It's important to point out, that there's nothing necessarily wrong with bias, the real issue should be with inaccuracy. It's not enough to say that this or that news report is biased, you actually have to show how it is wrong.
It was quite common for people to obtain all of their news from biased, or at least "politically informed" viewpoints, news sources, etc. throughout the 19th century and into the middle of the 20th century, and the results were not an utter calamity. people used to be responsible for reading news from several different sources, much like they are now on the Internet, and then forming their own opinions from the consensus, or at least their appreciation of the consensus.
The fetish for "balance "in journalism only started in the 1950s, afternoon national television networks in the United States started airing news broadcast, and the government and activists feared that three national news networks simply didn't give enough opportunities for people to hear a multitude of opinions. Thus, the early journalists who worked in television attempted to create a certain "tone" or ideological conceit that was apparently neutral.
Of course, "balanced" journalism is just as ideologically-biased as anything else, it's simply biased towards the belief that there are two sides to every issue and these two sides are of equal merit. And since the deeper a complex issue is covered, the more likely the reporter's perspective is likely to show through, a "balanced" journalist is likely just not going to delve too deeply into issues. Because, in the end, appearing fair is more important than telling the truth.
in my opinion, a reporter isn't worth his salt unless he has some kind of deep-seated values and beliefs, and the problem with a lot of cable journalism is they simply deny this from the outset, and this leads to bland, uninformative infotainment. Which is why we have TDS.
It's pretty clear that Stewart has had a profound effect upon how people born after 1980 get their news. He's probably the US's most relevant and well known cultural critic and satirist. Some people bring up Twain but I'm not sure he's there (yet) -- Rosewater demonstrated that Stewart's got something more to say but he's not ready to go into Mysterious Stranger territory.
On the other hand he's flatly more historically relevant, and has made a more indelible impression than H. L. Menken. Time and other outlets have compared him to Walter Cronkite with zero fucking irony, and it's a fair cop.
Comedy Central used to be the network that had Mystery Science Theater and the odd stand-up anthology. And then one day they got South Park, and it became the network with South Park.
And then Craig Killborn was an ass to his boss one too many times, and they hired Jon Stewart, and then Comedy Central became the network with The Daily Show (and later Colbert). And the occasional screening of Mean Girls and nauseating repeats of Tosh.0.
The Larry Willmore show is pretty good and manages to be original despite the general glut of news satire out there right now, but I suspect it's not enough.
Note - first off, I am not sure about AQ, but this is an INDUSTRY STANDARD practice to suppress noise generation. In that case you only ground one side of the cable
Right, but (1) You don't do this for digital cable, and (2) ground-lifting has nothing to do with signal direction, it has to do with interrupting ground loops in equipment distant from the patch panel. The grounds are lifted on the send side of some patches, the receive side of others...
perhaps we should spend a few minutes contemplating what it is we plan to call an actual intelligence, once we get that far.
An essential characteristic of intelligence is that we don't know how it works. Thus a computer program can never be intelligent, and the essential definitions of intelligence are pushed back over an horizon every time a test is beaten. Thus TFA.
I use GnuPG to secure some archival things in the cloud.
I'd consider giving some money to it if it was actually usable for its first and most important function, namely, securing emails. It works perfectly, but it's deployment is utterly lacking, no major vendors have gotten far enough behind it to enable it by default, and even knowledgable users don't do something as simple as sign their emails, to at least advertise to others that they have a key.
Also I live in LA, I can see ICANN from my office window, and there are basically no opportunities to get your key signed. GPG has no community.
These aren't technical problems with GPG, they're problems with how it's marketed and how it's positioned in platforms. In my opinion, GnuPG needs users a lot more than it might need $60k in emergency funds. Get the users and the funding will likely be obviated.
Proof that years of astronaut training and astronaut psychological evaluations should be required before purchase for all gun owners. There'd be no more gun accidents or murders.
I hate to bring it up but there was the astronaut who went loopy and drove 500 miles in adult diapers to kill her ex-boyfriend. (I forget her name.)
I went on a few dates with this girl who used to work at NASA, in engineering at Goddard and at Houston, she used to know a bunch of astronauts and she said while none of them were totally nuts, they were all a little weird and totally neurotic about doing anything that might get them bumped from the rotation, particularly when the shuttle program was EOLd and there were no more mission slots forthcoming. The pressure of being an astronaut in space was one thing; the pressure of being selected as an astronaut, but then never going into space was quite another. Layer on that the inevitably weird macho/"Right Stuff"/elite competition stuff...
You can get at pretty much the whole thing now. The only thing you can't do in Swift is create a C function pointer to a Swift code block, so some of the callback-based tasks in CoreAudio and CoreMIDI can't be used. But apart from that calling into C and using C data structures pretty much just works.
The existing APIs aren't very idiomatic to Swift, you gotta do more casts than you probably should have to and there are some really common patterns in Cocoa that are a pain.
If Apple sells me $300 in hardware as a $600 cellphone, it's still a bargain, because the phone is easily worth more than $600 to me.
Anyways, final sale price of the the flagship phones is always about the same, it's not like there's some incredible alternative to an iPhone that's significantly better and significantly cheaper. Apple's profits in this case come from selling units to resellers at close to sale price, where a Samsung will give away half the end sale price of a phone in rebates and sales incentives to resellers and carriers.
On the sell side Apple makes most of its profits be squeezing middlemen, because they know people actually want their phone. Samsung and HTC phones are good but are effectively commodities, something to have in stock when people walk in and ask for an Android phone. Thus, Samsung and HTC have to sell them at wholesale prices.
Technically if you adjust for inflation Standard Oil still has the market cap crown. Who gives a flying fuck?
The New York Times does, they made the dumb comparison.
And yes, comparing the historical market cap of a company with the present market cap of another is meaningless, companies compete and operate in the present, under present conditions, and these conditions (of which the value of nominal dollars is a minor one) do not hold over time.
They had quarterly earning to make and doing a marketing tie-in with Norton made some money and didn't cost a dime. And anyways why would they bother spending money trying to "improve" their computer when Microsoft owned most of the actual user experience?
The PC clone industry collapsed because when it was broke no one took the blame, and when it worked the wrong people got the credit. The problem with commodities is brands become meaningless, and maybe PCs weren't as much of a commodity as Microsoft had everyone believe...
Yeah, but what political system made it possible for such a person to do that better than the richest nation of the planet?!
The AC is sarcastic, but I'd point out that Elon Musk is a South African who got most of his education in Canada. As a matter of fact, of the five founders of PayPal listed on the Wiki page, only one of them is from the US...
This is approximately the same arrangement "our" astronauts use at the moment.
Boeing makes a lot of passenger planes, and the US has really expensive new fighter jets, but apart from that the US aerospace establishment is kinda earning a C+ at the moment. The US doesn't make any of the current highest/fastest/heaviest aircraft, our military procurement system is completely sclerotic and over-managed, the best thing we have going for us is a PayPal billionaire who's building rockets effectively as a hobby...
Hollywood job pays on average 27K. (Using the numbers in the summary).
I'm not sure about the methodology in the summary, but if you look at the scale rates for most Hollywood entertainment unions you'll see the weekly rates even for entry-level job classifications will be around $2000/week. Actors are only a small part of the puzzle and they aren't really representative of the entire employment picture of the film industry. For every professional actor in the film industry there's gotta be a dozen people in behind-the-scenes crew positions.
Even then I'm not really sure how much more "broad" the App economy is, since it seems to be dominated by "star" apps, particularly in gaming, productivity and social networks. Also consider that Apple takes a 30% agency fee for all apps while CAA and William Morris Endeavor only take 10% of their client's salary, and even then Hollywood talent agents are seen as the acme of largess and venality.
I honestly don't think "wannabee" counts towards these things.:-P
There are a lot of professional actors that still wait tables. You can be SAG, book semi-regular walk-ons on TV and the occasional film and still need a second gig-- people wait tables, but they also code, sell stuff on Etsy, write, work as realtors...
Even really successful actors end up having a lot of free time, Josh Brolin is known for, apart from acting, being a really successful high-frequency trader in the mid-aughts.
The problem with the electoral college is not that it exists, it's that it's being used improperly as a flawed proxy for the popular vote instead of as it was originally intended, which was to reflect the will of the individual states, not the people.
Are you sure that's how it was intended? The EC has state-apportioned representatives because the constituents of the Continental Congress and later the Convention were colonies, later called states. Neither the US constitution, nor does any commentary I'm aware of, state that electors are pledged to represent the interests of their state.
Of course, at every crucial point in history prior to the 1860s, somebody suggests reducing the power of states in favor of either democratic populism (Jackson) of federal power (Hamilton, Washington...), and the argument against goes something like, "You're just trying to abolish slavery!" American federalism was invented as a pretext to sustain slavery in the colonies where it was economically entrenched.
Slashdot Mirror
It's important to point out, that there's nothing necessarily wrong with bias, the real issue should be with inaccuracy. It's not enough to say that this or that news report is biased, you actually have to show how it is wrong.
It was quite common for people to obtain all of their news from biased, or at least "politically informed" viewpoints, news sources, etc. throughout the 19th century and into the middle of the 20th century, and the results were not an utter calamity. people used to be responsible for reading news from several different sources, much like they are now on the Internet, and then forming their own opinions from the consensus, or at least their appreciation of the consensus.
The fetish for "balance "in journalism only started in the 1950s, afternoon national television networks in the United States started airing news broadcast, and the government and activists feared that three national news networks simply didn't give enough opportunities for people to hear a multitude of opinions. Thus, the early journalists who worked in television attempted to create a certain "tone" or ideological conceit that was apparently neutral.
Of course, "balanced" journalism is just as ideologically-biased as anything else, it's simply biased towards the belief that there are two sides to every issue and these two sides are of equal merit. And since the deeper a complex issue is covered, the more likely the reporter's perspective is likely to show through, a "balanced" journalist is likely just not going to delve too deeply into issues. Because, in the end, appearing fair is more important than telling the truth.
in my opinion, a reporter isn't worth his salt unless he has some kind of deep-seated values and beliefs, and the problem with a lot of cable journalism is they simply deny this from the outset, and this leads to bland, uninformative infotainment. Which is why we have TDS.
Just speaking for myself, I was born in 1979.
It's pretty clear that Stewart has had a profound effect upon how people born after 1980 get their news. He's probably the US's most relevant and well known cultural critic and satirist. Some people bring up Twain but I'm not sure he's there (yet) -- Rosewater demonstrated that Stewart's got something more to say but he's not ready to go into Mysterious Stranger territory.
On the other hand he's flatly more historically relevant, and has made a more indelible impression than H. L. Menken. Time and other outlets have compared him to Walter Cronkite with zero fucking irony, and it's a fair cop.
Comedy Central used to be the network that had Mystery Science Theater and the odd stand-up anthology. And then one day they got South Park, and it became the network with South Park.
And then Craig Killborn was an ass to his boss one too many times, and they hired Jon Stewart, and then Comedy Central became the network with The Daily Show (and later Colbert). And the occasional screening of Mean Girls and nauseating repeats of Tosh.0.
The Larry Willmore show is pretty good and manages to be original despite the general glut of news satire out there right now, but I suspect it's not enough.
Right, but (1) You don't do this for digital cable, and (2) ground-lifting has nothing to do with signal direction, it has to do with interrupting ground loops in equipment distant from the patch panel. The grounds are lifted on the send side of some patches, the receive side of others...
An essential characteristic of intelligence is that we don't know how it works. Thus a computer program can never be intelligent, and the essential definitions of intelligence are pushed back over an horizon every time a test is beaten. Thus TFA.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I use GnuPG to secure some archival things in the cloud.
I'd consider giving some money to it if it was actually usable for its first and
most important function, namely, securing emails. It works perfectly, but it's
deployment is utterly lacking, no major vendors have gotten far enough behind it to
enable it by default, and even knowledgable users don't do something as simple as
sign their emails, to at least advertise to others that they have a key.
Also I live in LA, I can see ICANN from my office window, and there are basically no
opportunities to get your key signed. GPG has no community.
These aren't technical problems with GPG, they're problems with how it's marketed
and how it's positioned in platforms. In my opinion, GnuPG needs users a lot more
than it might need $60k in emergency funds. Get the users and the funding will likely
be obviated.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAlTUP/sACgkQdILWxHwGqZcRfwCcDco8z5LG0gS2JR7LvifOEE1U
eJUAn1ZbFlj9V7t/Es380X6tEen5RBWs
=TrGp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I hate to bring it up but there was the astronaut who went loopy and drove 500 miles in adult diapers to kill her ex-boyfriend. (I forget her name.)
I went on a few dates with this girl who used to work at NASA, in engineering at Goddard and at Houston, she used to know a bunch of astronauts and she said while none of them were totally nuts, they were all a little weird and totally neurotic about doing anything that might get them bumped from the rotation, particularly when the shuttle program was EOLd and there were no more mission slots forthcoming. The pressure of being an astronaut in space was one thing; the pressure of being selected as an astronaut, but then never going into space was quite another. Layer on that the inevitably weird macho/"Right Stuff"/elite competition stuff...
Well, maybe not yelling, anyway...
You can get at pretty much the whole thing now. The only thing you can't do in Swift is create a C function pointer to a Swift code block, so some of the callback-based tasks in CoreAudio and CoreMIDI can't be used. But apart from that calling into C and using C data structures pretty much just works.
The existing APIs aren't very idiomatic to Swift, you gotta do more casts than you probably should have to and there are some really common patterns in Cocoa that are a pain.
I know, that LINC is an underground sensation...
His actions saved the documents from certain destruction. Punch something else.
If Apple sells me $300 in hardware as a $600 cellphone, it's still a bargain, because the phone is easily worth more than $600 to me.
Anyways, final sale price of the the flagship phones is always about the same, it's not like there's some incredible alternative to an iPhone that's significantly better and significantly cheaper. Apple's profits in this case come from selling units to resellers at close to sale price, where a Samsung will give away half the end sale price of a phone in rebates and sales incentives to resellers and carriers.
On the sell side Apple makes most of its profits be squeezing middlemen, because they know people actually want their phone. Samsung and HTC phones are good but are effectively commodities, something to have in stock when people walk in and ask for an Android phone. Thus, Samsung and HTC have to sell them at wholesale prices.
Does not bode well for the Note...
The New York Times does, they made the dumb comparison.
And yes, comparing the historical market cap of a company with the present market cap of another is meaningless, companies compete and operate in the present, under present conditions, and these conditions (of which the value of nominal dollars is a minor one) do not hold over time.
They had quarterly earning to make and doing a marketing tie-in with Norton made some money and didn't cost a dime. And anyways why would they bother spending money trying to "improve" their computer when Microsoft owned most of the actual user experience?
The PC clone industry collapsed because when it was broke no one took the blame, and when it worked the wrong people got the credit. The problem with commodities is brands become meaningless, and maybe PCs weren't as much of a commodity as Microsoft had everyone believe...
This is a stupid hill to die on, Chas.
The AC is sarcastic, but I'd point out that Elon Musk is a South African who got most of his education in Canada. As a matter of fact, of the five founders of PayPal listed on the Wiki page, only one of them is from the US...
This is approximately the same arrangement "our" astronauts use at the moment.
Boeing makes a lot of passenger planes, and the US has really expensive new fighter jets, but apart from that the US aerospace establishment is kinda earning a C+ at the moment. The US doesn't make any of the current highest/fastest/heaviest aircraft, our military procurement system is completely sclerotic and over-managed, the best thing we have going for us is a PayPal billionaire who's building rockets effectively as a hobby...
I'm not sure about the methodology in the summary, but if you look at the scale rates for most Hollywood entertainment unions you'll see the weekly rates even for entry-level job classifications will be around $2000/week. Actors are only a small part of the puzzle and they aren't really representative of the entire employment picture of the film industry. For every professional actor in the film industry there's gotta be a dozen people in behind-the-scenes crew positions.
Even then I'm not really sure how much more "broad" the App economy is, since it seems to be dominated by "star" apps, particularly in gaming, productivity and social networks. Also consider that Apple takes a 30% agency fee for all apps while CAA and William Morris Endeavor only take 10% of their client's salary, and even then Hollywood talent agents are seen as the acme of largess and venality.
There are a lot of professional actors that still wait tables. You can be SAG, book semi-regular walk-ons on TV and the occasional film and still need a second gig-- people wait tables, but they also code, sell stuff on Etsy, write, work as realtors...
Even really successful actors end up having a lot of free time, Josh Brolin is known for, apart from acting, being a really successful high-frequency trader in the mid-aughts.
487 bytes of of source, 57k of commentary.
If you need to recourse to "common sense" to prove your point...
Are you sure that's how it was intended? The EC has state-apportioned representatives because the constituents of the Continental Congress and later the Convention were colonies, later called states. Neither the US constitution, nor does any commentary I'm aware of, state that electors are pledged to represent the interests of their state.
Of course, at every crucial point in history prior to the 1860s, somebody suggests reducing the power of states in favor of either democratic populism (Jackson) of federal power (Hamilton, Washington...), and the argument against goes something like, "You're just trying to abolish slavery!" American federalism was invented as a pretext to sustain slavery in the colonies where it was economically entrenched.
Who's "we"?