You can google for the particulars but epidemiologists have had a reasonable measure of success getting it right.
I know its faux pas here, but you could you, actually READ the article to which your comment is attached, and then understand the point... that the flu vaccine may not being doing anything at all, because there's been no study into it. It could just be that healthy people are healthy, and thus don't have any problems.
Mozilla is taking Microsoft's word that these plugins don't have any vulnerabilities and are working just fine.
How exactly is that different from any other plugin?
Microsoft's plugins should be required to behave as every other responsible plugin.
Isn't it the way FF handles plugins the reason it can't be uninstalled? It sounds like a globally installed extension, and if that behavior is a problem, why does FF allow for such extensions to begin with?
Ya, except that as other have pointed out, the "race to idle" actually uses less watts. So pegging the cpu isn't as draining as keeping the process running longer.
Ah/., home of those without any reading comprehension.
My assertion was that people are responsible for deaths by car, not the cars themselves. Are you arguing with that point?
Then, my second statement was my amazement that stupid people who drive AREN'T killing each other off.
So where the fuck do you see me claiming that car accidents only kill stupid people? Oh, and then you bring up drunk driving... a stupid act if I ever saw one.
Thanks, but you've not really told me anything I haven't known, unless you're asserting that the flu mutates much more frequently than almost any other virus. MMR are also viruses which I assume also mutate.. yet a few shots during childhood is all that seems to be needed.
The flu vaccine seems like it was invented just to be a money printing press for the companies that make it, and the flu kills far less people that traffic accidents do each year.
No, that actually wouldn't have happened if this were closed source. The reason is that there would have been management that decided the license change, and any developers that didn't like it would have to go screw. The company and most of the developers (that wouldn't want or couldn't change jobs) would move along fine... unless of course the product was crap anyway, but then it wouldn't have gotten the marketshare if that were the case.
Ahh... you're talking about the automatic updates service, which is hosted by the same process as about a dozen other services. That service has a low priority, and I've never seen it bring any system to a halt. Usually I noticed it when the update icon first appears in the task bar saying its finished downloading update.
Are your observations perhaps on machines which are all managed by you?
Ya, um, what Mac application would I want that I couldn't run in Windows? You really fail to miss the point of why a Windows mode is included on a Mac at all... there isn't any software on a Mac that's no on Windows, but there's TONS of software on Windows that's not on a Mac.
So again... why bother buying overpriced hardware, only to have to buy Windows anyway, to run the programs I can already run on cheaper & more performant hardware?
Writing software is a service too. You can give away your software all you want, that doesn't mean anyone will actually use it though... which is why many firms charge for software (and you get the service for free).
I would suggest that having an actual physical object - a book - is more valuable than a digital copy of the content. Largely because it is something that you can personally carry around and do with as you please. You don't have to worry about anyone revoking your license or anything like that.
That all depends on the implementation. If the kindle (or whatever) allows me to throw a PDF onto it, then I don't see how the digial version is worth less, except that you don't have to pay for the physical component which makes up an insignificant portion of the price.
True... But once they've built my house I own a physical object. One that keeps the rain off of my head for years to come. One that I can eventually sell to another person. I may very well be paying another human being to build the house for me - but what I want is the house, not the building service. Those construction workers aren't going to keep me warm and dry - the house they build is.
And once you own the content, you own the content. There isn't a large history of losing access to the content; there have been a few cases, but that is certainly not the norm, which is why you hear just about all of the cases that popup. You can also sell content to others as well, including software, as a recent case deteremined.
My point though is that you're paying MUCH more for the house than if you just built it yourself. The materials are not the most significant part of the cost... its the act of actually building the house. Likewise, once you've read a story, you've gained from it, and you can't lose access to that anymore than you can choose to forget something. You can also re-read the story or re-install the software.
Again, I'm going to have to disagree.
People pay $20 for a CD, and $100 for a live performance of the same music. Yet that live performance only lasts a couple hours, and the CD can be played over and over again. By your logic the CD should be more valuable, but that simply isn't true.
Your memories of the perforance last forever, don't they? Also, the live performance is not the same content; there's a heavy visual component, and also the fact that you're in the presence of the band.
You're not just paying for the music at that point... and if all you really wanted is the music, you wouldn't go to a concert. but a live performance is more content + a service, much like eating at a nice restraunt. A steak cooked at home will feed you just as well as one from a fine dining restraunt, but you're paying to have someone cook it for you in a nice atmosphere. Food service isn't about selling food at all, nor are live concerts only about the music.
Similarly, people will pay millions of dollars for an original painting, when they could have the exact same image digitally reproduced for pennies.
That group of people is a vary small minority. And in that case, they aren't paying for the medium at all... they are paying a premium because it was the original. That's more dick waving than it is commerce.
If that's true, then why do we need the same flu vaccine each year? Why do elderly people already seem to have a good immunity towards the newest swine flu strain?
Normally I agree that vaccines are a good idea... but something seems exteremly fishy about the flu vaccine in particular.
I bought a retail version of Vista when it came out, because I knew I'd be getting rid of that computer in a few years (actually building the new one now).
Why? Businesses upgrade the same way consumers do, by purchasing a new computer and replacing the existing one. You don't really think IT runs around with a Win7 install disk goign to everyones desk do you?
Far more functionality out of the box, no requirement to agree to any conditions, far better performance and half the price.
Great, can't wait to play Fallout 3 and Crysis on it. And I'm sure I'll be able to plug any hardware I want into it later and it will just work.
Later this year... upgrade the kernel to 2.6.32 and get a 3D video driver. All the fancy desktop bling you could possibly want. Sweet.
Yes, sweet. I have to wait until "later this year" and do a convoluted upgrade. I guess my games will wait until then too, since apparently 3D video drivers are too much to ask for these days.
Um, ya, he switched. He bought a new Mac, not a PC, and tried using it. That he didn't like it doesn't mean he didn't switch, just like when I tried Linux (for two years) on my desktop includes as switching to Linux, then back.
I doubt, especially now, that people will be willing to fork out over double the price to get OSX and half the performance. Its a fad... one I expect not to last. People are already catching on to Apples lies about "it just works" (hello, iPhone?). I"m sure iPod will continue to be popular (for some reason, people aren't catching on in that category, although some are catching fire).
Can't speak to quality too much.. my last dell was a laptop in 2002 I think.
What made me rule out dell immediately when I purchased my new laptop was my experience with their consumer support, whom I called regarding friends Dells. It was so infuriating I didn't even bother with them this time around.
Ya you might actually want to look at the CPU usage during update, because the process doing the updates isn't using 100% while waiting for another process to finish. i've watched cpu usage several times during updates, and the only processes using cpu are the ones doing the actual updates (or the other running processes).
Er, no. Cars don't kill people... people driving cars kill people. The machine is only doing what its supposed to; its up to the operator to ensure the machine does what is safe.
As far as your "startling" numbers... looking around, the only startling thing is that these stupid people manage to have time to reproduce before killing themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
You can google for the particulars but epidemiologists have had a reasonable measure of success getting it right.
I know its faux pas here, but you could you, actually READ the article to which your comment is attached, and then understand the point... that the flu vaccine may not being doing anything at all, because there's been no study into it. It could just be that healthy people are healthy, and thus don't have any problems.
That, plus you have to remember that this plugin was being installed without user's knowledge in the first place.
You mean just like dozens of other plugins?
Mozilla is taking Microsoft's word that these plugins don't have any vulnerabilities and are working just fine.
How exactly is that different from any other plugin?
Microsoft's plugins should be required to behave as every other responsible plugin.
Isn't it the way FF handles plugins the reason it can't be uninstalled? It sounds like a globally installed extension, and if that behavior is a problem, why does FF allow for such extensions to begin with?
Ya, except that as other have pointed out, the "race to idle" actually uses less watts. So pegging the cpu isn't as draining as keeping the process running longer.
Ah /., home of those without any reading comprehension.
My assertion was that people are responsible for deaths by car, not the cars themselves. Are you arguing with that point?
Then, my second statement was my amazement that stupid people who drive AREN'T killing each other off.
So where the fuck do you see me claiming that car accidents only kill stupid people? Oh, and then you bring up drunk driving... a stupid act if I ever saw one.
Thanks, but you've not really told me anything I haven't known, unless you're asserting that the flu mutates much more frequently than almost any other virus. MMR are also viruses which I assume also mutate.. yet a few shots during childhood is all that seems to be needed.
The flu vaccine seems like it was invented just to be a money printing press for the companies that make it, and the flu kills far less people that traffic accidents do each year.
No, that actually wouldn't have happened if this were closed source. The reason is that there would have been management that decided the license change, and any developers that didn't like it would have to go screw. The company and most of the developers (that wouldn't want or couldn't change jobs) would move along fine... unless of course the product was crap anyway, but then it wouldn't have gotten the marketshare if that were the case.
Ahh... you're talking about the automatic updates service, which is hosted by the same process as about a dozen other services. That service has a low priority, and I've never seen it bring any system to a halt. Usually I noticed it when the update icon first appears in the task bar saying its finished downloading update.
Are your observations perhaps on machines which are all managed by you?
Ya, um, what Mac application would I want that I couldn't run in Windows? You really fail to miss the point of why a Windows mode is included on a Mac at all... there isn't any software on a Mac that's no on Windows, but there's TONS of software on Windows that's not on a Mac.
So again... why bother buying overpriced hardware, only to have to buy Windows anyway, to run the programs I can already run on cheaper & more performant hardware?
Writing software is a service too. You can give away your software all you want, that doesn't mean anyone will actually use it though... which is why many firms charge for software (and you get the service for free).
I would suggest that having an actual physical object - a book - is more valuable than a digital copy of the content. Largely because it is something that you can personally carry around and do with as you please. You don't have to worry about anyone revoking your license or anything like that.
That all depends on the implementation. If the kindle (or whatever) allows me to throw a PDF onto it, then I don't see how the digial version is worth less, except that you don't have to pay for the physical component which makes up an insignificant portion of the price.
True... But once they've built my house I own a physical object. One that keeps the rain off of my head for years to come. One that I can eventually sell to another person. I may very well be paying another human being to build the house for me - but what I want is the house, not the building service. Those construction workers aren't going to keep me warm and dry - the house they build is.
And once you own the content, you own the content. There isn't a large history of losing access to the content; there have been a few cases, but that is certainly not the norm, which is why you hear just about all of the cases that popup. You can also sell content to others as well, including software, as a recent case deteremined.
My point though is that you're paying MUCH more for the house than if you just built it yourself. The materials are not the most significant part of the cost... its the act of actually building the house. Likewise, once you've read a story, you've gained from it, and you can't lose access to that anymore than you can choose to forget something. You can also re-read the story or re-install the software.
Again, I'm going to have to disagree.
People pay $20 for a CD, and $100 for a live performance of the same music. Yet that live performance only lasts a couple hours, and the CD can be played over and over again. By your logic the CD should be more valuable, but that simply isn't true.
Your memories of the perforance last forever, don't they? Also, the live performance is not the same content; there's a heavy visual component, and also the fact that you're in the presence of the band.
You're not just paying for the music at that point... and if all you really wanted is the music, you wouldn't go to a concert. but a live performance is more content + a service, much like eating at a nice restraunt. A steak cooked at home will feed you just as well as one from a fine dining restraunt, but you're paying to have someone cook it for you in a nice atmosphere. Food service isn't about selling food at all, nor are live concerts only about the music.
Similarly, people will pay millions of dollars for an original painting, when they could have the exact same image digitally reproduced for pennies.
That group of people is a vary small minority. And in that case, they aren't paying for the medium at all... they are paying a premium because it was the original. That's more dick waving than it is commerce.
If that's true, then why do we need the same flu vaccine each year? Why do elderly people already seem to have a good immunity towards the newest swine flu strain?
Normally I agree that vaccines are a good idea... but something seems exteremly fishy about the flu vaccine in particular.
I bought a retail version of Vista when it came out, because I knew I'd be getting rid of that computer in a few years (actually building the new one now).
Why? Businesses upgrade the same way consumers do, by purchasing a new computer and replacing the existing one. You don't really think IT runs around with a Win7 install disk goign to everyones desk do you?
Far more functionality out of the box, no requirement to agree to any conditions, far better performance and half the price.
Great, can't wait to play Fallout 3 and Crysis on it. And I'm sure I'll be able to plug any hardware I want into it later and it will just work.
Later this year ... upgrade the kernel to 2.6.32 and get a 3D video driver. All the fancy desktop bling you could possibly want. Sweet.
Yes, sweet. I have to wait until "later this year" and do a convoluted upgrade. I guess my games will wait until then too, since apparently 3D video drivers are too much to ask for these days.
Um... why not just buy a cheaper PC and be done with it then?
Um, ya, he switched. He bought a new Mac, not a PC, and tried using it. That he didn't like it doesn't mean he didn't switch, just like when I tried Linux (for two years) on my desktop includes as switching to Linux, then back.
I doubt, especially now, that people will be willing to fork out over double the price to get OSX and half the performance. Its a fad... one I expect not to last. People are already catching on to Apples lies about "it just works" (hello, iPhone?). I"m sure iPod will continue to be popular (for some reason, people aren't catching on in that category, although some are catching fire).
Can't speak to quality too much.. my last dell was a laptop in 2002 I think.
What made me rule out dell immediately when I purchased my new laptop was my experience with their consumer support, whom I called regarding friends Dells. It was so infuriating I didn't even bother with them this time around.
Not according to this: http://content.dell.com/us/en/corp/d/corp-comm/michael_dell_computers_update.aspx
Ya you might actually want to look at the CPU usage during update, because the process doing the updates isn't using 100% while waiting for another process to finish. i've watched cpu usage several times during updates, and the only processes using cpu are the ones doing the actual updates (or the other running processes).
They won't get superpowers, but some of them will become ghouls.
Your analogy fails; I expect the electrician to ALREADY KNOW how much voltage my oven requires, without me having to explain anything.
Er, no. Cars don't kill people... people driving cars kill people. The machine is only doing what its supposed to; its up to the operator to ensure the machine does what is safe.
As far as your "startling" numbers... looking around, the only startling thing is that these stupid people manage to have time to reproduce before killing themselves.
More likely 20% water, 10% protein, 3% N, and 45% fat.
The fork was a huge waste of time and energy.... all over a clause that had to attribute to the developers be present in a binary release.