yup. most of the time on the more popular tech stocks yahoo finance will show above google too, so where this "hard coded" bias comes from is imagination.
You know what's just as much comedy?
top of the page:
Disclosure: I serve as a consultant to various companies that compete with Google. But I write on my own -- not at the suggestion or request of any client, without approval or payment from any client.
.
Yup. He's writing for himself, for a paycheck, to write against google.
believe it or not, as much as their headlines are funny sometimes and generally sarcastic, they and reddit and a number of sites tend to debunk bad fact checking quite often.
agreed in it's entirety. Carnegie Mellon is a school I've got a lot of interest in going to (if I could ever go there/get a scholarship, since it's expensive as shit).
Unlike Harvard which is a school that seems to produce 30% good students and 70% people who fuck up our society, CMU seems to have great programs and great teachers all around. I mean Pausch taught there. That alone tells me how well done CMU is.
I agree that anyone in HR worth their cred should be able to understand what it takes to get through CMU.
for me? it's a goddamn insult. I thrive to see teachers who enjoy their job and give me a reason to want to listen to what they say. I don't care to spend time in a class that is basically an interim class with 5% new material and 95% review, simply on the assumption that people are retarded.
Why should I waste part of my education if they're wasting part of their career?
for teaching methods: no method does, ever has or ever will, work perfectly for the general populace. It's just that teachers don't care beyond the status quo, as bob and the poster above him noted. It's the "this is the way that was good in the 50's, so lets keep it up". Even though, you know, it wasn't good or bad, it just "worked for all people on some level" so people went with it.
However, does the good teacher who adapts end up with good students who contribute and everyone enjoys and wins? hell yes. Why is it rare? because lots of teachers are an embarrassment to the field.
we've definitely gone too far on many things - I'm just saying that people need to look at what.
to just go wah big government big brother doesnt' say shit and certainly doesn't make an impact.
I didn't mean that as you specifically, but you know, that people need to define things. I'm tired of the republican agenda of "we need less government". I'd gladly support an agenda that actually gives examples and of things backed up with research - yet we have no such political group, and it's left more to science folks.
I'm not saying do nothing, I'm saying let's look at a goddamn solution. Why do we have to tax everyone a million dollars? Why can't the wealthy 1% contribute 85% and we split that other 15% of the cost between the entire rest of society, adjusted by poverty? It sounds sad, but guess what? It'd be damn fair. (note: numbers pulled out of my ass, just trying to make an example) The rich bear the burden of that which they have positioned themselves for.
simply because he gave people an "out" doesn't mean the problem's been solved or even addressed, which is the cheating.
all it means is that he laid down a big threat to flunk some students, and gave people a way to confess even if they didn't do something for sake of erasing a possible bad grade. Bombed the test? Now you got a free redo.
Or you can just go and be an idiot and go "well, he sure stopped that cheating problem" and watch cheating pick up right where it stopped a week later or a different group of classes or basically, next semester.
so we stop funding our science program, or space program, or social security, or welfare, or our government employees.
notice something? one of those is not like the other.
what do you think happens if we scrap social security? Do you think it's going to affect high income folks? No, they have money set aside for windfalls. Do you think it's going to affect middle class and low income folks? Yes, and that will crush our economy.
just a fyi. Social security money is given to people and then spent. Tax cuts or not giving money to the gov't are saved and not spent.
"less government" is not an explanation or a solution to anything. It's just a complaint with no actual basis, and no followup explanation.
Less Government what? Less government funding? Less government taxing? Less government employees? it helps to make sense with the phrases, not sound like a fucking joke/troll.
As indicated below, if you think you want less government, then feel free to stop using public roads, stop paying taxes, stop driving your car - after all, gasoline is taxed and that money goes to the government. Hell, don't even take public transportation, because that supports government too!
See how this works? really, do whatever you want (this is the land of the free after all), but take into mind what things are provided by the government. They don't excuse bad decisions and policies, nor corruption and fascism but there's more to it than "less government".
I think the whole thing calls into question what the professor has been doing that has been giving people a reason to want to cheat. Was his class too hard, were the requirements too high, was he boring as shit? Was the class too easy, do the students not have incentives, etc? So it also calls into question why the students were motivated to cheat.
this is a wake up call to a new "cyber-vulnerability"! Oh noes! I said the word cyber! It's not a threat, it's a cyberthreat!
yes, this is the hype they want you to believe. Stuxnet is something to be concerned about, but adding the word cyber is just bullshit hype all around.
the rest is just calling into play Siemens shitty programming ethics which are now going to bite them in the ass as businesses and government will probably shy away from business with them until this can be fixed.
it will change. how fast depends on if people catch on in their lifetime or it happens when they die.
as is, we're basically waiting for the people in leadership right now to die to fix a lot of situations - primarily politically. The question is whether the new guy has a clue.
anyone who says libertarian doesn't understand the conflict in the term. it's basically republicans who don't want to be called republicans or someone who hates both parties but still leans republican. if someone declares themselves independent libertarian, then they're more acknowledging that they don't necessarily align with "libertarian" views. I have a friend like this, and it's basically republican but he doesnt' want to admit it.
us wants china to follow our system because we're trying to get the hell out of it - it's like putting poison in china's waters that we've had for years and are getting rid of.
meanwhile, patents are not free of non-societal cost. there is a real financial cost for all the legal work that gets tied up in the system from patents, which has shot up substantially.
whaddya know. without patents, people actually develop on an idea and improve it!
I swear, one day our intellectual property brigade (worldwide association of assholes/idiots/morons in their various high ranking capacities - IFPI, RIAA, MPAA, WIPO,ASCAP,BSA the list is beyond long) will catch on to this idea, years later - since it must be patented or something.
there's huge amounts of success to be made by making games free to play. granted it's all in the execution and there *is* no cookie cutter way to just make free to play work, but there are lots of ways to explore that may be unique to each game, company, etc.
there was a big push for this and the conversation from the eu to phone manufacturers went like this:
we can legislate you to standardize your connectors, or you can do it yourself. What do you choose?
so they said they'd do it, and they did. What's the catch? in the US even though everyone uses mini-usb and because it's the US, they don't all match up (different size/shape even as same connector).
Slashdot Mirror
there are certainly folks that need a bigger screen for ease of access, but does that mean you magically don't have zoom or something?
size is not everything if you're zoomed out as much as possible and saying that you need things bigger.
you don't walk around with a tablet computer, you walk around with a phone that can do it.
way to not RTFA there buddy.
the guy works for a competitor to google. So he's complaining and probably works for a finance/stock ticker site.
meanwhile, google's results are almost never at the top. You know who's first on stock tickers? Yahoo.
So where's that hardcoded bias again? Your post should be downmodded.
yup. most of the time on the more popular tech stocks yahoo finance will show above google too, so where this "hard coded" bias comes from is imagination.
You know what's just as much comedy?
top of the page:
.
Yup. He's writing for himself, for a paycheck, to write against google.
your comment will surprise everyone who's done business. People are correct that this is specific to dell and companies that are doing damage control.
who's the idiot who doesn't want sustainable business? the guy that does shit customer service on his customers.
word spreads fast, even from your most loyal customers if you treat em like shit. that's one of the things the internet is well known for.
have you never read fark?
believe it or not, as much as their headlines are funny sometimes and generally sarcastic, they and reddit and a number of sites tend to debunk bad fact checking quite often.
the issue specifically is that the professor did a shit job.
uh, no.
nothing says it hasn't happened before. This is just the first time of him realizing it.
Honestly, how long has cheating been widespread and known? I can guess probably the last 100 years, minimum?
agreed in it's entirety. Carnegie Mellon is a school I've got a lot of interest in going to (if I could ever go there/get a scholarship, since it's expensive as shit).
Unlike Harvard which is a school that seems to produce 30% good students and 70% people who fuck up our society, CMU seems to have great programs and great teachers all around. I mean Pausch taught there. That alone tells me how well done CMU is.
I agree that anyone in HR worth their cred should be able to understand what it takes to get through CMU.
the reality is, that method works for you.
for me? it's a goddamn insult. I thrive to see teachers who enjoy their job and give me a reason to want to listen to what they say. I don't care to spend time in a class that is basically an interim class with 5% new material and 95% review, simply on the assumption that people are retarded.
Why should I waste part of my education if they're wasting part of their career?
for teaching methods: no method does, ever has or ever will, work perfectly for the general populace. It's just that teachers don't care beyond the status quo, as bob and the poster above him noted. It's the "this is the way that was good in the 50's, so lets keep it up". Even though, you know, it wasn't good or bad, it just "worked for all people on some level" so people went with it.
However, does the good teacher who adapts end up with good students who contribute and everyone enjoys and wins? hell yes. Why is it rare? because lots of teachers are an embarrassment to the field.
we've definitely gone too far on many things - I'm just saying that people need to look at what.
to just go wah big government big brother doesnt' say shit and certainly doesn't make an impact.
I didn't mean that as you specifically, but you know, that people need to define things. I'm tired of the republican agenda of "we need less government". I'd gladly support an agenda that actually gives examples and of things backed up with research - yet we have no such political group, and it's left more to science folks.
I'm not saying do nothing, I'm saying let's look at a goddamn solution. Why do we have to tax everyone a million dollars? Why can't the wealthy 1% contribute 85% and we split that other 15% of the cost between the entire rest of society, adjusted by poverty? It sounds sad, but guess what? It'd be damn fair. (note: numbers pulled out of my ass, just trying to make an example) The rich bear the burden of that which they have positioned themselves for.
simply because he gave people an "out" doesn't mean the problem's been solved or even addressed, which is the cheating.
all it means is that he laid down a big threat to flunk some students, and gave people a way to confess even if they didn't do something for sake of erasing a possible bad grade. Bombed the test? Now you got a free redo.
Or you can just go and be an idiot and go "well, he sure stopped that cheating problem" and watch cheating pick up right where it stopped a week later or a different group of classes or basically, next semester.
lets do another simple example.
de-funding.
so we stop funding our science program, or space program, or social security, or welfare, or our government employees.
notice something? one of those is not like the other.
what do you think happens if we scrap social security? Do you think it's going to affect high income folks? No, they have money set aside for windfalls. Do you think it's going to affect middle class and low income folks? Yes, and that will crush our economy.
just a fyi. Social security money is given to people and then spent. Tax cuts or not giving money to the gov't are saved and not spent.
"less government" is not an explanation or a solution to anything. It's just a complaint with no actual basis, and no followup explanation.
Less Government what? Less government funding? Less government taxing? Less government employees? it helps to make sense with the phrases, not sound like a fucking joke/troll.
As indicated below, if you think you want less government, then feel free to stop using public roads, stop paying taxes, stop driving your car - after all, gasoline is taxed and that money goes to the government. Hell, don't even take public transportation, because that supports government too!
See how this works? really, do whatever you want (this is the land of the free after all), but take into mind what things are provided by the government. They don't excuse bad decisions and policies, nor corruption and fascism but there's more to it than "less government".
I think the whole thing calls into question what the professor has been doing that has been giving people a reason to want to cheat. Was his class too hard, were the requirements too high, was he boring as shit? Was the class too easy, do the students not have incentives, etc? So it also calls into question why the students were motivated to cheat.
this is a wake up call to a new "cyber-vulnerability"! Oh noes! I said the word cyber! It's not a threat, it's a cyberthreat!
yes, this is the hype they want you to believe. Stuxnet is something to be concerned about, but adding the word cyber is just bullshit hype all around.
the rest is just calling into play Siemens shitty programming ethics which are now going to bite them in the ass as businesses and government will probably shy away from business with them until this can be fixed.
it will change. how fast depends on if people catch on in their lifetime or it happens when they die.
as is, we're basically waiting for the people in leadership right now to die to fix a lot of situations - primarily politically. The question is whether the new guy has a clue.
pretty much. however, considering how our government is basically a two party system, being libertarian means nothing in the big picture right now.
either you have seats in congress and influence or you're more likely to be able to change the direction the earth rotates.
please. it's almost trivial to sell shares in a company that puts anything above $1b in revenue a year, even if they're on the verge of bankruptcy.
uh, hate to break it to ya, but ballmer selling 87 million in shares is not necessarily a good sign for the company given current losses.
anyone who says libertarian doesn't understand the conflict in the term. it's basically republicans who don't want to be called republicans or someone who hates both parties but still leans republican. if someone declares themselves independent libertarian, then they're more acknowledging that they don't necessarily align with "libertarian" views. I have a friend like this, and it's basically republican but he doesnt' want to admit it.
us wants china to follow our system because we're trying to get the hell out of it - it's like putting poison in china's waters that we've had for years and are getting rid of.
meanwhile, patents are not free of non-societal cost. there is a real financial cost for all the legal work that gets tied up in the system from patents, which has shot up substantially.
whaddya know. without patents, people actually develop on an idea and improve it!
I swear, one day our intellectual property brigade (worldwide association of assholes/idiots/morons in their various high ranking capacities - IFPI, RIAA, MPAA, WIPO,ASCAP,BSA the list is beyond long) will catch on to this idea, years later - since it must be patented or something.
what are you talking about?
there's huge amounts of success to be made by making games free to play. granted it's all in the execution and there *is* no cookie cutter way to just make free to play work, but there are lots of ways to explore that may be unique to each game, company, etc.
there was a big push for this and the conversation from the eu to phone manufacturers went like this:
we can legislate you to standardize your connectors, or you can do it yourself. What do you choose?
so they said they'd do it, and they did. What's the catch? in the US even though everyone uses mini-usb and because it's the US, they don't all match up (different size/shape even as same connector).