I watched an interesting documentary ~10 years ago (that I've been annoyingly unable to track down) that took a surprisingly large number of obese people who had been unable to loose weight and put them up in a "spa" for 6 weeks eating a calorie restricted diet that exactly matched whatever number of calories that they said they were eating. Not surprisingly, they all lost weight.
Estimating calories is tricky.
Personally, I've lost ~80 lbs the same way and kept it off for a decade - move a bit more, eat a bit less. Its boring, it takes time, and it works.
Except for many, weight gain is not about bad habits. As much as the internet likes to have this "energy in needs to be less than energy out" story repeated at all corners, there's tons of reasons why it's not actually that simple. It's been found that overweight people commonly have a large variety of reasons why it doesn't work like that:
Metabolic rate –which affects how much of that energy in is transferred into the body.
Bacterial fauna –which affects how much of that energy is consumed by other organisms (and alone has been demonstrated to make the difference between morbid obesity and underweight)
Genetic factors that affect whether your body decides to store the fat, or reject it
Genetic factors that affect whether your body decides to burn predominantly fat or sugars (and hence affects how much is stored/rejected)
All of those deal with the "energy out" portion of the equation. Nobody's claiming that everyone has the same basic energy consumption, or even that its "fair" - but nobody gets to violate the laws of thermodynamics either. If your body is more efficient at getting calories from the food that you eat, you can eat less poundage for the same energy.
Okay, time to check other things, because it's clearly not you taking in more calories than you use, so it's actually not a disease but a symptom
Thermodynamics being what it is, it certainly is that. What's not obvious are that you may be mis-estimating how many calories you're taking in, or making incorrect assumptions about how many calories you're burning. There are various conditions that can affect the latter, although all that really means is that (a) you should see a doctor about them and (b) you should adjust your intake accordingly until they're corrected.
There are tons of excuses but that's all most of them are - excuses. I was overweight for much of my adult life until dropping 80+ pounds and used to say all the same things.
On demand bug fixes paid as needed. That satisfies it for both MS and the customer. But MS is unwilling to do even that.
And how much would you pay for a bug fix as an individual? Development, QA, testing, build, certification, delivery all at a (low-end) burdened rate of $150 an hour would add up pretty damn fast.
Personally, I'm often without Internet. That's both at home, and when traveling (e.g. in airports...
Considering that the thread was about caching porn for times with no internet access, I (and probably many although not all other travelers) would ask you nicely to just wait until you left the airport to start "consuming" again. Just a request, mind you.
What's wrong with being honest? I'm totally happy to credit Xerox with a ton of creative success (although, like TI, they couldn't market their way out of a wet paper bag). "The outsider takes it and [runs] with it" implies that the idea was stolen, which just isn't true.
Add opinions where you will, but significantly distorting key facts (from whichever side) is what I dislike.
"Removing the idea from the codec" doesn't actually work unless you're happy breaking every saved file out there whenever there's a potential legal hiccup. Not sure that'd go over real well.
Eh, my company spent more money on macs - but most places with ~35 employees have at least one "IT staff" guy and we never bothered with one - the savings more than made up for the "idiot tax." Besides, if you're even a few minutes more productive per week not dealing with an OS issue the nicer laptop pays for itself, and if the employees get a better experience that helps retention... there's a lot more to a good decision than just the number at the bottom of the credit card receipt.
As it should be. Having video codecs in the applications themselves makes no more sense than the old days of having printer, sound and video drivers shipped with everything.
If you can teach us how to give every open source project unlimited distribution rights for h264 technology, we'd love to hear it. If you can't, then we cannot legally use h264 in our projects in a few countries of earth. It's far more sensible to support the technology where we know that is friendly to our community, even if it is technically inferior. That technical inferiority can be tolerated while a highly probably lawsuit regarding video patents cannot be tolerated.
Except that we don't know that its friendly - as others have pointed out, the odds of such a similar codec being patent-unencumbered are slim to none. That's part of why the patent was granted though; at the time it was both novel and meaningful, if it was simple to innovate something like this then VP9 would be notably different yet just as effective.
Others happen to show their idea to an outsider and the outsider takes it and tuns with it (Steve Jobs and the GUI he saw a Xerox).
I think that you mean:
Others happen to show their idea to an outsider who licenses it in exchange for a significant percentage of Apple's stock and does a lot of hard work implementing the idea and converting it into a production-ready system (Steve Jobs and the GUI ideas he bought and then improved after he saw them at Xerox).
"...there is no suggestion anyone was to blame for Walker's crash..." unless you follow that link which says that the police suspect that speed was involved. No question that anyone not in the car was to blame is a different sentence indeed. Looking at the pictures of the scene its hard to imagine that they were driving anywhere close to the 45mph speed limit.
To expand on that a little, if someone's trying to crack your account then they can probably afford to have a human involved who will have a somewhat reasonable chance of getting your clues correct. Most people don't care about the accounts they get though, and with millions to choose from getting the correct number cut down to 1% of what it would otherwise have been just doesn't matter any more. Web scale helps them in that case.
Which defeats the silly monitor they're talking about - at a best case "goal" price of US$100 (already 2/3 of the cost of existing retail solutions quoted in the article), its not a throwaway piece.
It probably has something to do with the fact that while other tablets outsell the iPad, far more traffic is seen from iPads than from other tablets. Designing something pleasant to use takes more than +1'ing someone else's spec sheet.
So you're saying that the product they built doesn't meet your needs, therefore (ignoring the stuff that it has that you don't need) it is overpriced. Isn't that (to go back to cars) like comparing a Silverado to a Civic and saying that since you don't personally tow anything, the Silverado is an overpriced POS?
I live near Toronto sunrise in the winter is ~8am and sunset around 5 so you can literally commute to work in the dark and it is dark by the time you live the office seeing the sun for 0 hrs a day isn't a good thing if for no other reason than sometimes you need to do something outside where you can see what you are doing.
Indeed, the current TZ really helps your employer at the cost of the employee's personal time. And even that's assuming that they're using natural light, which these days is highly unlikely.
In fact, that'd gives you tons of free time in the light. Coordinating DST to work hours helps the employer (and only then if they use natural light) and hurts the employee.
And at least here in Austin kids have been going to school in the dark for a while now, so its not as if the current "solution" is solving anything much.
Even more - compared to Apple, Google is selling the Nexus 5 at hardware cost and taking a very large loss on Android itself, selling it for nothing, in order to get their hands on your data.
Slashdot Mirror
I watched an interesting documentary ~10 years ago (that I've been annoyingly unable to track down) that took a surprisingly large number of obese people who had been unable to loose weight and put them up in a "spa" for 6 weeks eating a calorie restricted diet that exactly matched whatever number of calories that they said they were eating. Not surprisingly, they all lost weight.
Estimating calories is tricky.
Personally, I've lost ~80 lbs the same way and kept it off for a decade - move a bit more, eat a bit less. Its boring, it takes time, and it works.
Except for many, weight gain is not about bad habits. As much as the internet likes to have this "energy in needs to be less than energy out" story repeated at all corners, there's tons of reasons why it's not actually that simple. It's been found that overweight people commonly have a large variety of reasons why it doesn't work like that:
All of those deal with the "energy out" portion of the equation. Nobody's claiming that everyone has the same basic energy consumption, or even that its "fair" - but nobody gets to violate the laws of thermodynamics either. If your body is more efficient at getting calories from the food that you eat, you can eat less poundage for the same energy.
It is simple. Its not easy, but it is simple.
Okay, time to check other things, because it's clearly not you taking in more calories than you use, so it's actually not a disease but a symptom
Thermodynamics being what it is, it certainly is that. What's not obvious are that you may be mis-estimating how many calories you're taking in, or making incorrect assumptions about how many calories you're burning. There are various conditions that can affect the latter, although all that really means is that (a) you should see a doctor about them and (b) you should adjust your intake accordingly until they're corrected.
There are tons of excuses but that's all most of them are - excuses. I was overweight for much of my adult life until dropping 80+ pounds and used to say all the same things.
Or the obvious solution to both your replies...
On demand bug fixes paid as needed. That satisfies it for both MS and the customer. But MS is unwilling to do even that.
And how much would you pay for a bug fix as an individual? Development, QA, testing, build, certification, delivery all at a (low-end) burdened rate of $150 an hour would add up pretty damn fast.
Personally, I'm often without Internet. That's both at home, and when traveling (e.g. in airports...
Considering that the thread was about caching porn for times with no internet access, I (and probably many although not all other travelers) would ask you nicely to just wait until you left the airport to start "consuming" again. Just a request, mind you.
US$1.05 seems to be the going rate.
What's wrong with being honest? I'm totally happy to credit Xerox with a ton of creative success (although, like TI, they couldn't market their way out of a wet paper bag). "The outsider takes it and [runs] with it" implies that the idea was stolen, which just isn't true.
Add opinions where you will, but significantly distorting key facts (from whichever side) is what I dislike.
"Removing the idea from the codec" doesn't actually work unless you're happy breaking every saved file out there whenever there's a potential legal hiccup. Not sure that'd go over real well.
I've seen it more often that that, but even granted - a once a week IT guy's time still adds up...
Eh, my company spent more money on macs - but most places with ~35 employees have at least one "IT staff" guy and we never bothered with one - the savings more than made up for the "idiot tax." Besides, if you're even a few minutes more productive per week not dealing with an OS issue the nicer laptop pays for itself, and if the employees get a better experience that helps retention... there's a lot more to a good decision than just the number at the bottom of the credit card receipt.
As it should be. Having video codecs in the applications themselves makes no more sense than the old days of having printer, sound and video drivers shipped with everything.
If you can teach us how to give every open source project unlimited distribution rights for h264 technology, we'd love to hear it. If you can't, then we cannot legally use h264 in our projects in a few countries of earth. It's far more sensible to support the technology where we know that is friendly to our community, even if it is technically inferior. That technical inferiority can be tolerated while a highly probably lawsuit regarding video patents cannot be tolerated.
Except that we don't know that its friendly - as others have pointed out, the odds of such a similar codec being patent-unencumbered are slim to none. That's part of why the patent was granted though; at the time it was both novel and meaningful, if it was simple to innovate something like this then VP9 would be notably different yet just as effective.
Others happen to show their idea to an outsider and the outsider takes it and tuns with it (Steve Jobs and the GUI he saw a Xerox).
I think that you mean:
Others happen to show their idea to an outsider who licenses it in exchange for a significant percentage of Apple's stock and does a lot of hard work implementing the idea and converting it into a production-ready system (Steve Jobs and the GUI ideas he bought and then improved after he saw them at Xerox).
FTFY.
"...there is no suggestion anyone was to blame for Walker's crash..." unless you follow that link which says that the police suspect that speed was involved. No question that anyone not in the car was to blame is a different sentence indeed. Looking at the pictures of the scene its hard to imagine that they were driving anywhere close to the 45mph speed limit.
Well said.
To expand on that a little, if someone's trying to crack your account then they can probably afford to have a human involved who will have a somewhat reasonable chance of getting your clues correct. Most people don't care about the accounts they get though, and with millions to choose from getting the correct number cut down to 1% of what it would otherwise have been just doesn't matter any more. Web scale helps them in that case.
The presentation is awful as well. Full screen width monospaced fonts with no introduction describing what they're doing.
Or one rented pickup with a trailer.
Which defeats the silly monitor they're talking about - at a best case "goal" price of US$100 (already 2/3 of the cost of existing retail solutions quoted in the article), its not a throwaway piece.
It probably has something to do with the fact that while other tablets outsell the iPad, far more traffic is seen from iPads than from other tablets. Designing something pleasant to use takes more than +1'ing someone else's spec sheet.
So you're saying that the product they built doesn't meet your needs, therefore (ignoring the stuff that it has that you don't need) it is overpriced. Isn't that (to go back to cars) like comparing a Silverado to a Civic and saying that since you don't personally tow anything, the Silverado is an overpriced POS?
I live near Toronto sunrise in the winter is ~8am and sunset around 5 so you can literally commute to work in the dark and it is dark by the time you live the office seeing the sun for 0 hrs a day isn't a good thing if for no other reason than sometimes you need to do something outside where you can see what you are doing.
Indeed, the current TZ really helps your employer at the cost of the employee's personal time. And even that's assuming that they're using natural light, which these days is highly unlikely.
In fact, that'd gives you tons of free time in the light. Coordinating DST to work hours helps the employer (and only then if they use natural light) and hurts the employee.
Although in exchange you do get to knock off at noon!
And at least here in Austin kids have been going to school in the dark for a while now, so its not as if the current "solution" is solving anything much.
Even more - compared to Apple, Google is selling the Nexus 5 at hardware cost and taking a very large loss on Android itself, selling it for nothing, in order to get their hands on your data.