The problem is, they apparently didn't win by the definition of 'win'. Only the machine looked like it won. The machine never even logged the fact that someone got a payout.
Seems like these clowns found a way to make the machine flash its lights - unclear if they even had to pull the lever.
They machines list the payout... something like 4 'whatevers' in a row, and you get the jackpot. The machine doesn't say "If the lights flash, you get the jackpot".
Uhm, if it shows up in a PET scan, its a physical phenomenon.
Well at least you have a theory on the matter. However, things still have causes an effects. You seem to have theorized an effect, not so much on the cause. Exactly what projects what?
And my 6 year old came back from school think that if she stood in front of a mirror and spun around a few times saying "bloody Mary" the ghost of Mary (whoever that is) would appear.
Guess what. No ghost. To even think there was a chance of a ghost showing is ridiculous.
You don't light a match because you _KNOW_ gasoline might be in the can and you _KNOW_ that its flammable.
With the idea of ghosts, a rational person would understand that there is no evidence that ghost even exist nor is there even a testable definition of what a ghost is. There is no danger - not even a theoretical one.
Now, As one church had on its sign facing the road: "Honk if you believe in Jesus, Text if you want to meet him" Somehow I don't think rapture would be triggered by a text message... however, that 3 car pile up....
BTW, your first hand account with the 3 people that 'risked' everything. How exactly did that go?
Before you start an experiment looking for ghost, take a moment to at least come up with a theory on what a ghost would be and how it would exist.
All of the so called ghost hunters seem to skip that part and assume that ghosts might exist (actually, they assume they DO exist - yet another leap) and are simply investigating to find out if ghosts exist at a particular location.
To date, there has been no scientific evidence that ghost exists.
If you can prove the existance of a ghost, I'm sure it would qualify for James Randii's Million dollar prize.
I think there is another point to be made as well. Not only did life based on DNA that required phosphate start here on earth, but apparently life based on arsenic did as well.
In effect, not only did lightning strike twice (question if there is other life in the universe) but it struck twice on the same planet.
If you buy through Paypal and receive the product via a download, there is no guarantee that the product got into the hands of the legal owner of the credit card.
So with stolen credit cards or Paypal accounts, some people must have been downloading the game (or however its registered). When the rightful owners found out, they had the charges reversed. Leaving Paypal to prove that the money wasn't indeed stolen.
Paypal offers protection only if you send to 'verified address'. If you send the product to some random address, then you are taking a risk. Likewise with activation codes.
If Bob.Smith@hotmail.com trys to buy something from you using a Paypal account assigned to Nancy.Smith@google.com, your an idiot if you send the activation code to Bob.Smith@hotmail.com. Activation code should only be sent to Nancy.Smith.
Bottom line, if he has 600,000 in the account, you can bet Paypal was just hit up by a credit card company to return some of that money. Paypal is just trying to figure out exactly what has to be returned. If its a lot of accounts, Paypal might freeze the account just to see how much money needs to be returned. Eventually, when whatever statute of limitations runs out, he will get the balance (Paypal of course gets the interest over those many months).
I've had 0 problems with Paypal. I only ship to verified addresses.
If you could track every atom of the lighter fluid, you'd see that there are as many atoms from the lighter fluid around after the combustion as before. In a nuclear explosion, there are fewer atoms around.
Uhm, with 'nuclear' explosions, aren't you "splitting the atom" and thus have more atoms in the end?:)
Well, the other thing they could do is send a letter giving Think Geek the rights to parody their slogan. That still acknowledges that they are protecting and licensing their products. Oh well
Actually, the "Contract with America" was an agreement to bring 10 things up for a vote. I'm not sure what the pass/reject rate was, but they (the Republicans) did live up to that part.
By all accounts, the Patriot was an anti-aircraft missle system that was modified to intercept short/medium range missles. The difference is that the missle travel at much higher speeds and it exposed a software flaw. So the critics would have you scrap the entire Patriot system - the backers would have you fix the software.
In this case the article makes a few mistakes. 1) You must hit the warhead in the missile... How do they know this? If the interceptor hits the incoming missile and breaks into pieces - leaving the warhead intact, what are the expected g-forces on that warhead? Heat loads? Pressure loads? Bottom line these 'experts' are talking out of their @$$. So they really have no idea what the real success criteria is. 2) They do not state that the theory behind the interceptor is flawed. In theory, is the resolution and speed of the radar fast enough? etc. If the theory is sound, then it must be a problem in the execution? What part.
What are they arguing as an alternative? If we have no defense against (insert axis of evil country name here) send missiles our way, and we believe they are going to send missiles our way. Are they suggesting we just take whatever they throw at us or should we take preemptive action?
Or should we just stop the funding and give all the money to one of their causes?
This is a geo-synchronous satellite. They are at an altitude of something like 26,000 miles. The maximum altitude of the current space shuttle is about 450 miles. There is a just a little bit of a gap between those numbers.
A space shuttle could haul a rocket up to that altitude...
The best solution would be to send up a rocket that could grapple the satellite and boost it out of that orbit. I'm not sure if its cheaper to de-orbit it or just move it a few hundred miles outside the orbit, circularize the orbit, and just stop worrying about it.
It has been estimated, at least for the IPAD, Apple's profit margin is 42%. And I suspect the profit margin on their desktops is in the same ballpark (either that or they are paying a lot more then expect at their sweat shops). Running that kind of profit margin when everyone else is lucky to get 15% is signs of monopolistic behavior. Just a sign mind you.
Add some more behaviors like locking out one phone vender or even buying ARM and then raising the price of ARM cores might be enough to trigger FTC investigation.
Did someone already say that Apple is the No. 1 desktop computer manufacturer?
Re:Buying ARM for a leg?
on
Apple To Buy ARM?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
In the past Apple has avoided anti-trust because of their market share (or lack of) and real competition from the clone makers. If Apple moves to stifle competition, they can be assured that the hammer will come down. The risk isn't just from the FTC, but from Europe and Asia as well. Right now Apple enjoys 42% profit margins (IPAD and judging by what they want to for their computers, they probably make just as much off the desktop). If for instance the FTC steps in, the remedy might be splitting the company into two - one hardware, one software. The floodgates for cheap clones will be open at that point.
Right now Apple enjoys a certain amount of lock in. You must buy from their store, you must develop for their platform the way they demand and use their computer with their operating system to do so. And of course fan boys to pay them.
Do they really want to risk that?
Full Disclosure: I was a fan boy in the early 1990s. About $7000 later (at that point more than I ever spent on a car), I was stuck with outdated hardware with no support from Apple to upgrade (just buy new). I also have a G4 - also outdated. So for the new every 2 (years) fans, congrats, I'm happy for you. My dual CPU, dual core Opteron setup (with SLI) was a slow evolution from ASUS dual P3 system that I bought circa 1999. Never spent more than $1000 at any upgrade step and only 'had' to upgrade every 3-4 years.
That's an awesome idea. At least make it available for some nominal charge. (And make the offer again at the end of the movie).
Theaters are always looking for a way to make money - AFAIK they barely break even on the ticket sales and rely mostly on concessions - how about selling something useful.
Not because the movie was spectacular. But because of what many (most/all) missed.
When the technicians are putting Quaid under for the vacation implant with the 'secret agent' option - one of the techs chuckles "Mars with a blue sky"
I guess I'll have to read Phillip K Dick's book to see if that was the intention.
The question isn't "Why do you smoke?", The quest is "Why did you ever start to smoke?"
As you said:"Yes, I'm aware that it stinks. Yes, I'm aware that it is extremely horrible for my health." All the more reason to question why an intelligent person would start.
"::shrug:: What can I say, I still enjoy it."
Yes, the same result when I ask my 3yr old why he wrote on the hallway wall.
If the handgun was cocked, it wouldn't take much force at all.
Bottom line, idiots who leaved cocked, and loaded weapons laying around are the issue (it doesn't even matter if there are kids around or not). He fails the gun safety IQ test.
Careless? There are many things in life you should never be careless about - firearms is one of them.
The moment you turn off the rockets, the path the object takes is 'ballistic' by definition. The issue is if the ballistic path intersects with earth (including dense atmosphere) or not. If the answer is no, then its either in orbit or if it has enough energy, on an escape path (govern more by the gravity of other objects).
A 2nd burn to circularize an orbit is just that. Instead of a elliptical orbit, it becomes more circular.
Real time games are a bad example because in general the trouble with threads is you have to sync them up. The entire program becomes give feedback, gather input, calculate stuff, give feedback. You generally need to make sure the calculate stuff parts starts and stops with some predictability.
Some games seem to run their AI in separate threads. These seems to be a reasonable compromise. So when the game does 'gather input' it asks the AI subsection where it wants to go at that instant.
However, its judging by the stability of games like Fallout3, its unclear if either the programmers know how to deal with threads or the underyling OS is ready for intense real time updates.
Around here, the programmers never met a thread they didn't like. Add a requirement like - "display dialog box to confirm shutdown" and suddenly the thread count in the application jumps by 4...
Could things be done more efficiently? No, because that would require thinking and thermodynamically it is cheaper just to spawn another thread.
This is just a patent battle. RIM fired the first shot by accusing Motorola of violating its patents. Motorola is countering by saying "Oh, yeah, not only are you violating our patents, but you shouldn't be allowed to import your stuff until all this gets resolved".
Bottom line, they are both just posturing. In the end they will sign some sort of cross licensing agreement that will allow each other to user each other's patents and more importantly, cut everyone else out (its the startups that aren't part of this that will loose in the end).
All this over patents that are probably little more than: "A phone, that can display information on a screen".
BTW, Last time I used 'Good Technologies" push software it totally screwed up my phone. If an email came through while you were on the phone, you got disconnected. Yes, they are fighting over that piece of crap.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, they apparently didn't win by the definition of 'win'. Only the machine looked like it won. The machine never even logged the fact that someone got a payout.
Seems like these clowns found a way to make the machine flash its lights - unclear if they even had to pull the lever.
They machines list the payout... something like 4 'whatevers' in a row, and you get the jackpot. The machine doesn't say "If the lights flash, you get the jackpot".
Uhm, if it shows up in a PET scan, its a physical phenomenon.
Well at least you have a theory on the matter. However, things still have causes an effects. You seem to have theorized an effect, not so much on the cause. Exactly what projects what?
And my 6 year old came back from school think that if she stood in front of a mirror and spun around a few times saying "bloody Mary" the ghost of Mary (whoever that is) would appear.
Guess what. No ghost. To even think there was a chance of a ghost showing is ridiculous.
You don't light a match because you _KNOW_ gasoline might be in the can and you _KNOW_ that its flammable.
With the idea of ghosts, a rational person would understand that there is no evidence that ghost even exist nor is there even a testable definition of what a ghost is. There is no danger - not even a theoretical one.
Now, As one church had on its sign facing the road: "Honk if you believe in Jesus, Text if you want to meet him" Somehow I don't think rapture would be triggered by a text message... however, that 3 car pile up....
BTW, your first hand account with the 3 people that 'risked' everything. How exactly did that go?
Before you start an experiment looking for ghost, take a moment to at least come up with a theory on what a ghost would be and how it would exist.
All of the so called ghost hunters seem to skip that part and assume that ghosts might exist (actually, they assume they DO exist - yet another leap) and are simply investigating to find out if ghosts exist at a particular location.
To date, there has been no scientific evidence that ghost exists.
If you can prove the existance of a ghost, I'm sure it would qualify for James Randii's Million dollar prize.
I think there is another point to be made as well. Not only did life based on DNA that required phosphate start here on earth, but apparently life based on arsenic did as well.
In effect, not only did lightning strike twice (question if there is other life in the universe) but it struck twice on the same planet.
wxWidgets - helping X-windows newbs like me since at least 1997.
Nice job.
Next up, a study on perfect female breast size.
"No ma'am, I'm not oogling you, I'm conducting a study"
If you buy through Paypal and receive the product via a download, there is no guarantee that the product got into the hands of the legal owner of the credit card.
So with stolen credit cards or Paypal accounts, some people must have been downloading the game (or however its registered). When the rightful owners found out, they had the charges reversed. Leaving Paypal to prove that the money wasn't indeed stolen.
Paypal offers protection only if you send to 'verified address'. If you send the product to some random address, then you are taking a risk. Likewise with activation codes.
If Bob.Smith@hotmail.com trys to buy something from you using a Paypal account assigned to Nancy.Smith@google.com, your an idiot if you send the activation code to Bob.Smith@hotmail.com. Activation code should only be sent to Nancy.Smith.
Bottom line, if he has 600,000 in the account, you can bet Paypal was just hit up by a credit card company to return some of that money. Paypal is just trying to figure out exactly what has to be returned. If its a lot of accounts, Paypal might freeze the account just to see how much money needs to be returned. Eventually, when whatever statute of limitations runs out, he will get the balance (Paypal of course gets the interest over those many months).
I've had 0 problems with Paypal. I only ship to verified addresses.
If you could track every atom of the lighter fluid, you'd see that there are as many atoms from the lighter fluid around after the combustion as before. In a nuclear explosion, there are fewer atoms around.
Uhm, with 'nuclear' explosions, aren't you "splitting the atom" and thus have more atoms in the end? :)
Well, the other thing they could do is send a letter giving Think Geek the rights to parody their slogan. That still acknowledges that they are protecting and licensing their products. Oh well
Nope, your the idiot.
The original poster clearly said "speeding"
BTW, if in a given population more than say... 85% commit murder, then yeah, go ahead make it legal. :)
Actually, the "Contract with America" was an agreement to bring 10 things up for a vote. I'm not sure what the pass/reject rate was, but they (the Republicans) did live up to that part.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America
By all accounts, the Patriot was an anti-aircraft missle system that was modified to intercept short/medium range missles. The difference is that the missle travel at much higher speeds and it exposed a software flaw. So the critics would have you scrap the entire Patriot system - the backers would have you fix the software.
In this case the article makes a few mistakes.
1) You must hit the warhead in the missile... How do they know this? If the interceptor hits the incoming missile and breaks into pieces - leaving the warhead intact, what are the expected g-forces on that warhead? Heat loads? Pressure loads? Bottom line these 'experts' are talking out of their @$$. So they really have no idea what the real success criteria is.
2) They do not state that the theory behind the interceptor is flawed. In theory, is the resolution and speed of the radar fast enough? etc. If the theory is sound, then it must be a problem in the execution? What part.
What are they arguing as an alternative? If we have no defense against (insert axis of evil country name here) send missiles our way, and we believe they are going to send missiles our way. Are they suggesting we just take whatever they throw at us or should we take preemptive action?
Or should we just stop the funding and give all the money to one of their causes?
This is a geo-synchronous satellite. They are at an altitude of something like 26,000 miles. The maximum altitude of the current space shuttle is about 450 miles. There is a just a little bit of a gap between those numbers.
A space shuttle could haul a rocket up to that altitude...
The best solution would be to send up a rocket that could grapple the satellite and boost it out of that orbit. I'm not sure if its cheaper to de-orbit it or just move it a few hundred miles outside the orbit, circularize the orbit, and just stop worrying about it.
smartphone maybe not.
It has been estimated, at least for the IPAD, Apple's profit margin is 42%. And I suspect the profit margin on their desktops is in the same ballpark (either that or they are paying a lot more then expect at their sweat shops). Running that kind of profit margin when everyone else is lucky to get 15% is signs of monopolistic behavior. Just a sign mind you.
Add some more behaviors like locking out one phone vender or even buying ARM and then raising the price of ARM cores might be enough to trigger FTC investigation.
Did someone already say that Apple is the No. 1 desktop computer manufacturer?
In the past Apple has avoided anti-trust because of their market share (or lack of) and real competition from the clone makers. If Apple moves to stifle competition, they can be assured that the hammer will come down. The risk isn't just from the FTC, but from Europe and Asia as well. Right now Apple enjoys 42% profit margins (IPAD and judging by what they want to for their computers, they probably make just as much off the desktop). If for instance the FTC steps in, the remedy might be splitting the company into two - one hardware, one software. The floodgates for cheap clones will be open at that point.
Right now Apple enjoys a certain amount of lock in. You must buy from their store, you must develop for their platform the way they demand and use their computer with their operating system to do so. And of course fan boys to pay them.
Do they really want to risk that?
Full Disclosure: I was a fan boy in the early 1990s. About $7000 later (at that point more than I ever spent on a car), I was stuck with outdated hardware with no support from Apple to upgrade (just buy new). I also have a G4 - also outdated. So for the new every 2 (years) fans, congrats, I'm happy for you. My dual CPU, dual core Opteron setup (with SLI) was a slow evolution from ASUS dual P3 system that I bought circa 1999. Never spent more than $1000 at any upgrade step and only 'had' to upgrade every 3-4 years.
That's an awesome idea. At least make it available for some nominal charge. (And make the offer again at the end of the movie).
Theaters are always looking for a way to make money - AFAIK they barely break even on the ticket sales and rely mostly on concessions - how about selling something useful.
Not because the movie was spectacular. But because of what many (most/all) missed.
When the technicians are putting Quaid under for the vacation implant with the 'secret agent' option - one of the techs chuckles "Mars with a blue sky"
I guess I'll have to read Phillip K Dick's book to see if that was the intention.
The question isn't "Why do you smoke?", The quest is "Why did you ever start to smoke?"
As you said:"Yes, I'm aware that it stinks. Yes, I'm aware that it is extremely horrible for my health." All the more reason to question why an intelligent person would start.
"::shrug:: What can I say, I still enjoy it."
Yes, the same result when I ask my 3yr old why he wrote on the hallway wall.
Are you saying but for the fact that you would be punished via jail time, that having your child killed is not deterrent enough? Wow.
If the handgun was cocked, it wouldn't take much force at all.
Bottom line, idiots who leaved cocked, and loaded weapons laying around are the issue (it doesn't even matter if there are kids around or not). He fails the gun safety IQ test.
Careless? There are many things in life you should never be careless about - firearms is one of them.
The moment you turn off the rockets, the path the object takes is 'ballistic' by definition.
The issue is if the ballistic path intersects with earth (including dense atmosphere) or not. If the answer is no, then its either in orbit or if it has enough energy, on an escape path (govern more by the gravity of other objects).
A 2nd burn to circularize an orbit is just that. Instead of a elliptical orbit, it becomes more circular.
Real time games are a bad example because in general the trouble with threads is you have to sync them up. The entire program becomes give feedback, gather input, calculate stuff, give feedback. You generally need to make sure the calculate stuff parts starts and stops with some predictability.
Some games seem to run their AI in separate threads. These seems to be a reasonable compromise. So when the game does 'gather input' it asks the AI subsection where it wants to go at that instant.
However, its judging by the stability of games like Fallout3, its unclear if either the programmers know how to deal with threads or the underyling OS is ready for intense real time updates.
Around here, the programmers never met a thread they didn't like. Add a requirement like - "display dialog box to confirm shutdown" and suddenly the thread count in the application jumps by 4...
Could things be done more efficiently? No, because that would require thinking and thermodynamically it is cheaper just to spawn another thread.
This is just a patent battle. RIM fired the first shot by accusing Motorola of violating its patents. Motorola is countering by saying "Oh, yeah, not only are you violating our patents, but you shouldn't be allowed to import your stuff until all this gets resolved".
Bottom line, they are both just posturing. In the end they will sign some sort of cross licensing agreement that will allow each other to user each other's patents and more importantly, cut everyone else out (its the startups that aren't part of this that will loose in the end).
All this over patents that are probably little more than: "A phone, that can display information on a screen".
http://www.fiercewireless.com/story/motorola-vs.-rim-patent-war-begins/2008-02-19
BTW, Last time I used 'Good Technologies" push software it totally screwed up my phone. If an email came through while you were on the phone, you got disconnected. Yes, they are fighting over that piece of crap.