, you'll eventually end up not being able to pass an inspection, or restart a plant, or something else kind of important. Then you'll have to hire them back as highly paid consultants so they can remind you how stuff works...
There's a brief explanation here. The gist of it is that Salesforce.com's storage charge is charging you for the storage plus the expected transactions/querying that you'll do on the larger amount of data. I suppose they could break out storage charges and transaction/query charges into separate billing items, but they seem to prefer to charge based on just the amount of data, perhaps assuming that overall workloads scale roughly with total data-set size, making it a good billing proxy.
The other reason is that salesforce.com is targeted at The Enterprise, where anything below five digits is noise.
I've written a few articles lately and not run into any troubles. What kinds of articles are people writing? I could imagine if it's on pop culture or Israel-Palestine or something there might be more drama, but in mathematics and archaeology (my two main areas of interest), I haven't had any troubles yet. People seem mostly polite, one person thanked me for improving an article, and some people have improved what I've written.
Yeah, some kind of quantification is definitely missing. How unusual? How unusual among people of the same profession? How common are major physics discoveries among people who don't share such features (i.e., is it a necessary feature?). Attempting to draw conclusions about complex cognitive functions from small-n measurements of a handful of macroscopic features feels a little bit like phrenology.
If you're okay with a subdomain rather than looking to register directly under a TLD, FreeDNS is another one that's been around for a while, though they target themselves a bit more at people who want a changeable hostname for their dynamic IP (a free alternative to the used-to-be-free-but-now-isn't DynDNS).
This is a little different in that he's not doing a purely descriptive prediction, but an attempt at objective evaluation. In the presidential election, he wasn't trying to build a statistical model that would say whether Romney or Obama was a better leader, or a better politician: all he was attempting to do was predict who would win. But in baseball his approach is to analyze objective criteria in an attempt to quantify how valuable a player is to their team. For example, one measure of value is if they get on base more than an "average" replacement player would, which typically means a player who can play the same position (e.g. a catcher compared to an average catcher). Another measure of value is whether they field better than a typical player at that position. You add all those up and you can attempt to estimate how many runs more/fewer a team would've had over the season if your 2nd baseman had been replaced with The Average MLB Second Baseman.
So in this case he's not trying to predict who'll win the MVP, but arguing who should win the MVP, on the basis that they are objectively the most valuable player to their team. Now trying to do that with presidential elections would be interesting...
I had run into Steve [Ballmer] a few times at Harvard, where he and Bill were close. The first time we met face-to-face, I thought, This guy looks like an operative for the N.K.V.D.
You have your chronology backwards: prohibitions on desecrating British symbols weren't created after those on desecrating Muslim symbols, but, rather, the former predate the latter. Traditionally burning the UK flag was prosecuted under various treason and sedition statutes. As those fell into disuse in the 20th century, by the latter part of the century the government used general "breach of the peace" statutes to prosecute people (mostly socialists and communists) who burnt the UK flag, or otherwise desecrated its national symbols (e.g. by burning the Queen in effigy).
Dude, he compromised so much on health-care that he literally passed the Republican health-care plan: it was almost identically the Heritage Foundation / Romneycare plan. As far as I can tell, it included virtually nothing of a Hillarycare-style, Democratic plan. So he basically compromised all the way to their side.
The decline in VC spending did not start on November 7, and is not due to feverish fears of Obama. It dates to earlier this year at the latest, and is more related to spectacular flops in Bubble 2.0, stuff like Zynga's IPO going down in flames. It's not really Obama's fault that a lot of the tech bubble companies have no business plan.
Zynga's disastrous IPO certainly hasn't helped the tech-IPO market's prospects. Don't think you can blame that one on either Congress or Obama, either.
HP still offers RPN on a few of their calculators. In the graphing-calculator department, there's the HP 50g, which can switch between RPN and non-RPN modes.
They have a list of the six RPN calculators they still sell here (bottom of the page).
Yeah, in this particular election I think all these stories about GOTV efforts and ground games are unlikely to be pointing to real deciding factors. In a 2004-style election where the winner comes down to <1%, maybe. And this year, it's plausible some better turnout operations could've flipped Florida, which Romney only lost by 0.6%. But to win overall, he'd need to flip all of: Florida (0.6%), Ohio (1.9%), Virginia (3.0%), and Colorado (4.7%). The first is plausible, and the second is on the edge of possibility, but once you're talking about 5% shifts, that starts to get out of the range of what you can get from just better phone-banking.
Yeah, in this particular election I think all these stories about GOTV efforts and ground games are unlikely to be pointing to real deciding factors. In a 2004-style election where the winner comes down to maybe, but when you're talking about 5% shifts, that starts to get out of the range of what you can get from just better phone-banking.
At least not in this sense: he stuck with things, not founding things to sell 'em to investors and move on. The first tech company Jobs founded was Apple, and that's the company he died leading.
To elaborate, the reason why is basically the same as why a battery-backed UPS charged off mains electricity doesn't violate conservation of energy: it charges off an energy source while that source is still good, in order to use the power in case the energy source cuts off.
In the case you describe, they'd be caught because they have no real business: a business whose shareholders are their only customers is not a business.
You would need to ensure that's not possible either, i.e. that corporate purchases are bona-fide corporate purchases not benefitting specific individuals.
It works reasonably well in Scandinavia, which has relatively low corporate taxes (lower than the U.S.) but quite high individual income taxes.
We'd also save billions of dollars if we stopped selling clothes dryers that are hideously inefficiency; elsewhere in the world condensing dryers are the norm and in some cases dry clothes faster.
I think the prevalence of gas-powered dryers is a reason the U.S. still uses more inefficient dryers, because the fuel (natural gas) is fairly cheap, and much cheaper than with the electric-powered dryers that are prevalent in parts of Europe. So there's less economic incentive to improve efficiency.
Slashdot Mirror
This is one advantage to working in more "traditional" engineering industries than software: in tech, they can ditch the institutional knowledge and just ship arbitrarily broken crap, but in, say, chemical engineering, if you don't keep around the people who know how stuff works, you'll eventually end up not being able to pass an inspection, or restart a plant, or something else kind of important. Then you'll have to hire them back as highly paid consultants so they can remind you how stuff works...
(See also: A relevant /. story from last year)
There's a brief explanation here. The gist of it is that Salesforce.com's storage charge is charging you for the storage plus the expected transactions/querying that you'll do on the larger amount of data. I suppose they could break out storage charges and transaction/query charges into separate billing items, but they seem to prefer to charge based on just the amount of data, perhaps assuming that overall workloads scale roughly with total data-set size, making it a good billing proxy.
The other reason is that salesforce.com is targeted at The Enterprise, where anything below five digits is noise.
I've written a few articles lately and not run into any troubles. What kinds of articles are people writing? I could imagine if it's on pop culture or Israel-Palestine or something there might be more drama, but in mathematics and archaeology (my two main areas of interest), I haven't had any troubles yet. People seem mostly polite, one person thanked me for improving an article, and some people have improved what I've written.
Yeah, some kind of quantification is definitely missing. How unusual? How unusual among people of the same profession? How common are major physics discoveries among people who don't share such features (i.e., is it a necessary feature?). Attempting to draw conclusions about complex cognitive functions from small-n measurements of a handful of macroscopic features feels a little bit like phrenology.
Slashdot seems to love reporting this recurring story, I guess because you can write it with mad-libs...
If you're okay with a subdomain rather than looking to register directly under a TLD, FreeDNS is another one that's been around for a while, though they target themselves a bit more at people who want a changeable hostname for their dynamic IP (a free alternative to the used-to-be-free-but-now-isn't DynDNS).
This season is over, they just haven't finished all the post-season awards, like the MVP.
A typical season lasts 7 months, from the end of March to the end of October.
This is a little different in that he's not doing a purely descriptive prediction, but an attempt at objective evaluation. In the presidential election, he wasn't trying to build a statistical model that would say whether Romney or Obama was a better leader, or a better politician: all he was attempting to do was predict who would win. But in baseball his approach is to analyze objective criteria in an attempt to quantify how valuable a player is to their team. For example, one measure of value is if they get on base more than an "average" replacement player would, which typically means a player who can play the same position (e.g. a catcher compared to an average catcher). Another measure of value is whether they field better than a typical player at that position. You add all those up and you can attempt to estimate how many runs more/fewer a team would've had over the season if your 2nd baseman had been replaced with The Average MLB Second Baseman.
So in this case he's not trying to predict who'll win the MVP, but arguing who should win the MVP, on the basis that they are objectively the most valuable player to their team. Now trying to do that with presidential elections would be interesting...
He first got well-known doing statistics-based baseball analysis (aka sabermetrics), and only moved into politics later.
For details we turn to our usual correspondent...
The correlation with income is considerably larger.
Paul Allen spotted it in 1980:
Au contraire, that's the reason for the program: what other talent pool is better prepared to make the best of shitty working conditions?
You have your chronology backwards: prohibitions on desecrating British symbols weren't created after those on desecrating Muslim symbols, but, rather, the former predate the latter. Traditionally burning the UK flag was prosecuted under various treason and sedition statutes. As those fell into disuse in the 20th century, by the latter part of the century the government used general "breach of the peace" statutes to prosecute people (mostly socialists and communists) who burnt the UK flag, or otherwise desecrated its national symbols (e.g. by burning the Queen in effigy).
Dude, he compromised so much on health-care that he literally passed the Republican health-care plan: it was almost identically the Heritage Foundation / Romneycare plan. As far as I can tell, it included virtually nothing of a Hillarycare-style, Democratic plan. So he basically compromised all the way to their side.
The decline in VC spending did not start on November 7, and is not due to feverish fears of Obama. It dates to earlier this year at the latest, and is more related to spectacular flops in Bubble 2.0, stuff like Zynga's IPO going down in flames. It's not really Obama's fault that a lot of the tech bubble companies have no business plan.
Zynga's disastrous IPO certainly hasn't helped the tech-IPO market's prospects. Don't think you can blame that one on either Congress or Obama, either.
HP still offers RPN on a few of their calculators. In the graphing-calculator department, there's the HP 50g, which can switch between RPN and non-RPN modes.
They have a list of the six RPN calculators they still sell here (bottom of the page).
Ugh, Slashdot ate part of my comment due to a <.
Reposting:
Yeah, in this particular election I think all these stories about GOTV efforts and ground games are unlikely to be pointing to real deciding factors. In a 2004-style election where the winner comes down to <1%, maybe. And this year, it's plausible some better turnout operations could've flipped Florida, which Romney only lost by 0.6%. But to win overall, he'd need to flip all of: Florida (0.6%), Ohio (1.9%), Virginia (3.0%), and Colorado (4.7%). The first is plausible, and the second is on the edge of possibility, but once you're talking about 5% shifts, that starts to get out of the range of what you can get from just better phone-banking.
Yeah, in this particular election I think all these stories about GOTV efforts and ground games are unlikely to be pointing to real deciding factors. In a 2004-style election where the winner comes down to maybe, but when you're talking about 5% shifts, that starts to get out of the range of what you can get from just better phone-banking.
At least not in this sense: he stuck with things, not founding things to sell 'em to investors and move on. The first tech company Jobs founded was Apple, and that's the company he died leading.
To elaborate, the reason why is basically the same as why a battery-backed UPS charged off mains electricity doesn't violate conservation of energy: it charges off an energy source while that source is still good, in order to use the power in case the energy source cuts off.
In the case you describe, they'd be caught because they have no real business: a business whose shareholders are their only customers is not a business.
You would need to ensure that's not possible either, i.e. that corporate purchases are bona-fide corporate purchases not benefitting specific individuals.
It works reasonably well in Scandinavia, which has relatively low corporate taxes (lower than the U.S.) but quite high individual income taxes.
I think the prevalence of gas-powered dryers is a reason the U.S. still uses more inefficient dryers, because the fuel (natural gas) is fairly cheap, and much cheaper than with the electric-powered dryers that are prevalent in parts of Europe. So there's less economic incentive to improve efficiency.