Wouldn't this market be the same thing as insurance? When you buy a fire insurance policy you're betting that your house will burn down.
I think anyone who's had their house burn down would most certainly disagree with you. While you might look at their charred house and payout of two times the house's value and see a good bet, they look at the charred house and see all their possessions destroyed. I don't think that's what they were in for when they signed up for the policy. Insurance is not a bet that the event will occur. It is protection in the unlikely case that the events do happen.
Note: If you are the insurance company, then you are betting, but you are betting that the event will not occur.
This is a way for the government to tap the expertise of people who do analysis of the middle east and other areas of the world. It is essentially opening the field to experts who, while they might not have insider information, might have a good "gut instinct" for what's going on.
Mmhmm. Why then does the system need to be setup as a speculative market? To entice these people to do it? But now they don't have to put as much effort into making a real analysis. Some would say that the prospect of losing money would keep them from placing bets unless they were "pretty sure". Well, if the point is to save money, and analysts still want to get paid, I don't see them going along with it.
Still, there is no mention in the articles that this system is for analysts only.
It has offered real-money futures contracts for U.S. and other political markets including"Control of Congress" as well as the Democratic & Republican Presidential nominee and the popular vote share, Senate seats, Russian and French Presidential contests, etc.
So at this Iowa place, we're talking about more mundane events, mostly elections, and not wars? I hope the difference is readily apparent.
Before anyone says "But look! Those people aren't running around rigging elections and making money", there are better reasons to rig an election... You get to be president.
2) The US plans to destabilize Iran. A muckity-muck on the Pentagon posts something on how long it will take and then checks the probabilities experts in the field have put forth based on what each of them knows about local politics, etc. This helps us formulae our policy, give us a better idea what we are up against, and may keep us out in the first place. (This is all just guesswork, we'll know more when trading opens).
Why is a system such as this needed to weigh the opinions of experts? Experts are willing to give their opinions in long and detailed argumentative essays rather than just betting on what will happen. These reports are much more detailed and give far greater insight to any situation than 1,000 people betting on current events. The system as I have read about it does nothing to ensure that the people betting will be experts on anything.
Formulating our policy on numbers, and not on good analysis, is not the path we want to be taking.
Well, I must admit, I am surprised as well. It seems like this would be a great way to do things. The only problem with this solution is a standard, but we've seen manufacturers agree on standards before, so this one would be no different. Hell, it could probably use existing standards for WML (or whatever it's called), and incorporate the buttons on the remote as hyperlinks which submit IR data. Of course, you would want some sort of mode which allows you to customize a layout for your preference. One could provide support for older devices through the internet by providing description files which are downloaded, then transferred to the device by IR or USB.
I spent $70 on a universal learning remote, but navigating the menu on my TV still leaves me using Up/Down to move forward and backwards, and using Left/Right to move up/down. In addition, even if I did re-program those buttons, it wouldn't change the fact that the labling would be contrary to the actual functions.
Wha.. What? On the learning remote I have, you simply press the button on the universal remote you want to learn a function for, then take the original remote and press the button you want to emulate while pointing it at the universal remote. You can do this for any button. The labels on the buttons are meant for your guidance only. I don't see how reversing the "axes" on your current setup would be "contrary to the actual functions" of going up/down and forward/backward (we use left and right arrows to indicate this for rewind/ff, among other things).
1. You have taken one person's view of CM (annoy rich white people) to be the whole point of CM. That isn't true.
2. While it is true that you don't wish death upon anyone, saying that it wouldn't bother you if someone killed them is depraved indifference to human life. It's disgusting.
3. You describe the traffic from CM to be something which ruins your life. Other accounts here dispute that (I can't say on it either way because I have not participated, as a biker or driver, in CM).
4. Okay my sitting in the front of the bus analogy was a bit off. What about the civil rights marches and sit-ins that blocked streets and other public areas then? Morally unjustified?
5. Rioters should be shot on sight? What happened to due process? Or even punishments that fit the crime? Again, I *will* call you a facist because you continue to talk like one.
6. Okay you didn't say anything about minorities. The parent to your post did, and I made a little jump on that one.
7. You called the grandparent a communist, and say in this post that the bikers are now socialists. The two ideas are completely different. Which is it?
Oh, you mean the gainfully employed people who have jobs and families that they are stuck commuting between
Of course this has the disgusting implication that all the minorities cheering for CM are, of course, unemployed (and probably on welfare too, huh?)
it serves their rather infantile concept of social change by mob demand rather than rational discussion or argumentation.
Yeah that helped in the South in the 60s, didn't it? Shit, what were all those niggers doing sitting in the front of the bus trying to enact that whiny communist social change.
Remember, children, you can't push for social change when you are dead.
Yeah no one knows who Martin Luther King, Jr. or Mahatma Ghandi or even James Davis are (well true, that last one is a little too local). Not to mention that your wish of death upon people who speak out is purely facist.
Yes that's true. Except Bush is one of those people (read: right-wing) who like to read the letter of the Constitution, rather than interpret the spirit.
The letter of the Constitution says that those people are not citizens, and are therefore not under jurisdiction of the Constitution.
The spirit of the Constitution is that we're all equal under the law (IMO, and of course, the Constitution says a lot of other things). Of course, when it was written, "all" meant white landowners, but the protections of the Constitution have since been extended to all citizens (except youths). It is quite hypocritical to stand up and speak about justice when you use loopholes to avoid enforcing your own laws.
You will find no such link because no such argument exists. "If you're not breaking the law, you don't have to worry" is the rallying cry of facists. One day, the law may change, and you may be breaking the law. All of the sudden, all of your rights are gone. You signed them away when you were law-abiding.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance" -- Thom. Jefferson
When I update my system, many of the updates are for third-party packages.
Okay, but if Linus & Co. also wrote a window manager, web browser, email client, etc., you would see less "third-party" fixes, and more "Linux" fixes. If you're going to compare kernel to kernel, do it. If you're going to compare overall product to product, do that. Don't compare Linux Kernel to Windows Product.
Note: I understand the issues raised with regards to minor application exploits causing whole system hacks. That's not what I'm talking about here.
You cannot take two schools and broadly apply your experiences there across all universities. There is no such thing as a "regular American University". Are you talking public or private? A large state school, or a small liberal arts college, etc etc etc etc etc.
Personally, from my experience at a northeastern state university, the professor is the critical element.
Is the reason you can't use it truly because it's not Open Source? If so, you are the one ideologically cutting yourself off from a good piece of software.
If the reason you can't use it is because it's written for Windows, that has nothing to do with Open Source. Don't confuse the two. Open source software exists for Windows, and closed source exists for *nix, but if it's not written for your platform, chances are* you're SOL.
Interesting argument, but I think a lot of computers are already reused. Both of my grandparents have recieved hand-me-down systems, as well as several other family members. Also, the company I work for sells old systems at 25$ to employees. We're talking like p2-350 range, certainly still usable. These systems are usually reserved within 15 minutes of the notices being emailed around (~700-800 person company, and they sell off boxes as they get replaced).
Granted, my experiences could be extraordinary, but since computers, like cars, are still usable long past their "optimum life", I would reckon that many people who are not ready to shell out for a brand new box reuse systems in the same way.
I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle."
The analogy of liquor stores is severely flawed as, at least from my experience, most liquor stores and bars won't have you blowing them up if you beat the system. In fact, it is in their financial interest to serve you, assuming they don't get busted and hit with a fine (or lose their licence). Also, in most places, enforcement of these laws are very lax (the exception being college towns, basically).
To make this more secure, each passport should contain a unique id and each passport check point should be networked to a central database. The passport reviewer would then see the picture stored on the passport, the picture stored in the central database, and the face of the person standing in front of him. If there are any discrepancies simply punch his ticket for Camp X-Ray.
With the exception of the photos, doesn't this already occur? When I checked in to fly to Europe, they were demoing a new check-in system for Continental (I think) at EWR. You swiped your passport at the check-in, and they gave you a smart card which you then used to board the airplane. When they read the smartcard at the gate, my info and photo popped up on the terminal. I believe they were scanning the photos in from the passport, but the info was either accessed from a database or OCR'd, as it was in a screen font, and not just one huge raster.
This is marked insightful but I must question some of the assertions made. You claim that people throw away passports and get new ones to avoid or clean up visa problems. This implies that the nations denying visas (or whatever is happening) are doing so based SOLELY upon the Passport Number, a number which is only used to uniquely identify the passport document itself, and not the person? I surely hope not.
I think your conclusions are jumped at. Perhaps this intentional miscalibration is something that only occurs on certain brands of cars (all of my, and my family's vehicles, have been GM for several years). Perhaps none of the "Your speed is.." signs are calibrated properly in New Jersey. Perhaps the way I, or you, sit in the car introduces parallax into our reading of the speedometer, either causing me to think the speedometer is reading too low, or you too high (obviously doesn't apply to digital speedometers). I think any of these is more possible than the speedometer is broken on all the last 8 cars I've driven or all the last 8 cars you've driven...
Re:calling clueful car manufacturers
on
Pods Unite
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
FWIW, the quality through the cassette adapter and a local FM transmitter will be about equal, assuming you choose an FM frequency that will be uninterfered with.
Slashdot Mirror
anyone having trouble either doesn't have a clue about what they are doing, or has the wrong hardware misconfigured horribly.
Obviously!
Wouldn't this market be the same thing as insurance? When you buy a fire insurance policy you're betting that your house will burn down.
I think anyone who's had their house burn down would most certainly disagree with you. While you might look at their charred house and payout of two times the house's value and see a good bet, they look at the charred house and see all their possessions destroyed. I don't think that's what they were in for when they signed up for the policy. Insurance is not a bet that the event will occur. It is protection in the unlikely case that the events do happen.
Note: If you are the insurance company, then you are betting, but you are betting that the event will not occur.
This is a way for the government to tap the expertise of people who do analysis of the middle east and other areas of the world. It is essentially opening the field to experts who, while they might not have insider information, might have a good "gut instinct" for what's going on.
Mmhmm. Why then does the system need to be setup as a speculative market? To entice these people to do it? But now they don't have to put as much effort into making a real analysis. Some would say that the prospect of losing money would keep them from placing bets unless they were "pretty sure". Well, if the point is to save money, and analysts still want to get paid, I don't see them going along with it.
Still, there is no mention in the articles that this system is for analysts only.
It has offered real-money futures contracts for U.S. and other political markets including"Control of Congress" as well as the Democratic & Republican Presidential nominee and the popular vote share, Senate seats, Russian and French Presidential contests, etc.
So at this Iowa place, we're talking about more mundane events, mostly elections, and not wars? I hope the difference is readily apparent.
Before anyone says "But look! Those people aren't running around rigging elections and making money", there are better reasons to rig an election... You get to be president.
2) The US plans to destabilize Iran. A muckity-muck on the Pentagon posts something on how long it will take and then checks the probabilities experts in the field have put forth based on what each of them knows about local politics, etc. This helps us formulae our policy, give us a better idea what we are up against, and may keep us out in the first place. (This is all just guesswork, we'll know more when trading opens).
Why is a system such as this needed to weigh the opinions of experts? Experts are willing to give their opinions in long and detailed argumentative essays rather than just betting on what will happen. These reports are much more detailed and give far greater insight to any situation than 1,000 people betting on current events. The system as I have read about it does nothing to ensure that the people betting will be experts on anything.
Formulating our policy on numbers, and not on good analysis, is not the path we want to be taking.
Well, I must admit, I am surprised as well. It seems like this would be a great way to do things. The only problem with this solution is a standard, but we've seen manufacturers agree on standards before, so this one would be no different. Hell, it could probably use existing standards for WML (or whatever it's called), and incorporate the buttons on the remote as hyperlinks which submit IR data. Of course, you would want some sort of mode which allows you to customize a layout for your preference. One could provide support for older devices through the internet by providing description files which are downloaded, then transferred to the device by IR or USB.
I spent $70 on a universal learning remote, but navigating the menu on my TV still leaves me using Up/Down to move forward and backwards, and using Left/Right to move up/down. In addition, even if I did re-program those buttons, it wouldn't change the fact that the labling would be contrary to the actual functions.
Wha.. What? On the learning remote I have, you simply press the button on the universal remote you want to learn a function for, then take the original remote and press the button you want to emulate while pointing it at the universal remote. You can do this for any button. The labels on the buttons are meant for your guidance only. I don't see how reversing the "axes" on your current setup would be "contrary to the actual functions" of going up/down and forward/backward (we use left and right arrows to indicate this for rewind/ff, among other things).
Well a few points back at you.
1. You have taken one person's view of CM (annoy rich white people) to be the whole point of CM. That isn't true.
2. While it is true that you don't wish death upon anyone, saying that it wouldn't bother you if someone killed them is depraved indifference to human life. It's disgusting.
3. You describe the traffic from CM to be something which ruins your life. Other accounts here dispute that (I can't say on it either way because I have not participated, as a biker or driver, in CM).
4. Okay my sitting in the front of the bus analogy was a bit off. What about the civil rights marches and sit-ins that blocked streets and other public areas then? Morally unjustified?
5. Rioters should be shot on sight? What happened to due process? Or even punishments that fit the crime? Again, I *will* call you a facist because you continue to talk like one.
6. Okay you didn't say anything about minorities. The parent to your post did, and I made a little jump on that one.
7. You called the grandparent a communist, and say in this post that the bikers are now socialists. The two ideas are completely different. Which is it?
Oh, you mean the gainfully employed people who have jobs and families that they are stuck commuting between
Of course this has the disgusting implication that all the minorities cheering for CM are, of course, unemployed (and probably on welfare too, huh?)
it serves their rather infantile concept of social change by mob demand rather than rational discussion or argumentation.
Yeah that helped in the South in the 60s, didn't it? Shit, what were all those niggers doing sitting in the front of the bus trying to enact that whiny communist social change.
Remember, children, you can't push for social change when you are dead.
Yeah no one knows who Martin Luther King, Jr. or Mahatma Ghandi or even James Davis are (well true, that last one is a little too local). Not to mention that your wish of death upon people who speak out is purely facist.
Do you decide your position on all issues based on if it has inconvenienced you?
Yes that's true. Except Bush is one of those people (read: right-wing) who like to read the letter of the Constitution, rather than interpret the spirit.
The letter of the Constitution says that those people are not citizens, and are therefore not under jurisdiction of the Constitution.
The spirit of the Constitution is that we're all equal under the law (IMO, and of course, the Constitution says a lot of other things). Of course, when it was written, "all" meant white landowners, but the protections of the Constitution have since been extended to all citizens (except youths). It is quite hypocritical to stand up and speak about justice when you use loopholes to avoid enforcing your own laws.
Only 6 people? So some families sitting in the park are breaking the law?
You will find no such link because no such argument exists. "If you're not breaking the law, you don't have to worry" is the rallying cry of facists. One day, the law may change, and you may be breaking the law. All of the sudden, all of your rights are gone. You signed them away when you were law-abiding.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance" -- Thom. Jefferson
When I update my system, many of the updates are for third-party packages.
Okay, but if Linus & Co. also wrote a window manager, web browser, email client, etc., you would see less "third-party" fixes, and more "Linux" fixes. If you're going to compare kernel to kernel, do it. If you're going to compare overall product to product, do that. Don't compare Linux Kernel to Windows Product.
Note: I understand the issues raised with regards to minor application exploits causing whole system hacks. That's not what I'm talking about here.
You cannot take two schools and broadly apply your experiences there across all universities. There is no such thing as a "regular American University". Are you talking public or private? A large state school, or a small liberal arts college, etc etc etc etc etc.
Personally, from my experience at a northeastern state university, the professor is the critical element.
Is the reason you can't use it truly because it's not Open Source? If so, you are the one ideologically cutting yourself off from a good piece of software.
If the reason you can't use it is because it's written for Windows, that has nothing to do with Open Source. Don't confuse the two. Open source software exists for Windows, and closed source exists for *nix, but if it's not written for your platform, chances are* you're SOL.
*Yes, programs can be ported.
Interesting argument, but I think a lot of computers are already reused. Both of my grandparents have recieved hand-me-down systems, as well as several other family members. Also, the company I work for sells old systems at 25$ to employees. We're talking like p2-350 range, certainly still usable. These systems are usually reserved within 15 minutes of the notices being emailed around (~700-800 person company, and they sell off boxes as they get replaced).
Granted, my experiences could be extraordinary, but since computers, like cars, are still usable long past their "optimum life", I would reckon that many people who are not ready to shell out for a brand new box reuse systems in the same way.
Wild guesses, but you get teh meaning.
If by "meaning" you mean, "I made up a bunch of shit and proved nothing," then yes, I got it.
I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle."
* the one potentially valid use for them after they leave the store
Do you know how to think critically, or do you just believe everything you read in a +5, Insightful comment?
The analogy of liquor stores is severely flawed as, at least from my experience, most liquor stores and bars won't have you blowing them up if you beat the system. In fact, it is in their financial interest to serve you, assuming they don't get busted and hit with a fine (or lose their licence). Also, in most places, enforcement of these laws are very lax (the exception being college towns, basically).
To make this more secure, each passport should contain a unique id and each passport check point should be networked to a central database. The passport reviewer would then see the picture stored on the passport, the picture stored in the central database, and the face of the person standing in front of him. If there are any discrepancies simply punch his ticket for Camp X-Ray.
With the exception of the photos, doesn't this already occur? When I checked in to fly to Europe, they were demoing a new check-in system for Continental (I think) at EWR. You swiped your passport at the check-in, and they gave you a smart card which you then used to board the airplane. When they read the smartcard at the gate, my info and photo popped up on the terminal. I believe they were scanning the photos in from the passport, but the info was either accessed from a database or OCR'd, as it was in a screen font, and not just one huge raster.
Note at any time that my memory could be flawed.
This is marked insightful but I must question some of the assertions made. You claim that people throw away passports and get new ones to avoid or clean up visa problems. This implies that the nations denying visas (or whatever is happening) are doing so based SOLELY upon the Passport Number, a number which is only used to uniquely identify the passport document itself, and not the person? I surely hope not.
I think your conclusions are jumped at. Perhaps this intentional miscalibration is something that only occurs on certain brands of cars (all of my, and my family's vehicles, have been GM for several years). Perhaps none of the "Your speed is.." signs are calibrated properly in New Jersey. Perhaps the way I, or you, sit in the car introduces parallax into our reading of the speedometer, either causing me to think the speedometer is reading too low, or you too high (obviously doesn't apply to digital speedometers). I think any of these is more possible than the speedometer is broken on all the last 8 cars I've driven or all the last 8 cars you've driven...
FWIW, the quality through the cassette adapter and a local FM transmitter will be about equal, assuming you choose an FM frequency that will be uninterfered with.