Even if it were a problem, it's a problem they've solved on all the other OSes, because you can access the same Google apps on those. Investing in a ChromeOS machine provides you a set of advantages that are all present on lots of other machines, with none of those machines' other benefits. It'll have to sell on simplicity itself and a low device cost if it's to really work as a product.
They're recalculating the average atomic weight, the one on the periodic table, based on the abundances of the different isotopes in nature. If you're trying to calculate the mass of, say, 300,000 molecules of something, you use the average atomic weight and don't try to figure out what isotope each atom is.
Right, it's the worst atrocities, or nothing. Nobody's supposed to condemn any of the other stuff in between. Certainly they're not supposed to address the issues that they, personally, find important. What the hell would we have then? Freedom? The hell with that.
The Wikileaks comparison has more to do with the Sheriff's Office's response to the leak, than the nature of the leak itself. They could've run around saying they were going to track down and dismember anybody who has a copy of the file, but instead their comments to the press focus on the nature of the problem, its possible consequences, and what they're doing about those consequences. Compare to the Wikileaks situation where much of the political hot air is about leaning on one group that's disseminating the information, as though eliminating Wikileaks would somehow stop the information getting around by other means.
"'The truth is, once it's been out there and on the Internet and copied, you're never going to regain total control"
That's a remarkably pragmatic approach, and portrays the Sherrif's office as focussed and efficient. Public perception matters a lot in these instances, and while they could've threatened to rip off the ears of anyone who shares the files, it would have had no effect on actual information sharing, at a great cost to their public image in at least some quarters.
It's also nice to see that someone understands what "information wants to be free" means: that information tends to be free, and you have to plan for this.
Google Reader's feed discovery and its "magic" sort option, and Priority Inbox, are arguably an early implimentation of this sort of philosophy - when the system knows enough about your usage patterns, it can begin to prioritise particular information. From that it's a simple step to have it start presenting information to you at times when you might need it, but before you have explicitly stated a need. They're already quite a long way along. Latitude's slightly creepy Location History extension could play a big part in this as well. After about 3 months of usage it had a pretty good idea where I worked, where I lived, and when I tended to visit particular restaurants.
I really mean in the information security sense of the word "attack", something along the lines of "an aggressive action on the system in question". It's a word with a very varied and somewhat loaded meaning. It is a DDoS though.
Actually, it is DDoS. Those letters have a meaning, you know. It's not a pejorative word. Real-world picketing could equally be called a denial of service attack.
Arbitration can only happen when there's a contract between two parties to mandate it. And the kind of mandatory, binding arbitration you refer to is practically a nonentity in the UK.
Actually the title's my original one. And as noted below, I'm hardly the first to draw the comparison. In fact given the legal incompetence shown by the firm, one can either assume it was a bad-faith shakedown by a firm that knew it had no legal ground to stand on, or an honest case of spectacular incompetence by a bunch of idiots. I think I was being kind by assuming the former.
If the costs could've collapsed by nature, it probably would've happened to at least a miniscule degree in the last decade of widespread mobile phone use. The fact is that it's at a deadlock. Each carrier charges every other carrier obscene termination fees for roaming. It's that fee that then sets the roaming rate in the market. A network could choose to eat the huge fees the other networks charge when its own customers roam, but that'd probably drive it out of business. Or it could choose to drop its termination fees for non-customers roaming onto its network, but that doesn't benefit them in the slightest, it helps everyone else instead. They're stuck in a local minimum that free market actions can't hop them out of. They need a perturbation. If/when roaming fees are forced to drop, they should stay low without any further action.
(FWIW, your common or garden Symbian phone's had SIP integrated for a while, and it's hardly affected mobile VOIP adoption.)
[the press], not the government that works on behalf of the people, are the arbiters of what does and doesn't constitute properly-classified national security information.
They are not the only arbiters, but they do have a say, and they represent the people as much as the government does, if not more so. That the public has a say in what secrets its government keeps is an necessity for any functioning democracy. Wikileaks' actions are borderline anarchic and ill-reasoned, but the hunger with which the information has been reviewed suggests that the people want to know more than they have been allowed to.
I think Google already settled that first one with Pagerank.
Maybe that's the idea, Google will tally your worth as a being by the pagerank of the sites you share. Of course the only way to win that game is not to play.
Re:Video Cards Will Continue It On
on
Goodbye, VGA
·
· Score: 1
DVI can carry a VGA signal via an adaptor. You don't need an seperate VGA port on there. I've got a card from as long ago as 2005 that has two DVI ports and came with a matching pair of adaptors.
Re:That's one heck of a "long goodbye"
on
Goodbye, VGA
·
· Score: 1
What are you doing with your mouse and keyboard that the protocol makes a practical difference? I'm legitimately curious, not sniping. I use a PS/2 keyboard to save ports myself.
I'm saying that the criticism has nothing to do with damaging "someone else's predetermined view of things". In fact the most vocal critics are the people who have the most to gain from this research being correct.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure I see the causal relationship between your special immunity, skipping the jab, and what you're feeding your body.
Even if it were a problem, it's a problem they've solved on all the other OSes, because you can access the same Google apps on those. Investing in a ChromeOS machine provides you a set of advantages that are all present on lots of other machines, with none of those machines' other benefits. It'll have to sell on simplicity itself and a low device cost if it's to really work as a product.
They're recalculating the average atomic weight, the one on the periodic table, based on the abundances of the different isotopes in nature. If you're trying to calculate the mass of, say, 300,000 molecules of something, you use the average atomic weight and don't try to figure out what isotope each atom is.
In fact, while I'm at it, how about you get off your ass and start raising awareness of the issues you think he's forgotten?
Michael Moore did not write the Slashdot headline.
Right, it's the worst atrocities, or nothing. Nobody's supposed to condemn any of the other stuff in between. Certainly they're not supposed to address the issues that they, personally, find important. What the hell would we have then? Freedom? The hell with that.
The Wikileaks comparison has more to do with the Sheriff's Office's response to the leak, than the nature of the leak itself. They could've run around saying they were going to track down and dismember anybody who has a copy of the file, but instead their comments to the press focus on the nature of the problem, its possible consequences, and what they're doing about those consequences. Compare to the Wikileaks situation where much of the political hot air is about leaning on one group that's disseminating the information, as though eliminating Wikileaks would somehow stop the information getting around by other means.
"'The truth is, once it's been out there and on the Internet and copied, you're never going to regain total control"
That's a remarkably pragmatic approach, and portrays the Sherrif's office as focussed and efficient. Public perception matters a lot in these instances, and while they could've threatened to rip off the ears of anyone who shares the files, it would have had no effect on actual information sharing, at a great cost to their public image in at least some quarters.
It's also nice to see that someone understands what "information wants to be free" means: that information tends to be free, and you have to plan for this.
"If we stop the machine with 3,000 people apiece in the experiments"
Woah woah woah, I think someone got confused about what they're meant to be colliding here. I don't think smashing grad students is the answer.
An important nuance, thanks.
Google Reader's feed discovery and its "magic" sort option, and Priority Inbox, are arguably an early implimentation of this sort of philosophy - when the system knows enough about your usage patterns, it can begin to prioritise particular information. From that it's a simple step to have it start presenting information to you at times when you might need it, but before you have explicitly stated a need. They're already quite a long way along. Latitude's slightly creepy Location History extension could play a big part in this as well. After about 3 months of usage it had a pretty good idea where I worked, where I lived, and when I tended to visit particular restaurants.
I really mean in the information security sense of the word "attack", something along the lines of "an aggressive action on the system in question". It's a word with a very varied and somewhat loaded meaning. It is a DDoS though.
Actually, it is DDoS. Those letters have a meaning, you know. It's not a pejorative word. Real-world picketing could equally be called a denial of service attack.
I am so glad I am not the only person making this mistake these days.
(Well, not only in a contract situation, but in the scenario you're imagining.)
Arbitration can only happen when there's a contract between two parties to mandate it. And the kind of mandatory, binding arbitration you refer to is practically a nonentity in the UK.
Actually the title's my original one. And as noted below, I'm hardly the first to draw the comparison. In fact given the legal incompetence shown by the firm, one can either assume it was a bad-faith shakedown by a firm that knew it had no legal ground to stand on, or an honest case of spectacular incompetence by a bunch of idiots. I think I was being kind by assuming the former.
If the costs could've collapsed by nature, it probably would've happened to at least a miniscule degree in the last decade of widespread mobile phone use. The fact is that it's at a deadlock. Each carrier charges every other carrier obscene termination fees for roaming. It's that fee that then sets the roaming rate in the market. A network could choose to eat the huge fees the other networks charge when its own customers roam, but that'd probably drive it out of business. Or it could choose to drop its termination fees for non-customers roaming onto its network, but that doesn't benefit them in the slightest, it helps everyone else instead. They're stuck in a local minimum that free market actions can't hop them out of. They need a perturbation. If/when roaming fees are forced to drop, they should stay low without any further action.
(FWIW, your common or garden Symbian phone's had SIP integrated for a while, and it's hardly affected mobile VOIP adoption.)
[the press], not the government that works on behalf of the people, are the arbiters of what does and doesn't constitute properly-classified national security information.
They are not the only arbiters, but they do have a say, and they represent the people as much as the government does, if not more so. That the public has a say in what secrets its government keeps is an necessity for any functioning democracy. Wikileaks' actions are borderline anarchic and ill-reasoned, but the hunger with which the information has been reviewed suggests that the people want to know more than they have been allowed to.
I think Google already settled that first one with Pagerank.
Maybe that's the idea, Google will tally your worth as a being by the pagerank of the sites you share. Of course the only way to win that game is not to play.
DVI can carry a VGA signal via an adaptor. You don't need an seperate VGA port on there. I've got a card from as long ago as 2005 that has two DVI ports and came with a matching pair of adaptors.
What are you doing with your mouse and keyboard that the protocol makes a practical difference? I'm legitimately curious, not sniping. I use a PS/2 keyboard to save ports myself.
I'm saying that the criticism has nothing to do with damaging "someone else's predetermined view of things". In fact the most vocal critics are the people who have the most to gain from this research being correct.
The harshness of the environment isn't due to the presence of arsenic, but the lack of phosphorus. That's what's really interesting.
I prefer to believe that we live in a universe that awesome.