From the text of the email, it seems that the user launched the site once in each browser. The quote was probably changing each time the page loaded (according to some actuarial variable, intentional randomness to see how people reacted to different prices, or a bug in the software making the quote) completely independently of the browser choice.
Star Trek's technobabble wasn't science fiction. The words they used were tangentally related to science which was tangentally related to the events onscreen, but it may as well have been luminiferous ether for all it was coupled to the plot. Star Trek rarely dealt with issues of science*, it was very much a "space show".
Top-notch production values and acquired-taste niche programming are not a good combination. You can't get an expensive program going on a small viewership.
Minecraft's another good example. It's basically a 3D Farmville, or an antisocial Animal Crossing, and operates on much the same set of drives and play cycles.
I should point out that those "nervous ticks and involuntary reactions", if you're referring to so-called microexpressions, are currently well in the realm of pseudoscience. They're no more revealing than general nervousness or erratic behavior. (Perhaps unsurprisingly the TSA is very enthusiastic about adopting the technique.)
When they first ran the story, they said Sony had confirmed with them that it was a fake, so the CT update was probably reasonable enough at the time it was added. NowGamer have changed the story without explaining the nature of the change.
Aliasing. Pixels too small to distinguish doesn't mean you've achieved display perfection, for much the same reasons that your games machine might do a 2x supersample, essentially rendering the game at double the display resolution to remove "jaggies".
The largest and most successful musicians are the ones that most effectively act as employees of powerful record companies. Part of being an effective employee of those companies is believing them when they say "X is the reason why your sales are down".
MAC filtering, right? A surprising number of generic routers from telecom companies do some MAC-based authentication, I've found. I was surprised to discover that my aunt's Orange router made you switch it into a pairing mode by holding a button on the side before it'd let an unfamiliar device actually use the network. So even though this amazing hacker could get through the WEP password in 5 seconds, he wasn't going anywhere.
You're correct to a degree, inasmuch as stock prices can be inflated artificially (esp. when there's an anomalous growth spurt that's assumed to be sustainable). Absolutely you can get stocks where the price is completely decoupled from whatever the underlying company is worth. The market is not an effective tool for estimating a company's value. However that does not mean that the whole exercise is a game of bullshit.
You're only offloading on a sucker if the stock you're offloading actually is overvalued. If you offloaded your Apple shares back around 2000, the recipient would be in a position to offload those shares for a much better profit today, so you'd be the sucker in that instance. In that case, owning the stock has done them much more good than you.
2.2, 2.1 update 1, 2.1, something called 020201 (2.0?) and 1.6 account for almost all of the users. The remainder are custom ROMs you're not really obliged to support. Not that having five major releases operating in the wild is much better, mind.
You're not measuring anything, of course. You're defining something and forming a conclusion from rigorous logic. There's no "intents and purposes", either, it actually is exactly 1 as defined.
Slashdot Mirror
Headlines like that give me goosebumps.
It is not a recipe.
The offending article isn't a recipe.
There are hardware H.264 decoders which are very efficient. There is no such thing as a hardware Flash animation decoder.
From the text of the email, it seems that the user launched the site once in each browser. The quote was probably changing each time the page loaded (according to some actuarial variable, intentional randomness to see how people reacted to different prices, or a bug in the software making the quote) completely independently of the browser choice.
Star Trek's technobabble wasn't science fiction. The words they used were tangentally related to science which was tangentally related to the events onscreen, but it may as well have been luminiferous ether for all it was coupled to the plot. Star Trek rarely dealt with issues of science*, it was very much a "space show".
*When it did, it was often excellent
The scientific meaning is the one intended in an article about the science of the show, surely?
It might lead customers to not buy their own £5 iPhone timetabling app.
Top-notch production values and acquired-taste niche programming are not a good combination. You can't get an expensive program going on a small viewership.
Minecraft's another good example. It's basically a 3D Farmville, or an antisocial Animal Crossing, and operates on much the same set of drives and play cycles.
EA at least has a stock value to calculate a value from, however abstract that value may be. Zynga isn't public and doesn't even have a nominal value.
The frequently a microwave oven uses is actually off-resonance for water. It's about a factor of 8 too low in frequency.
I should point out that those "nervous ticks and involuntary reactions", if you're referring to so-called microexpressions, are currently well in the realm of pseudoscience. They're no more revealing than general nervousness or erratic behavior. (Perhaps unsurprisingly the TSA is very enthusiastic about adopting the technique.)
They made that policy change a year ago. All their Android phones use microSD.
I suspect Google will be the ones to bring the magic. Word has it that Android Gingerbread has a big gaming focus.
When they first ran the story, they said Sony had confirmed with them that it was a fake, so the CT update was probably reasonable enough at the time it was added. NowGamer have changed the story without explaining the nature of the change.
Aliasing. Pixels too small to distinguish doesn't mean you've achieved display perfection, for much the same reasons that your games machine might do a 2x supersample, essentially rendering the game at double the display resolution to remove "jaggies".
That they have the right to do it does not mean that they have the exclusive right to do it, which is what's required in this instance.
The largest and most successful musicians are the ones that most effectively act as employees of powerful record companies. Part of being an effective employee of those companies is believing them when they say "X is the reason why your sales are down".
Absolutely. Holding onto a stock and guessing if it's about to flatten out or decline is no way to play the markets in this day and age.
MAC filtering, right? A surprising number of generic routers from telecom companies do some MAC-based authentication, I've found. I was surprised to discover that my aunt's Orange router made you switch it into a pairing mode by holding a button on the side before it'd let an unfamiliar device actually use the network. So even though this amazing hacker could get through the WEP password in 5 seconds, he wasn't going anywhere.
If you were in any doubt as to why they were sponsoring a study which discovered something scary about the intertrons.
You're correct to a degree, inasmuch as stock prices can be inflated artificially (esp. when there's an anomalous growth spurt that's assumed to be sustainable). Absolutely you can get stocks where the price is completely decoupled from whatever the underlying company is worth. The market is not an effective tool for estimating a company's value. However that does not mean that the whole exercise is a game of bullshit.
You're only offloading on a sucker if the stock you're offloading actually is overvalued. If you offloaded your Apple shares back around 2000, the recipient would be in a position to offload those shares for a much better profit today, so you'd be the sucker in that instance. In that case, owning the stock has done them much more good than you.
2.2, 2.1 update 1, 2.1, something called 020201 (2.0?) and 1.6 account for almost all of the users. The remainder are custom ROMs you're not really obliged to support. Not that having five major releases operating in the wild is much better, mind.
You're not measuring anything, of course. You're defining something and forming a conclusion from rigorous logic. There's no "intents and purposes", either, it actually is exactly 1 as defined.