You seem to have an objective grasp behind the alleged causes (at least some of them) of global warming. I mean that in a laudable, not pajorative, sense. Since I am by no means a pundit on the subject, I'd be interested to hear your responses to some other arguments I have heard - the falseness/truthness of them I am unaware of.
I have heard that:
A) The temperature of the earth mimics closely the sunspot cycle.
B) The CO2 levels are a lagging variable when compared against the temperature of the earth. (ie, it increases only after earth's temperatures increase).
C) The human imprint of C02 is immaterial - I think something like 6% of all CO2 released? (most of it being released by the Oceans). On top of which, there are other green house gases that have major affect like Methane.
D) Deforestation and replantation of trees assists reducing CO2. Since CO2 is absorbed by trees, cutting old ones and replanting new ones would actually assist reduction in CO2
What I'm saying is your taking my quote out of context. The OP's point was that if a company is legitamite it does not need to rely on 'clutter' methods to increase its position on Google's results. Whereas, my point was to demonstrate an example of a legitamite company that would benefit from employeeing such tactics.
If you're a good shipping company, you don't need to be linked to on digg and you definitely don't need to do link farming. Right. However, my point is that you can be a legitimate company but with no traffic. In which case, you would have to compensate for that lack of traffic. That's why things like advertising and sales people exist. A great product doesn't necessarily sell itself.
Lets see... counter examples... how about searching Google for the word "shipping". What do you know, UPS and Fedex are #1 and #2, and their front pages aren't a mess of useless, Google-pleasing crap. Maybe because they are real businesses and aren't pandering some direct ship junk or get rich quick scheme. I think that's very presumptious of you. Traffic to a site is a major factor in determining its relevance on the Google results. An established business like Fedex would inherently have high level of traffic. A start-up business, that may very well be legitimate, and useful for users searching for it, may not get indexed appropriately or may not be displayed as a relevant hit on google's results page, unless it has a lot of text and other 'clutter' that google bots search for.
While I agree that Apple should be forced to sell unlocked phones, modifying a product in a non-approved way DOES invalidate your waranty. Why should the vendor be held reliable if YOU break his software? Like this sentance, the sentance above doesn't contradict itself -- no, wait a minute, yes it does. Why should the vendor be forced to unlock the phone? Just like the policy with warranties, you know full well what product your getting and the terms of service; if you don't like get, go shop elsewhere.
They argue for a greater acceptance of the view that our brain may have some intrinsic activity that's somewhat independent of sensory input.
This has been a postulate of mine for a while. It's the only rational explanation for me thinking about sex every 5 seconds - with our without sensory input.
Why aren't they made to sell? Since it's actually available to consumers, this is more than just proof of concept. After all, a product's existence is eventually determined by market's demand, and its price will be determined by the increase in scale of production and improved manufacturing techniques. Take a look at LCD/Plasma TV prices and sales levels Pre Y2K; OLED may follow the same path. Whether or not that technology will do so, however, willd depend on market conditions (demand, costs, competitors, etc) - not Public Relations.
The problem is not the operating system itself. The problem is with Microsoft's development processes. Its ineffiency bloats the operating system and bogs down the speed and quality of the development. Moving on to a new operating system will result in the 'same' product. Think about it... telling the development team of Duke Nukem Forever to move onto Duke Nukem Whenever will not result in an expedited, improved, or actualized product.
Moreover, the system may in fact increase the numbers of false positives on the very grounds of its existence. People may act suspiciously because they are worried that they may be considered suspicious. It's the feeling you get when you walk out of a store without buying something. (At least I get it). I feel like people will think I stole something, so I automatically become overly self-conscious of my behaviour even though I did nothing wrong or planned to do anyting wrong...
The laws regarding purchasing the international copy of a book (international copies of the same book which have different ISBN numbers and are technically not to allowed to be sold in US) are a bit murkey. But it appears that you can, indeed, get those books legally.
A blurb from a rather lengthy reply on Google Answers: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=295219 "The current state of US law is that international versions
of textbooks that are lawfully manufactured under the authorization of
the copyright holder can be legally imported by a party that has
acquired them outside of the US, for subsequent resale within the US.
While the copyright holder can require that their license holders (the
international printers) do not themselves ship manufactured copies
directly for public distribution in the US without prior consent, the
copyright holder cannot prevent a party from purchasing lawfully
manufactured copies outside the US, and importing them into the US for
sale or otherwise disposal."
For the opportunists amongst you, this does present an arbitrage opportunity to buy books abroad and resell them in US, though it is my understanding that companies like Amazon and EBAY have provisions against resale of such books.
Fantastic idea, except for the fact that anyone in the path of Katrina who could have afforded a $385 water bottle could have afforded a $90 plane ticket, $35 bus ride, or $27 tank of gas.
Yeah, except let's discount this over its useful life.
A plane ticket is 1 time use sunk cost. The bottle you'll be able to use indefinately (barring replacment of filters).
So you'll get a couple of drinks on the plane with price included. Let's say 1 liter's worth. $385 water bottle, without filter replacement, will last for 6,000 liters of water.
so $90/liter w/ plane ticket.
or $0.06/liter w/ the filter bottle. And it will even be cheaper than that, assuming the filters will sell for less than the original cost of the bottle.
From Wiki:
"To obtain a rating for a game, a publisher sends the ESRB videotaped footage of the game's most graphic and extreme content. The publisher also fills out a questionnaire describing the game's content and encloses a check for between $2,000 and $3,000.
The ESRB states on its website that three trained raters, working independently, then watch the footage and recommend a rating. If all raters agree on the rating, content descriptors are added and the ESRB notifies the publisher of its decision. If there is no consensus, additional raters review the footage and materials. After the rating is agreed upon, the ESRB in-house personnel review the footage and all materials to ensure that all information is accurate and a certificate is sent to the publisher. If the publisher wishes, they may edit the game and resubmit the footage and questionnaire in order to achieve a lower rating. If this is the case, the process begins anew. The publisher may also appeal the game's rating if they wish. The appeals committee is composed of entertainment software industry representatives.
When the game is ready for release, the publisher sends copies of the final version of the game to the ESRB. The game packaging is reviewed, and the ESRB says that its in-house personnel randomly play games to ensure that all the information provided during the rating process was complete and accurate. Penalties may apply to the publisher if it is eventually found, either through the in-house personnel's playing or consumer comments that the game's content is more extreme than the publisher stated in its application.
The identities of the ESRB raters are kept confidential and selected randomly from a pool of full-time ESRB employees who live in the New York City area. According to an ESRB introductory brochure from 1994: "The raters represent a wide range of backgrounds, races, and ages and have no ties to the interactive entertainment industry. Raters include retired school principals, parents, professionals, and other individuals from all walks of life."
---
Ok, so you have to have a rating in order to be able to sell games. To get a rating you have to PAY money up front. Then you have anonymous people rating content, so the public has no way of checking the legitimacy of these raters. On top of which, the creators of the game can then get fined if these anonomyous reviewers feel that the demo footage is not in line with the actual game! Yes, that's not censorship.
The major flaw is not how it's rated, but the fact that it is rated. I have no problem with independent reviewers rating games and/or movies, but I do have a problem with an arbitrary organization making ratings; it becomes legalized censorship.
Pick a question. Then keep asking that question to a politician. You should get truly randomized results. If you doubt me, just take a politician with an opposite stance, and repeat the process. The answers will not be polar opposites. And consequently no information could be extracted that scenerio -- wow, I think I just proved that you can't transmit information across a quantum entanglement..
Yeah, sounds odd. I have a honda accord '99 ULEV (Ultra Low Emission Vehicle). I got it in NJ (which I assume is one of those 7 states the speak of). But when my muffler broke, I had trouble finding a replacement, b/c apparently my accord was only meant to be sold in California.
On a side note: The LEV/ULEV vehicles have a higher-than-normal level of platinum in their mufflers, thus making them extremely expensive compared to normal mufflers, ~$1,700 for a retail replacement. My 3rd-party replacement was still ~$650! When looking at these low emission vehicles, keep that in mind. My muffler currently retails at >50% trade-in value of my entire car!
AT&T might have a basis for a lawsuit, since it has a contract with Apple for exclusivity. For users with modified iPhones, I speculate the only negative externality will be a voided warranty.
The prediction of this mechanism is predicated on the fact that the subjects being observed are not aware of the observer. The mere fact of observing may change the outcome of the objects' behaviour. Now, thanks to the slahdot effect, this mechanism & its patent will be rendered useless.
"Some people really do believe a bus traveling 70 mph can clear a 50-foot gap in a freeway, as depicted in the movie Speed."
Forget Speed. If you want a real lesson in physics, watch Road Trip. Not only does the Ford Taurus clear the gap based on their calculations it also loses its suspension, and then explodes. Don't forget, they had to recalculate their speed for approach after a loogie launched by 'Stifler' collapsed one side of the broken bridge. ...If that's not an accurate lesson in physics, I don't know what is.
Funny, I had fairly recently written an article paralleling insurance companies to investing in stocks.
Though, admittedly, my article is a bit wordy with extended metaphors, and may not be my best writing, it does explain why someone that is unhealthy would be required to pay higher premiums.
Here's a poignant excerpt from the article:
"When an insurance company sets an insurance rate on a 17 year old at a 50% premium above what an average driver pays, it does so because the 17 year old has a profile of high risk. If that 17 year old doesn't get into a car accident, the insurance company makes 50% more money on the 17 year old than it does on the average of all other drivers combined. In other words, to an insurance company, a 17 year old is nothing more than a speculative small cap stock! The impact is profound if you consider the outcome if the insurance company doesn't adjust its rates based on a driver's risk. Simply put, if the insurance company treats the 17 year old as part of the average statistic they will not be compensated for taking on additional risk."
"When pressed as to why broadcasters would want to do this, Burger replied simply 'because they want you to pay for that right'."
A 'right' is something that you can do without asking anyone else's permission. Once you have to ask someone's permission, then it no longer becomes a 'right' but a 'priviledge'. He just admitted that they want to charge people for exercising their right to use their own property. At best, he's just not that bright; at worst, this is yet another unwarranted advance on our freedoms.
Slashdot Mirror
I have heard that:
A) The temperature of the earth mimics closely the sunspot cycle.
B) The CO2 levels are a lagging variable when compared against the temperature of the earth. (ie, it increases only after earth's temperatures increase).
C) The human imprint of C02 is immaterial - I think something like 6% of all CO2 released? (most of it being released by the Oceans). On top of which, there are other green house gases that have major affect like Methane.
D) Deforestation and replantation of trees assists reducing CO2. Since CO2 is absorbed by trees, cutting old ones and replanting new ones would actually assist reduction in CO2
Your thoughts?
What I'm saying is your taking my quote out of context. The OP's point was that if a company is legitamite it does not need to rely on 'clutter' methods to increase its position on Google's results. Whereas, my point was to demonstrate an example of a legitamite company that would benefit from employeeing such tactics.
This has been a postulate of mine for a while. It's the only rational explanation for me thinking about sex every 5 seconds - with our without sensory input.
Maybe XBOX360 can give a Wii a run for its money on more than just price competition. They should port this to the 360: http://www.compusa.com/products/product_info.asp?pfp=srch1&Ntt=novint&N=0&Dx=mode+matchall&Nty=1&D=novint&Ntk=All&product_code=347104
Why aren't they made to sell? Since it's actually available to consumers, this is more than just proof of concept. After all, a product's existence is eventually determined by market's demand, and its price will be determined by the increase in scale of production and improved manufacturing techniques. Take a look at LCD/Plasma TV prices and sales levels Pre Y2K; OLED may follow the same path. Whether or not that technology will do so, however, willd depend on market conditions (demand, costs, competitors, etc) - not Public Relations.
The problem is not the operating system itself. The problem is with Microsoft's development processes. Its ineffiency bloats the operating system and bogs down the speed and quality of the development. Moving on to a new operating system will result in the 'same' product. Think about it... telling the development team of Duke Nukem Forever to move onto Duke Nukem Whenever will not result in an expedited, improved, or actualized product.
Moreover, the system may in fact increase the numbers of false positives on the very grounds of its existence. People may act suspiciously because they are worried that they may be considered suspicious. It's the feeling you get when you walk out of a store without buying something. (At least I get it). I feel like people will think I stole something, so I automatically become overly self-conscious of my behaviour even though I did nothing wrong or planned to do anyting wrong...
The laws regarding purchasing the international copy of a book (international copies of the same book which have different ISBN numbers and are technically not to allowed to be sold in US) are a bit murkey. But it appears that you can, indeed, get those books legally.
A blurb from a rather lengthy reply on Google Answers: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=295219
"The current state of US law is that international versions of textbooks that are lawfully manufactured under the authorization of the copyright holder can be legally imported by a party that has acquired them outside of the US, for subsequent resale within the US. While the copyright holder can require that their license holders (the international printers) do not themselves ship manufactured copies directly for public distribution in the US without prior consent, the copyright holder cannot prevent a party from purchasing lawfully manufactured copies outside the US, and importing them into the US for sale or otherwise disposal."
Check out http://firstandsecond.com/
For the opportunists amongst you, this does present an arbitrage opportunity to buy books abroad and resell them in US, though it is my understanding that companies like Amazon and EBAY have provisions against resale of such books.
Yeah, except let's discount this over its useful life.
A plane ticket is 1 time use sunk cost. The bottle you'll be able to use indefinately (barring replacment of filters).
So you'll get a couple of drinks on the plane with price included. Let's say 1 liter's worth. $385 water bottle, without filter replacement, will last for 6,000 liters of water.
so $90/liter w/ plane ticket.
or $0.06/liter w/ the filter bottle. And it will even be cheaper than that, assuming the filters will sell for less than the original cost of the bottle.
From Wiki: "To obtain a rating for a game, a publisher sends the ESRB videotaped footage of the game's most graphic and extreme content. The publisher also fills out a questionnaire describing the game's content and encloses a check for between $2,000 and $3,000.
The ESRB states on its website that three trained raters, working independently, then watch the footage and recommend a rating. If all raters agree on the rating, content descriptors are added and the ESRB notifies the publisher of its decision. If there is no consensus, additional raters review the footage and materials. After the rating is agreed upon, the ESRB in-house personnel review the footage and all materials to ensure that all information is accurate and a certificate is sent to the publisher. If the publisher wishes, they may edit the game and resubmit the footage and questionnaire in order to achieve a lower rating. If this is the case, the process begins anew. The publisher may also appeal the game's rating if they wish. The appeals committee is composed of entertainment software industry representatives.
When the game is ready for release, the publisher sends copies of the final version of the game to the ESRB. The game packaging is reviewed, and the ESRB says that its in-house personnel randomly play games to ensure that all the information provided during the rating process was complete and accurate. Penalties may apply to the publisher if it is eventually found, either through the in-house personnel's playing or consumer comments that the game's content is more extreme than the publisher stated in its application.
The identities of the ESRB raters are kept confidential and selected randomly from a pool of full-time ESRB employees who live in the New York City area. According to an ESRB introductory brochure from 1994: "The raters represent a wide range of backgrounds, races, and ages and have no ties to the interactive entertainment industry. Raters include retired school principals, parents, professionals, and other individuals from all walks of life."
--- Ok, so you have to have a rating in order to be able to sell games. To get a rating you have to PAY money up front. Then you have anonymous people rating content, so the public has no way of checking the legitimacy of these raters. On top of which, the creators of the game can then get fined if these anonomyous reviewers feel that the demo footage is not in line with the actual game! Yes, that's not censorship.
The major flaw is not how it's rated, but the fact that it is rated. I have no problem with independent reviewers rating games and/or movies, but I do have a problem with an arbitrary organization making ratings; it becomes legalized censorship.
Pick a question. Then keep asking that question to a politician. You should get truly randomized results. If you doubt me, just take a politician with an opposite stance, and repeat the process. The answers will not be polar opposites.
And consequently no information could be extracted that scenerio -- wow, I think I just proved that you can't transmit information across a quantum entanglement..
"If you're good enough, you won't even see the code anymore. You'll just see a Blonde, Brunette, Red head..." - 0
Is it just for throttling bit torrent traffic? Can't it also be used to report on potentially illegal bit torrent transfers, as well as legal ones?
On a side note: The LEV/ULEV vehicles have a higher-than-normal level of platinum in their mufflers, thus making them extremely expensive compared to normal mufflers, ~$1,700 for a retail replacement. My 3rd-party replacement was still ~$650! When looking at these low emission vehicles, keep that in mind. My muffler currently retails at >50% trade-in value of my entire car!
AT&T might have a basis for a lawsuit, since it has a contract with Apple for exclusivity. For users with modified iPhones, I speculate the only negative externality will be a voided warranty.
Was the arctic chosen due to temperature conditions resembling Mars, or the disappearing frozen water?
I think +50 Interesting +50 Funny will suffice, thanks!
The prediction of this mechanism is predicated on the fact that the subjects being observed are not aware of the observer. The mere fact of observing may change the outcome of the objects' behaviour. Now, thanks to the slahdot effect, this mechanism & its patent will be rendered useless.
"Some people really do believe a bus traveling 70 mph can clear a 50-foot gap in a freeway, as depicted in the movie Speed."
Forget Speed. If you want a real lesson in physics, watch Road Trip. Not only does the Ford Taurus clear the gap based on their calculations it also loses its suspension, and then explodes. Don't forget, they had to recalculate their speed for approach after a loogie launched by 'Stifler' collapsed one side of the broken bridge.
Funny, I had fairly recently written an article paralleling insurance companies to investing in stocks. Though, admittedly, my article is a bit wordy with extended metaphors, and may not be my best writing, it does explain why someone that is unhealthy would be required to pay higher premiums.
Here's a poignant excerpt from the article:
"When an insurance company sets an insurance rate on a 17 year old at a 50% premium above what an average driver pays, it does so because the 17 year old has a profile of high risk. If that 17 year old doesn't get into a car accident, the insurance company makes 50% more money on the 17 year old than it does on the average of all other drivers combined. In other words, to an insurance company, a 17 year old is nothing more than a speculative small cap stock! The impact is profound if you consider the outcome if the insurance company doesn't adjust its rates based on a driver's risk. Simply put, if the insurance company treats the 17 year old as part of the average statistic they will not be compensated for taking on additional risk."
The rest of the article can be found here: http://greenarrowinvestments.com/theory.aspx
I remember this one! This is one where the coyote sat his ass in a slingshot then strapped himself to an acme rocket. Is that what we're doing here?
"When pressed as to why broadcasters would want to do this, Burger replied simply 'because they want you to pay for that right'."
A 'right' is something that you can do without asking anyone else's permission. Once you have to ask someone's permission, then it no longer becomes a 'right' but a 'priviledge'. He just admitted that they want to charge people for exercising their right to use their own property. At best, he's just not that bright; at worst, this is yet another unwarranted advance on our freedoms.