First its 12%. Thats an insane number. Then they give a number saying of that 12%, 10% do not use the TV for anything other then video games, video tapes, dvds? Then how the hell did those 10% get in that number. Besides, that still leaves us with 10% of the population
I would like it to be known, I know of rich people (those having assets over $1 million) who do not have cable tv because the cable company won't put wire to their area. Now a days they can get satellite, but that was not always the case.
Then there are the people who cannot afford an extra $50/month...they would rather put that money into other things - say feeding their kids.
Then there are the people who have an extra tv in places like the kitchen where there is no cable outlet, and getting satellite in there is pricey.
Then, still, the minority of people who do not want to support organizations like comcast and dish network (For whatever reason) who are happy getting the tv via antenna.
Until they can reduce the figures to say 1-2% they should not make changes. As the First Post person said, what would happen to the CEO of a company if he inacted a plan to remove 12% of the customer base?
Really? Please show me where it says this stuff. Where does it say a feature implies added positive capabilities?
Dictionary.com Feature
1. A good property or behaviour (as of a program).
Whether it was intended or not is immaterial.
2. An intended property or behaviour (as of a program).
Whether it is good or not is immaterial (but if bad, it is also a misfeature).
3. A surprising property or behaviour; in particular, one that is purposely inconsistent because it works better that way - such an inconsistency is therefore a feature and not a
bug. This kind of feature is sometimes called a miswart.
First: It is a desired property of the programmers - they wanted this form of restriction. In Google's eyes this is a good aspect of the program, and even if they didn't see it as good, it was an intended aspect of this program. Notice the emphasis on the or
Now a Bug:
An unwanted and unintended property of a program or piece of hardware, especially one that causes it to malfunction. Antonym of feature. E.g. "There's a bug in the editor: it writes things out backward." The
identification and removal of bugs in a program is called
Notice the bolded and Just in case you did not see it. If the designers of this program did intend this aspect of the program, it fails to meet one of your requirements. As for the "unwanted" aspect, well you may not want it - but since Google wanted that aspect, our above reference shows it fails to meet the aspect of a bug.
I hope this is enough to show you the difference between a bug and a feature. Your definition is in place because you dislike things like DRM. While I do not like it, I understand the difference between a feature and a bug.
I generally do qualify features like copy protection, DRM etc as bugs. I think I'm not alone in that.
Not trying to sound like a troll, or even a flame - but you (and anyone who agrees with you)are wrong.
It may be an undeseriable feature, but it is a feature, not a bug.
To try and make your own definition (knowingly) and passing it on without that disclaimer is also wrong.
Re:What would be the significance of this?
on
Lake spotted on Titan?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
That is because mod's are fickle idiots. They don't agree with something so mod it troll. I get meta-mods two-three times a day...if i see yours i will meta-mod it.:)
On the whole, I agree with you - this is not that impressive. I don't think anyone is going to say "hey lets go swim in liquid methane"...if it was water I would be more impressed. Obviously on a planet that rain's methane there would be a buildup of methane which would equate to a pool. It's like being shocked we have lakes full of water!
They might be patenting the specific algorithms used. Has Amazon actually sued anyone yet with regards to these patents? Personally, I would think other companies could jump up with prior art. These associations seem to have been around for a while. CDnow did it, netflix does it. When i go to a mom N pop online computer parts store and buy something, i usually get recommendations "You just bought a dvd burner, would you like to buy 100 dvd's, dvd scratch remover, dvd audio cable,...."
I think you are mistaken. It is not a "minor fix" but a "minor hack". Fixing it implies that it was broken, I am pretty sure it was not borken - just had a feature that Jon did not like.
I think we should all remember that just because Google is the pinnacle of success and is second only to (insert your diety here), Google too can make mistakes.
Bill Gates called and says that he doesn't make any mistakes - everything you perceive to be wrong is a planned strategy in motion.
That is a crappy analogy becuase it makes no analogy - its the same bloody thing.
I want to say "well duh" but you might misunderstand. The purpose of an anology is to point out the same exact thing with a different example to help you relate. The trick to an analogy is to either 1) trick the person into realizing it (i.e. "Ohhhh i get it") or 2) to keep the analogy as close to the original situation so someone can't say "you are not comparing apples to apples".
Reading was definitly optional for you. They said the 10 year construction can begin. They did not say this has been 10 years in planning. So their estimating it will be done by 2015.
If I am not mistaken, the big risk to fusion methods (at least until we get the process right) is the big explosion. No it is not radioactive, but it is still a big HONKIN explosion.
I would not recommend any country that is less then stable - and many African countires are unstable.
With someone having to run the plant, the licensing required, the cleanups, pr, etc it costs money. And do you honestly think the energy companies are going to research themselves out of a paycheck? Hopefully fusion power will work, but we will still be charged. Hopefully it will be cheaper if it is truly clean. Hopefully it will be cheaper if the cost to create the energy is inexpensive. But there will always be a price...just hopefully it will stagger future price increases.
The movie industry has the same clout as the music industry. They can go to no-name talent and give them raw deals, and then they can go to big name talent and offer them golden deals. As for lawsuits - you really do not need money to sue, you just need to prove to your lawyer that you will win a lot of money. If I go to a lawyer and say "Hey take a chance on me, and i will give you 10% of my 100,000$ winning" you can be rest assured you will get one of the best lawyers around including his legal team of 10 other lawyers.
Both organizations, and the people who deal with them, are all looking out for themselves - nothign wrong with that. But in this case, New Line is breaking contract - which is moral and legally wrong.
There really shouldn't be any mixed feelings. We should not call Peter Jackson greedy, we should not say that New Line "bet the farm" - because honestly, if the movie tanked they would still be around. All you have to do is look at the facts: Peter Jackson had a contract, New Line is trying to violate that contract, hence New Line is in the wrong. The one line their lawyer said about Jacksons "Piggishness" is flagrant and I would hope to get better out of a lawyer. New Line, if anything is the greedy bastards here. Jackson just wants his due. He helped make New Line 4 Billion dollars.
Imagine this - you have a contract with your boss that any new inventions you make, you get 2.5% of the gross profit (remember no gross profit = no paycheck). You make your boss an invention that gets him 10 billion dollars. You are entitled to 250 million. They want to give you half of that because they think half is more then enough... How would you feel? Also remember, it was your reputation on the line.
The Nazgul on his horse came at the hobbit farmer. They were about slap him with a death subpeona if he didn't fess up to where the hobbits were. Thats total lawyer tactics "Tell us what we want to know, or we will take your life from you."
I saw this show on the Discovery Channel about a year or two ago. It talked about the Earth cooling (probably due to a nuclear blast from a meteor), then how the earth became a snowball, and then how the earth reheated itself (carbon monoxide from volcano's entered the atmosphere, but due to lack of rain never settled, so it built up increasing heat due to greenhouse effect). Those changes took many thousands of years (with the exception of the nuclear blast).
Really the only debate in "scientific circles" are the scientists under the payroll of big companies that create pollution. The temperature increases we have been noticing over the recent years is dramatic, not naturally occuring. We could do a lot to reduce this pollution. Not to mention you can feel it (compare city air to country air)....and if we can feel it, rest assured our atmosphere has already felt it.
Reading is a skill, just like touch typing. If you practice it enough you'll naturally become faster
I must be unnatural then. I read all the time, ever since I was a little kid. I would read encyclopedias, fantasy books, comic books, magazines, newspapers (yes even as a little kid). I can read a page every 2-3 minutes. Typing...well I can type as fast as someone can speak to me (assuming normal conversation speed). That I gained from skill, but I think that was more training my fingers to respond to my brain impulses more efficiently. While reading is based on how fast you can take the data given to your eyes and process them in your brain...i must be slow;)
BTW, if you like fantasy books give this one a try. It is long, in depth, and just pretty damn good. You really get to know the character. The book series did so well that at one point they released a special paperback edition of the first book for free...
What do you mean by "hit about 4-5/hr.". 4-5 pages? Chapters? If you are stating 4-5 books an hour I am sorry, but I must cry bullshit until i see absolute evidence (which in our situation is probably impractical/impossible).
This isn't the Army anymore. I have never heard that definition of gun before, and civilian useage is gun is the generic term for firearm and can be anything that uses gunpower (sometimes air counts too) to fire a projectile.
Just because we are civilians doesn't mean the military definitions are inaccurate or incorrect. We may misuse the word "Gun" and use it in a much more loose fashion - but that is our fault for being incorrect. Most people don't know the difference - but there is a difference. The same can be said about computers. Many people call the monitor the computer - but we know it isn't the computer, it is the display screen (monitor). Some even call it the TV (and no they don't watch tv broadcasts, they just don't know its called a monitor).
My computer analogy is spot on.
No really its not. You do not need a gun to survive...you do need a job to make money - and depending on your lifestyle, you may need a job that pays more then McDonalds will pay. A gun will only "fit" "better" if you live in an area that requires a gun regularly for defense (the Bronx or South Central LA does not count, we are speaking war-torn country).
have seem people hit 2 inch groups at 50 yards with a pistol
And if you would see me fire, you would see me do this...but this is exceptionally rare. Especially at a standing pace, without any assistance. Now put this in with real life: A moving bear, probably charging you at 30MPH and you are a lot less likely to find a person who can hit the creature - and do so without wetting his pants.
Pistols are carried (in wilderness situations) in general not to hunt the creature, more to scare it off. A quick pull out of a pistol to shoot in the air will generally scare away most animals. In hunting, unless your a gun-bunny wanna-be, you are hunting with a rifle. Will there be people who use pistols -yea, but not enough.
A 9mm pistol hurt when you shot it? I shoot my Sig all the time and it doesn't even tickle... I have shot a.50 cal long barrel desert eagle and it just recoiled, but no pain, no soreness.
but I can't very well argue with a Master Sergeant even by proxy.
I won't argue it...I did too many pushups because of this terminology issue:)
If you're basing this on ROTC training, you probably only ever used military pistols
In ROTC I was captain of the rifle team. I have been shooting guns for a long time. I come from Israel, and I remember being four years old and on the firing range (though i didn't shoot, my dad did teach me about weapon safety). I have shot many weapons: M-16, M-60, shotguns, desert eagles, glocks, rugers, sigs, magnums, and some standard hunting rifles. When I was in Israel (age 13) my brother was in the military and had access to a wide variety of weapons. I got to shoot an AK automatic (scary weapon for a 13 year old). In ROTC we primarily shot in the prone position - maybe once or twice we taught people how to shoot standing up - though since they miss a lot, it is discouraging. When I go to the firing range (with my sig and laser sight) i tend to practice doubletaps a lot. I have a decent knowledge of weapons. I am also deadly accurate (my brother and father were snipers...and maybe it's partly a genetic trait, but i have never missed a shot...too bad i can't say the same about my CounterStrike skills):)
10-15 feet is about right for the average person. Most non-trained people cannot get beyond 10 feet accurately. Most trained people start to miss at 15. There are the exceptions, but it is still an exception - especially at moving targets and in a scary situation (bear chasing you). Yea if I have a sight scope and am prone it will be easier - but I don't know how close I want to get my eye to a.357 magnum with its recoil and there are situations (bear chasing you) which would make this impractical.
All that long-winded fluff being said. The gun companies must be careful in their terminology - but so the same can be said for P2P companies.
Slashdot Mirror
First its 12%. Thats an insane number. Then they give a number saying of that 12%, 10% do not use the TV for anything other then video games, video tapes, dvds? Then how the hell did those 10% get in that number. Besides, that still leaves us with 10% of the population
I would like it to be known, I know of rich people (those having assets over $1 million) who do not have cable tv because the cable company won't put wire to their area. Now a days they can get satellite, but that was not always the case.
Then there are the people who cannot afford an extra $50/month...they would rather put that money into other things - say feeding their kids.
Then there are the people who have an extra tv in places like the kitchen where there is no cable outlet, and getting satellite in there is pricey.
Then, still, the minority of people who do not want to support organizations like comcast and dish network (For whatever reason) who are happy getting the tv via antenna.
Until they can reduce the figures to say 1-2% they should not make changes. As the First Post person said, what would happen to the CEO of a company if he inacted a plan to remove 12% of the customer base?
Really? Please show me where it says this stuff. Where does it say a feature implies added positive capabilities?
Dictionary.com Feature
1. A good property or behaviour (as of a program). Whether it was intended or not is immaterial.
2. An intended property or behaviour (as of a program). Whether it is good or not is immaterial (but if bad, it is also a misfeature).
3. A surprising property or behaviour; in particular, one that is purposely inconsistent because it works better that way - such an inconsistency is therefore a feature and not a bug. This kind of feature is sometimes called a miswart.
First: It is a desired property of the programmers - they wanted this form of restriction. In Google's eyes this is a good aspect of the program, and even if they didn't see it as good, it was an intended aspect of this program. Notice the emphasis on the or
Now a Bug:
An unwanted and unintended property of a program or piece of hardware, especially one that causes it to malfunction. Antonym of feature. E.g. "There's a bug in the editor: it writes things out backward." The identification and removal of bugs in a program is called
Notice the bolded and Just in case you did not see it. If the designers of this program did intend this aspect of the program, it fails to meet one of your requirements. As for the "unwanted" aspect, well you may not want it - but since Google wanted that aspect, our above reference shows it fails to meet the aspect of a bug.
I hope this is enough to show you the difference between a bug and a feature. Your definition is in place because you dislike things like DRM. While I do not like it, I understand the difference between a feature and a bug.
I generally do qualify features like copy protection, DRM etc as bugs. I think I'm not alone in that.
Not trying to sound like a troll, or even a flame - but you (and anyone who agrees with you)are wrong.
It may be an undeseriable feature, but it is a feature, not a bug.
To try and make your own definition (knowingly) and passing it on without that disclaimer is also wrong.
That is because mod's are fickle idiots. They don't agree with something so mod it troll. I get meta-mods two-three times a day...if i see yours i will meta-mod it.
On the whole, I agree with you - this is not that impressive. I don't think anyone is going to say "hey lets go swim in liquid methane"...if it was water I would be more impressed. Obviously on a planet that rain's methane there would be a buildup of methane which would equate to a pool. It's like being shocked we have lakes full of water!
They might be patenting the specific algorithms used. Has Amazon actually sued anyone yet with regards to these patents? Personally, I would think other companies could jump up with prior art. These associations seem to have been around for a while. CDnow did it, netflix does it. When i go to a mom N pop online computer parts store and buy something, i usually get recommendations "You just bought a dvd burner, would you like to buy 100 dvd's, dvd scratch remover, dvd audio cable,...."
minor fix to a program
I think you are mistaken. It is not a "minor fix" but a "minor hack". Fixing it implies that it was broken, I am pretty sure it was not borken - just had a feature that Jon did not like.
I think we should all remember that just because Google is the pinnacle of success and is second only to (insert your diety here), Google too can make mistakes.
Bill Gates called and says that he doesn't make any mistakes - everything you perceive to be wrong is a planned strategy in motion.
A triple-dupe sunday with the works?
That is a crappy analogy becuase it makes no analogy - its the same bloody thing.
:)
I want to say "well duh" but you might misunderstand. The purpose of an anology is to point out the same exact thing with a different example to help you relate. The trick to an analogy is to either 1) trick the person into realizing it (i.e. "Ohhhh i get it") or 2) to keep the analogy as close to the original situation so someone can't say "you are not comparing apples to apples".
The analogy is fine, thanks for agreeing
DOesn't the original post say this thing needs to get to 1 million C....isn't 1 million C enough to make a big boom?
Reading was definitly optional for you. They said the 10 year construction can begin. They did not say this has been 10 years in planning. So their estimating it will be done by 2015.
If I am not mistaken, the big risk to fusion methods (at least until we get the process right) is the big explosion. No it is not radioactive, but it is still a big HONKIN explosion.
I would not recommend any country that is less then stable - and many African countires are unstable.
With someone having to run the plant, the licensing required, the cleanups, pr, etc it costs money. And do you honestly think the energy companies are going to research themselves out of a paycheck? Hopefully fusion power will work, but we will still be charged. Hopefully it will be cheaper if it is truly clean. Hopefully it will be cheaper if the cost to create the energy is inexpensive. But there will always be a price...just hopefully it will stagger future price increases.
The movie industry has the same clout as the music industry. They can go to no-name talent and give them raw deals, and then they can go to big name talent and offer them golden deals. As for lawsuits - you really do not need money to sue, you just need to prove to your lawyer that you will win a lot of money. If I go to a lawyer and say "Hey take a chance on me, and i will give you 10% of my 100,000$ winning" you can be rest assured you will get one of the best lawyers around including his legal team of 10 other lawyers.
Both organizations, and the people who deal with them, are all looking out for themselves - nothign wrong with that. But in this case, New Line is breaking contract - which is moral and legally wrong.
I believe the lawyer read Robin Hood one too many times.
You know, the Hollywood version - "steal from everyone, give to my rich bosses (and myself)"
There really shouldn't be any mixed feelings. We should not call Peter Jackson greedy, we should not say that New Line "bet the farm" - because honestly, if the movie tanked they would still be around. All you have to do is look at the facts: Peter Jackson had a contract, New Line is trying to violate that contract, hence New Line is in the wrong. The one line their lawyer said about Jacksons "Piggishness" is flagrant and I would hope to get better out of a lawyer. New Line, if anything is the greedy bastards here. Jackson just wants his due. He helped make New Line 4 Billion dollars.
Imagine this - you have a contract with your boss that any new inventions you make, you get 2.5% of the gross profit (remember no gross profit = no paycheck). You make your boss an invention that gets him 10 billion dollars. You are entitled to 250 million. They want to give you half of that because they think half is more then enough... How would you feel? Also remember, it was your reputation on the line.
there are no lawyers (and no solicitors,
The Nazgul on his horse came at the hobbit farmer. They were about slap him with a death subpeona if he didn't fess up to where the hobbits were. Thats total lawyer tactics "Tell us what we want to know, or we will take your life from you."
The same could be said for music artists who get "bad" music contracts.
:D~
Oh wait wait here comes the negative mods. Someone mod it insightful so i can be an Insightful troll
I saw this show on the Discovery Channel about a year or two ago. It talked about the Earth cooling (probably due to a nuclear blast from a meteor), then how the earth became a snowball, and then how the earth reheated itself (carbon monoxide from volcano's entered the atmosphere, but due to lack of rain never settled, so it built up increasing heat due to greenhouse effect). Those changes took many thousands of years (with the exception of the nuclear blast).
Really the only debate in "scientific circles" are the scientists under the payroll of big companies that create pollution. The temperature increases we have been noticing over the recent years is dramatic, not naturally occuring. We could do a lot to reduce this pollution. Not to mention you can feel it (compare city air to country air)....and if we can feel it, rest assured our atmosphere has already felt it.
Reading is a skill, just like touch typing. If you practice it enough you'll naturally become faster
;)
I must be unnatural then. I read all the time, ever since I was a little kid. I would read encyclopedias, fantasy books, comic books, magazines, newspapers (yes even as a little kid). I can read a page every 2-3 minutes. Typing...well I can type as fast as someone can speak to me (assuming normal conversation speed). That I gained from skill, but I think that was more training my fingers to respond to my brain impulses more efficiently. While reading is based on how fast you can take the data given to your eyes and process them in your brain...i must be slow
BTW, if you like fantasy books give this one a try. It is long, in depth, and just pretty damn good. You really get to know the character. The book series did so well that at one point they released a special paperback edition of the first book for free...
If MS put out a p2p program that allowed you to d/l any program except MS programs...I would be fine with that :)
Wheel of time I hit about 4-5 / hr.
What do you mean by "hit about 4-5/hr.". 4-5 pages? Chapters? If you are stating 4-5 books an hour I am sorry, but I must cry bullshit until i see absolute evidence (which in our situation is probably impractical/impossible).
This isn't the Army anymore. I have never heard that definition of gun before, and civilian useage is gun is the generic term for firearm and can be anything that uses gunpower (sometimes air counts too) to fire a projectile.
.50 cal long barrel desert eagle and it just recoiled, but no pain, no soreness.
Just because we are civilians doesn't mean the military definitions are inaccurate or incorrect. We may misuse the word "Gun" and use it in a much more loose fashion - but that is our fault for being incorrect. Most people don't know the difference - but there is a difference. The same can be said about computers. Many people call the monitor the computer - but we know it isn't the computer, it is the display screen (monitor). Some even call it the TV (and no they don't watch tv broadcasts, they just don't know its called a monitor).
My computer analogy is spot on.
No really its not. You do not need a gun to survive...you do need a job to make money - and depending on your lifestyle, you may need a job that pays more then McDonalds will pay. A gun will only "fit" "better" if you live in an area that requires a gun regularly for defense (the Bronx or South Central LA does not count, we are speaking war-torn country).
have seem people hit 2 inch groups at 50 yards with a pistol
And if you would see me fire, you would see me do this...but this is exceptionally rare. Especially at a standing pace, without any assistance. Now put this in with real life: A moving bear, probably charging you at 30MPH and you are a lot less likely to find a person who can hit the creature - and do so without wetting his pants.
Pistols are carried (in wilderness situations) in general not to hunt the creature, more to scare it off. A quick pull out of a pistol to shoot in the air will generally scare away most animals. In hunting, unless your a gun-bunny wanna-be, you are hunting with a rifle. Will there be people who use pistols -yea, but not enough.
A 9mm pistol hurt when you shot it? I shoot my Sig all the time and it doesn't even tickle... I have shot a
but I can't very well argue with a Master Sergeant even by proxy.
:)
:)
.357 magnum with its recoil and there are situations (bear chasing you) which would make this impractical.
I won't argue it...I did too many pushups because of this terminology issue
If you're basing this on ROTC training, you probably only ever used military pistols
In ROTC I was captain of the rifle team. I have been shooting guns for a long time. I come from Israel, and I remember being four years old and on the firing range (though i didn't shoot, my dad did teach me about weapon safety). I have shot many weapons: M-16, M-60, shotguns, desert eagles, glocks, rugers, sigs, magnums, and some standard hunting rifles. When I was in Israel (age 13) my brother was in the military and had access to a wide variety of weapons. I got to shoot an AK automatic (scary weapon for a 13 year old). In ROTC we primarily shot in the prone position - maybe once or twice we taught people how to shoot standing up - though since they miss a lot, it is discouraging. When I go to the firing range (with my sig and laser sight) i tend to practice doubletaps a lot. I have a decent knowledge of weapons. I am also deadly accurate (my brother and father were snipers...and maybe it's partly a genetic trait, but i have never missed a shot...too bad i can't say the same about my CounterStrike skills)
10-15 feet is about right for the average person. Most non-trained people cannot get beyond 10 feet accurately. Most trained people start to miss at 15. There are the exceptions, but it is still an exception - especially at moving targets and in a scary situation (bear chasing you). Yea if I have a sight scope and am prone it will be easier - but I don't know how close I want to get my eye to a
All that long-winded fluff being said. The gun companies must be careful in their terminology - but so the same can be said for P2P companies.