find the perfect balance of just enough humans to make the ads profitable, and advertisers feel like they're actually hitting an eyeball every now and then.
All they really need to do is convince people that the ads are profitable. They probably aren't, even if every hit actually was a real eyeball, but the whole purpose of the marketing department is to make the client believe that the money they are spending actually results in more sales.
Why not a tower (microcell) in EVERY home, provided by the carrier... along with fiber to the home.
Heck, why not go one further and instead of making it a cell, just have the phone hardwired to it. It can even be powered by it. Then those crappy batteries won't keep dying on us. Plus since it is tied to the house, there is no need for everyone in the whole house to have one. I'm telling you, it's the wave of the future!
Game publishers price in a way that pretty much demands a secondary market. The path to make used sales irrelevant is easy: lower prices so there isn't appreciable profit to be had by trying to facilitate a used market. People don't wan't to pay $60 on a game they'll, on average, maybe play for a week before being done with it. This is the most effective strategy that can possible be done.
I guess the game companies are pandering to people like me, who buy a game with the intent to play it until they have finished it, found all the easter eggs and gotten 100% on all the subgames and side quests. I got Skyrim and Final Fantasy XIII-2 for Christmas and I have not even opened FF yet. I have over 200 hours into Skyrim and I am not done yet. That's about 30 cents per hour of entertainment.
Now I understand that there are people who just want to ooh and ah at the eye candy for a couple of hours, download some cheats to get through the storyline in record time and then move on to the next game. perhaps game companies should shove out some low cost shiny drivel for $10 to appease that group.
One leading indication to me of the worthiness of a product is if the company uses it's own product. Apparently Zuckerberg doesn't use it. So I guess it is not worthwhile for me to use it either.
The trouble with shorting is that you have to be confident about both the equilibrium state and the trajectory...Well then buy a put option three years in the future. You can pick up the right to sell the stock at $18 in January 2014 for only $4.30 right now. If the stock price goes down to $2.30 as you think it will, then you can sell it for $18 minus your $4.30 for the put and laugh all the way to the bank.
Of course, to me, the fact that an out of the money Put is that high shows pretty good confidence that options traders think the price has some more drop left in it.
Taking click-throughs into account was something that evolved as a way to reassure advertising purchasers that what they were paying for was proportional to effectiveness of ads in motivating behavior.
I say they should take it one step further. They only get paid if somebody buys something on my website. This is the way Amazon compensated their partners. It gives the advertising companies more skin in the game and more of an incentive to promote sales, instead of promoting impressions or clicks.
If the lawyer will take the case for a cut of the proceeds, what do you have to lose? Time? What's it worth to you when you are unemployed?
I know several people that make a decent living just off of suing somebody or 4 or 5 years. Sad but true. If you get fired for not turning over a FB password, that is a legitimate lawsuit, IMHO.
And what about in a state like where I live, NC? Employeer "I want your facebook information" me "no" Employeer "ok you are fired" me "doh!" a lot of states are right to work states where they can fire you for nothing if they so chose to. Even if not they can find something to fire you for in no right to work states.
Sounds like you were fired for cause, and an unjustified cause at that. I'd hire a lawyer. They can't fire you for refusing to break the Facebook's Terms of Service.
This was so much easier when they competed nude. Well, of course, and the ancient Olympics was male only. That also helps solve the gender issue, for right or wrong.
I used to do that at radio shack, minus the obscene text. I was more into making interesting graphical patterns, or making random bits of sand fall down into randomly placed lines boxes and circles on the screen. I could usually write something like that in about 5 minutes. Sometimes the salesmen got annoyed, but then if they didn't want people running programs on it, then why was it sitting there hooked up to a TV?
One gate per participant. That's simple enough with lasers. But if the clock starts differently for each of them, then how do they know if they are behind and need to press faster? They aren't racing the clock, they are racing each other.
They are racing against each other. They don't necessarily care about their time. Maybe they want to beat the record or whatever, but mostly they want to beat the other guy.
0.03 sec is enormous in the context of the Olympics. The difference between Gold and Silver medals is sometimes 0.01 sec.
But the end of the race doesn't correlate that closely to the beginning of the race. If the timing was.03 off, that doesn't mean that the Gold winner would now be.04 seconds ahead (or.02 behind). The runners run based in part on what their opponents are doing, and the last bit is likely to be just as close if they all started at the same time or if one started 1/4 second late.
Use a light, then, for Pete's sake. Why make this difficult?
I don't buy this truck of measuring the time to ten thousandths of a second anyway. 1/10,000 of a second, we are talking about 1/100th of an inch at top speed for a runner. I don't believe they have that kind of accuracy in their measurement.
Or do it the way it's done in alpine sports - let the participant choose when to start within a short interval, and measure when he actually breaks the starting line. That way there would be new tactics at play too. How do you do that when there are multiple people in the race?
Bizarrely, even when I was a kid, all the textbooks had everything measured in metric, but even at that young age, U.S. kids already seem to know imperial units and find the metric stuff to be something that has to be converted. If it is not taught along with learning to talk, then it is too late.
Modern music on the radio is most often not derived from live work, where the band gets feedback , instead it is constructed piecemeal in a studio. Finally, and to the primary loss, the thousands of hours of interplay between the members does not happen as often, the stuff is made up by one or two people. Repeated plays via corrupted channels forced into specifically limited formats is the final blow. It has been known since the 30's that just play it again reduces the resistance, people end up "liking" the stuff.
You say true. It used to be that acts performed live, and then someone would say "we need to get that on tape". Now, it is just the opposite. Bands sit down in a studio and put down some songs, then they go tour it. It could have been around the 1950s or 1960s that the transition really took place, so it was unusual for a band to be touring material that hadn't been recorded yet even in the 1970s. Pink Floyd toured "The dark Side of the Moon" for about three years before ever going in to the studio with it. And that album still sells millions every year.
The subtle yet profound chord progressions of rap music must have been overlooked.
Rap Music has more profound chord progressions because they usually pick good music to steal the endlessly looped sample from.
I can't tell you how much it bugs me to listen to a stolen riff in a rap song, and be thinking to myself "oh, this is where he builds up to the transition to the next part and then , here it comes....oh crap", as they suddenly go back to the beginning of the riff and repeat it 200 more times.
"Hey, look! In the past they made complex, ponderous music in line with the ponderous, complex architecture and interior decoration that was in style that day. Today, we prefer simpler, smoother lines in our rococco chairs, and what do you know, we prefer simpler, more elegant music as well! Maybe music reflects the society we live in?"
Was it that we preferred simpler, smoother lines, or was it that we couldn't afford the more complex designs? I, for one, would love to have the intricate woodwork of a 17th century house in my home, but to pay someone to do that (if you could find anyone who knew how) would raise the cost of the house by a factor of 10 at least.
I play along with a click at the behest of our band leader. I can play with the click just fine, but I just don't understand why the ability to play at exactly the same tempo all the way through a song suddenly became a requirement. I mean, for thousands of years, we have been able to vary the tempo within a piece of music at strategic points and it was considered a good thing, but now suddenly being able to hold a steady beat for part of a piece and then hold a different steady beat for the next part is somehow bad?
ringo starr is the most overrated drummer of all time, any drummer could have been in that band and nothing would have been different
All of the Beatles were overrated individually. But when you, put them together, well, then they were overrated as a group. I mean, they did put out some incredibly well orchestrated and forward thinking music, but they also put out a lot of bubble gum crap (and that is where the money came from).
Slashdot Mirror
find the perfect balance of just enough humans to make the ads profitable, and advertisers feel like they're actually hitting an eyeball every now and then.
All they really need to do is convince people that the ads are profitable. They probably aren't, even if every hit actually was a real eyeball, but the whole purpose of the marketing department is to make the client believe that the money they are spending actually results in more sales.
Just the fact that he HAS a twitter account was enough to lose my vote.
Why not a tower (microcell) in EVERY home, provided by the carrier... along with fiber to the home.
Heck, why not go one further and instead of making it a cell, just have the phone hardwired to it. It can even be powered by it. Then those crappy batteries won't keep dying on us. Plus since it is tied to the house, there is no need for everyone in the whole house to have one. I'm telling you, it's the wave of the future!
Game publishers price in a way that pretty much demands a secondary market. The path to make used sales irrelevant is easy: lower prices so there isn't appreciable profit to be had by trying to facilitate a used market. People don't wan't to pay $60 on a game they'll, on average, maybe play for a week before being done with it. This is the most effective strategy that can possible be done.
I guess the game companies are pandering to people like me, who buy a game with the intent to play it until they have finished it, found all the easter eggs and gotten 100% on all the subgames and side quests. I got Skyrim and Final Fantasy XIII-2 for Christmas and I have not even opened FF yet. I have over 200 hours into Skyrim and I am not done yet. That's about 30 cents per hour of entertainment.
Now I understand that there are people who just want to ooh and ah at the eye candy for a couple of hours, download some cheats to get through the storyline in record time and then move on to the next game. perhaps game companies should shove out some low cost shiny drivel for $10 to appease that group.
One leading indication to me of the worthiness of a product is if the company uses it's own product. Apparently Zuckerberg doesn't use it. So I guess it is not worthwhile for me to use it either.
I was all excited at first because I thought they were dropping the UI. Instead they are just changing the name. Kind of like Ford renaming the Pinto.
The trouble with shorting is that you have to be confident about both the equilibrium state and the trajectory...Well then buy a put option three years in the future. You can pick up the right to sell the stock at $18 in January 2014 for only $4.30 right now. If the stock price goes down to $2.30 as you think it will, then you can sell it for $18 minus your $4.30 for the put and laugh all the way to the bank.
Of course, to me, the fact that an out of the money Put is that high shows pretty good confidence that options traders think the price has some more drop left in it.
Taking click-throughs into account was something that evolved as a way to reassure advertising purchasers that what they were paying for was proportional to effectiveness of ads in motivating behavior.
I say they should take it one step further. They only get paid if somebody buys something on my website. This is the way Amazon compensated their partners. It gives the advertising companies more skin in the game and more of an incentive to promote sales, instead of promoting impressions or clicks.
If the lawyer will take the case for a cut of the proceeds, what do you have to lose? Time? What's it worth to you when you are unemployed?
I know several people that make a decent living just off of suing somebody or 4 or 5 years. Sad but true. If you get fired for not turning over a FB password, that is a legitimate lawsuit, IMHO.
And what about in a state like where I live, NC? Employeer "I want your facebook information" me "no" Employeer "ok you are fired" me "doh!" a lot of states are right to work states where they can fire you for nothing if they so chose to. Even if not they can find something to fire you for in no right to work states. Sounds like you were fired for cause, and an unjustified cause at that. I'd hire a lawyer. They can't fire you for refusing to break the Facebook's Terms of Service.
This was so much easier when they competed nude. Well, of course, and the ancient Olympics was male only. That also helps solve the gender issue, for right or wrong.
I used to do that at radio shack, minus the obscene text. I was more into making interesting graphical patterns, or making random bits of sand fall down into randomly placed lines boxes and circles on the screen. I could usually write something like that in about 5 minutes. Sometimes the salesmen got annoyed, but then if they didn't want people running programs on it, then why was it sitting there hooked up to a TV?
One gate per participant. That's simple enough with lasers.
But if the clock starts differently for each of them, then how do they know if they are behind and need to press faster? They aren't racing the clock, they are racing each other.
They are racing against each other. They don't necessarily care about their time. Maybe they want to beat the record or whatever, but mostly they want to beat the other guy.
0.03 sec is enormous in the context of the Olympics. The difference between Gold and Silver medals is sometimes 0.01 sec. .03 off, that doesn't mean that the Gold winner would now be .04 seconds ahead (or .02 behind). The runners run based in part on what their opponents are doing, and the last bit is likely to be just as close if they all started at the same time or if one started 1/4 second late.
But the end of the race doesn't correlate that closely to the beginning of the race. If the timing was
Use a light, then, for Pete's sake. Why make this difficult?
I don't buy this truck of measuring the time to ten thousandths of a second anyway. 1/10,000 of a second, we are talking about 1/100th of an inch at top speed for a runner. I don't believe they have that kind of accuracy in their measurement.
Or do it the way it's done in alpine sports - let the participant choose when to start within a short interval, and measure when he actually breaks the starting line. That way there would be new tactics at play too.
How do you do that when there are multiple people in the race?
Bizarrely, even when I was a kid, all the textbooks had everything measured in metric, but even at that young age, U.S. kids already seem to know imperial units and find the metric stuff to be something that has to be converted. If it is not taught along with learning to talk, then it is too late.
$2 million in capital raised. So what are they opening, a Burger King?
The Magic 8 Ball says "Outlook not so good"
Modern music on the radio is most often not derived from live work, where the band gets feedback , instead it is constructed piecemeal in a studio. Finally, and to the primary loss, the thousands of hours of interplay between the members does not happen as often, the stuff is made up by one or two people. Repeated plays via corrupted channels forced into specifically limited formats is the final blow. It has been known since the 30's that just play it again reduces the resistance, people end up "liking" the stuff.
You say true. It used to be that acts performed live, and then someone would say "we need to get that on tape". Now, it is just the opposite. Bands sit down in a studio and put down some songs, then they go tour it. It could have been around the 1950s or 1960s that the transition really took place, so it was unusual for a band to be touring material that hadn't been recorded yet even in the 1970s. Pink Floyd toured "The dark Side of the Moon" for about three years before ever going in to the studio with it. And that album still sells millions every year.
The subtle yet profound chord progressions of rap music must have been overlooked.
Rap Music has more profound chord progressions because they usually pick good music to steal the endlessly looped sample from.
I can't tell you how much it bugs me to listen to a stolen riff in a rap song, and be thinking to myself "oh, this is where he builds up to the transition to the next part and then , here it comes....oh crap", as they suddenly go back to the beginning of the riff and repeat it 200 more times.
"Hey, look! In the past they made complex, ponderous music in line with the ponderous, complex architecture and interior decoration that was in style that day. Today, we prefer simpler, smoother lines in our rococco chairs, and what do you know, we prefer simpler, more elegant music as well! Maybe music reflects the society we live in?"
Was it that we preferred simpler, smoother lines, or was it that we couldn't afford the more complex designs? I, for one, would love to have the intricate woodwork of a 17th century house in my home, but to pay someone to do that (if you could find anyone who knew how) would raise the cost of the house by a factor of 10 at least.
I play along with a click at the behest of our band leader. I can play with the click just fine, but I just don't understand why the ability to play at exactly the same tempo all the way through a song suddenly became a requirement. I mean, for thousands of years, we have been able to vary the tempo within a piece of music at strategic points and it was considered a good thing, but now suddenly being able to hold a steady beat for part of a piece and then hold a different steady beat for the next part is somehow bad?
ringo starr is the most overrated drummer of all time, any drummer could have been in that band and nothing would have been different
All of the Beatles were overrated individually. But when you, put them together, well, then they were overrated as a group. I mean, they did put out some incredibly well orchestrated and forward thinking music, but they also put out a lot of bubble gum crap (and that is where the money came from).