Probably because it's value is $0.10. So, paying $1 isn't worth it to the OP, while $0.10 just might be. I know that I rent tons of crappy movies from Netflix. Sometimes they are just crappy, and sometimes I get pleasantly surprised. At $18 per month for the good movies, and no extra charge for the crappy ones delivered to my door, that is worth it. At ~$3.50 with me driving to a video store it would not be worth it to rent a crappy movie. The price of the crappy movies is near 0 but it is not 0. As more and more movies get added to the Netflix streaming, I am even more likely to watch crappy movies as the price will go down again.
No doubt you too use products that are crappy if the price is right.
Yes a board of directors is liable for it's actions and can be sued for not doing things that will further a companies goals. (Mind you this is different than always maximizing profits, something you also don't seem to understand.)
The idea behind suing the board because they didn't maximize profits is that the board is required to act in the best interest of the shareholders. Given that Google's motto has been "Do No Evil" from the beginning and that shareholders bought their shares with no evil as a company goal, it is safe to say that Google doing evil in favor of profits is not in the shareholders interest.
I could easily go a year without working. But then what? I would have depleted the savings I have for real emergencies, and have no guarantee that I didn't just blow through 6 months or a years income only to be faced with getting a job that is no better than the one I left. Quitting a job just because you have 6 months worth of money saved up, and your office has some politics is pretty irresponsible if you have other people depending on you.
Most people living in a state of near slavery is another debate all together, and one that I don't entirely disagree with. Worse yet is the slow slide into real slavery that we see happening regularly. Things like "Required Volunteering".
Your right, the kind of person who is seriously going to do development is 99.99% likely to have a computer that can do WM development and a 0.001% chance of owning a Mac.
I have found that the best place to work is a place that is willing to pay you. The premise here is that one of the two is being laid off because of tight economic times. That being the case, the choice might be the current job, or no job. I know for me at least, 'current job' would have to be really REALLY bad before it beat no job.
Given that there is a greater than 90% chance that a person wanting to jump into Windows Mobile development will already have a machine capable of doing the development, and a less than 10% chance that a person wanting to jump into iPhone development will already have a Mac capable of doing the development means that the OP has a very valid point.
Yeah, but they are not taking money from everyone. They are selling bonds to pay for it. This means that they are both giving money to the small group, and creating new investment opportunities for another! WooHoo! That makes it all right doesn't it? Oh, please, please, please tell me that it makes it all right.
For the same reason that ice cream shops sell rocky road ice cream. Sometimes, your second favorite is what you want at the moment. Sometimes your 10th favorite is what you want. Then there is the fact that since man has started telling stories, violence has been used as a way to generate interest. Have all stories contained violence? No. But many have. Some publishers of other media also push the limits of violent content. Video games are just not that different than other media when it comes to violence.
You don't read very well. He made it perfectly clear that he was perfectly fine with distracting passenger. Why? Because he wouldn't want to give up having passengers. He also made it perfectly clear that he was fine with distracting radios. Sure, he was willing to give a little and have the controls on the steering wheel, but he definitely stopped short of wanting a the kind of complete ban that he wants for a cell phone. He made it absolutely clear that he is a hypocrite that thinks other people's distractions should be banned, but his are OK.
Your right to rock out to your favorite tunes, argue with your wife in person, and watch your 3 month old in the back seat in no way trumps my right to get home without you killing me with your car.
I wouldn't be completely heartbroken to find out that we had accidentally (or on purpose) seeded Mars with life. Until life is found their, either on it's own, or planted from us, there will be a huge faction of people that don't want us to 'contaminate' it.
Well, I'm not going to claim to be an expert, particularly when discussing something that gets twisted as much as history, but given that they 'came for the communists' first, Germany obviously either saw communists as a worse than Jews, or at the very least saw them as an easier target and worthy of eradication. So, have the Germans learned their lesson of not eradicating groups that they disagree with, or that challenge their official morals? Or have they simply switched targets. And, to not just point a finger at the Germans, I have to say that the rest of the world is just as guilty. The Nazis have become a fairytale boogyman. Facts have become something that no longer are allowed to be discussed concerning Nazi Germany, and the lessons that could be learned from it are lost because of it. Even right here in the US we see much of the early Nazi behavior being repeated, but most people cannot see it because they have a cartoon view of the Nazi Party. Heck, I doubt most people even realize that Hitlers Black Hair and dark eyes are not the same color as the Aryan blond hair and blue eyes.
The ban on Nazi paraphenalia in Germany has always seemed a little bit off to me. I understand the reasons why they have the ban, and I am not suggesting embracing a Forth Reich, but when I hear about the ban, the quote that always comes to mind is:
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I wasn't a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
Surly the communists were at the time, considered as bad as the Nazis.
Again, computers are complex and hard, Expecting the normal person to understand them or even be able to configure them is silly.
No, they are not hard and the vast majority of the complexity is hidden even to experienced users. At 1, my son was using his computer with no problems. ~1 week after his second birthday, I formatted his hard drive, gave him an Ubuntu disk, and left him to reinstall on his own. He did it with no problems at all. I understand that my kid is a mutant super genius, but if even the smartest 2 year old on the planet can install and run a computer when they don't even know how to read yet, you cannot honestly claim that they are "hard". This article is about a grown woman that knows how to read.
I would be hard pressed to believe that the Dell computer did not come preconfigured to access the internet, and the Open Office that come on it reads and writes Word documents. The the woman claims that she had to miss a full year of school because of this. That means that in 1 full year, she could not figure out how to solve her problem. Given that she had all day to seek out help and information (since she wasn't in class or doing homework), it is simply not believable that she could not find someone to tell her "In Open Office, use SaveAs and change the file type to Microsoft Word", and "The computer comes preconfigured to access the internet. Just plug it into your DSL".
Unfortunately, it is clear that this woman is lying, and lying poorly. There are all sorts of reasons that people drop out of school. There are all sorts of lies that people tell to rationalize their choice. Often to themselves.
I too find the bill to be vulgar. I expect all members of legislature that vote for this to remand themselves to their nearest law enforcement official upon the passage of the law in order to server their five year sentence.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.
That quote is designed to cover the ass of smart malicious people. It gets repeated by the malicious to excuse their behavior, and by the stupid to try and make them feel smart. That being said, there are many mistakes that don't require stupidity or malice. I don't know enough of the man, or his position to know if what category the situation falls into, or if it is even a problem at all.
That's what I was thinking. The first time I heard zero day was with the DirectTV attack on illegally hacked satellite boxes. The reason it was called zero-day was because DirectTV sent little pieces of code that didn't do anything malicious in small segments. This resulted in the hackers ignoring each little piece of code. After all, the code didn't do anything harmful. Then on Superbowl Sunday, when the absolute highest quantity of hacked boxes would be running, they sent the last little bit of code that by itself didn't do anything harmful, but assembled all the other bits of code into a routine that literally fried the access cards. As I understand it, it actually put a burn hole in some of them. The term zero-day was used because the plan to burn the access cards was put in place long before the attack, and it took many small set up attacks to prep the system for the day that their count down reached zero.
Now, it seems that zero-day just means malware. Anyone know if there is a previous usage of the term before DirectTV?
I see no reason that a six year old could not play Counter Strike. My four year old plays many many games that would be considered adult with no problem. While he isn't quite up to the complexity of sophisticated Counter Strike, he certainly could play it badly today. He is unlikely to type "Greetings my fellow players, it is I, Jimmy the 6-year old Counter Strike player"; He would more likely type something like "Hi, I am Conan. I am 4."
Another two years, and I have no doubt that he could play a decent game of Counter Strike.
I have to tell you, that I fell into that misconception for a lot of years. It is poorly described almost universally. On the plus side, it did give a pal of mine who I have frequent friendly rivalries with, a good chance to be right.
Honestly, that isn't even the worst misconception people have about taxes. Many people (most?) don't even realize that the taxes that come out of their paychecks are "withheld". They think that they have to pay one set of taxes through the year, and a seperate set of taxes at the end of the year. Just look at the tax preparation commercials that are now running where they are bragging that "95% of our customers receive a refund". They say it like it is their great service that gets the government to give you money and that the fact that you have been overpaying throughout the year has nothing to do with it.
Scarier yet are the commercials that ran last year by H&R Block. Their commercial boiled down to telling people that they should trust them with their money because they were holding a lottery.
Honestly, the smokers KNOW what smoking is. This isn't 1950 anymore. It is the anti-smokers and anti-smoking industry that is the propaganda machine these days. They are just as bad with the lies as the tobacco companies were in the 50s. To see who has been conditioned, just look at my previous post that specifically states
cancer isn't the only problem and possibly not the biggest problem caused by smoking.
But because it also included the 100% true statement of:
if the negative effects of smoking were removed, then there should be no problem with it.
A stream of rebuttals started pouring in about how even if there were no negative effects, there would be problems. They proceeded to try and rationalize their conditioning by pointing out negative effects that the premise of the argument already said did not exist. There is no other explanation for this than conditioning by the anti-smoking industry.
You know, it's kind of funny that you are posting this on a web browser with HTML, as it is a perfect example of your second type of application.
Don't take that as an insult, as I am also posting to a discussion thread using a giant slow buggy program with every feature under the sun.
The question is though, would you rather be using a stable and fast application with a tiny set of features to read and post to Slashdot, or do you like using a huge generic buggy app?
Slashdot Mirror
Probably because it's value is $0.10. So, paying $1 isn't worth it to the OP, while $0.10 just might be. I know that I rent tons of crappy movies from Netflix. Sometimes they are just crappy, and sometimes I get pleasantly surprised. At $18 per month for the good movies, and no extra charge for the crappy ones delivered to my door, that is worth it. At ~$3.50 with me driving to a video store it would not be worth it to rent a crappy movie. The price of the crappy movies is near 0 but it is not 0. As more and more movies get added to the Netflix streaming, I am even more likely to watch crappy movies as the price will go down again.
No doubt you too use products that are crappy if the price is right.
Yes a board of directors is liable for it's actions and can be sued for not doing things that will further a companies goals. (Mind you this is different than always maximizing profits, something you also don't seem to understand.)
The idea behind suing the board because they didn't maximize profits is that the board is required to act in the best interest of the shareholders. Given that Google's motto has been "Do No Evil" from the beginning and that shareholders bought their shares with no evil as a company goal, it is safe to say that Google doing evil in favor of profits is not in the shareholders interest.
Yes. Because the alternative that you suggest of deceit over something as trivial as a movie rating is also stupid, but for different reasons.
I could easily go a year without working. But then what? I would have depleted the savings I have for real emergencies, and have no guarantee that I didn't just blow through 6 months or a years income only to be faced with getting a job that is no better than the one I left. Quitting a job just because you have 6 months worth of money saved up, and your office has some politics is pretty irresponsible if you have other people depending on you.
Most people living in a state of near slavery is another debate all together, and one that I don't entirely disagree with. Worse yet is the slow slide into real slavery that we see happening regularly. Things like "Required Volunteering".
Your right, the kind of person who is seriously going to do development is 99.99% likely to have a computer that can do WM development and a 0.001% chance of owning a Mac.
I have found that the best place to work is a place that is willing to pay you. The premise here is that one of the two is being laid off because of tight economic times. That being the case, the choice might be the current job, or no job. I know for me at least, 'current job' would have to be really REALLY bad before it beat no job.
Given that there is a greater than 90% chance that a person wanting to jump into Windows Mobile development will already have a machine capable of doing the development, and a less than 10% chance that a person wanting to jump into iPhone development will already have a Mac capable of doing the development means that the OP has a very valid point.
Really? You are honestly trying to claim that it isn't stupid to rate a movie as being good even when you have not seen it? Really?
Yeah, but they are not taking money from everyone. They are selling bonds to pay for it. This means that they are both giving money to the small group, and creating new investment opportunities for another! WooHoo! That makes it all right doesn't it? Oh, please, please, please tell me that it makes it all right.
For the same reason that ice cream shops sell rocky road ice cream. Sometimes, your second favorite is what you want at the moment. Sometimes your 10th favorite is what you want. Then there is the fact that since man has started telling stories, violence has been used as a way to generate interest. Have all stories contained violence? No. But many have. Some publishers of other media also push the limits of violent content. Video games are just not that different than other media when it comes to violence.
You don't read very well. He made it perfectly clear that he was perfectly fine with distracting passenger. Why? Because he wouldn't want to give up having passengers. He also made it perfectly clear that he was fine with distracting radios. Sure, he was willing to give a little and have the controls on the steering wheel, but he definitely stopped short of wanting a the kind of complete ban that he wants for a cell phone. He made it absolutely clear that he is a hypocrite that thinks other people's distractions should be banned, but his are OK. Your right to rock out to your favorite tunes, argue with your wife in person, and watch your 3 month old in the back seat in no way trumps my right to get home without you killing me with your car.
I wouldn't be completely heartbroken to find out that we had accidentally (or on purpose) seeded Mars with life. Until life is found their, either on it's own, or planted from us, there will be a huge faction of people that don't want us to 'contaminate' it.
So, what your saying is, the things you do are ok, but the things other people do are not. Wonderful.
Well, I'm not going to claim to be an expert, particularly when discussing something that gets twisted as much as history, but given that they 'came for the communists' first, Germany obviously either saw communists as a worse than Jews, or at the very least saw them as an easier target and worthy of eradication. So, have the Germans learned their lesson of not eradicating groups that they disagree with, or that challenge their official morals? Or have they simply switched targets. And, to not just point a finger at the Germans, I have to say that the rest of the world is just as guilty. The Nazis have become a fairytale boogyman. Facts have become something that no longer are allowed to be discussed concerning Nazi Germany, and the lessons that could be learned from it are lost because of it. Even right here in the US we see much of the early Nazi behavior being repeated, but most people cannot see it because they have a cartoon view of the Nazi Party. Heck, I doubt most people even realize that Hitlers Black Hair and dark eyes are not the same color as the Aryan blond hair and blue eyes.
When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the Jews, I remained silent; I wasn't a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.
Surly the communists were at the time, considered as bad as the Nazis.
Again, computers are complex and hard, Expecting the normal person to understand them or even be able to configure them is silly.
No, they are not hard and the vast majority of the complexity is hidden even to experienced users. At 1, my son was using his computer with no problems. ~1 week after his second birthday, I formatted his hard drive, gave him an Ubuntu disk, and left him to reinstall on his own. He did it with no problems at all. I understand that my kid is a mutant super genius, but if even the smartest 2 year old on the planet can install and run a computer when they don't even know how to read yet, you cannot honestly claim that they are "hard". This article is about a grown woman that knows how to read.
I would be hard pressed to believe that the Dell computer did not come preconfigured to access the internet, and the Open Office that come on it reads and writes Word documents. The the woman claims that she had to miss a full year of school because of this. That means that in 1 full year, she could not figure out how to solve her problem. Given that she had all day to seek out help and information (since she wasn't in class or doing homework), it is simply not believable that she could not find someone to tell her "In Open Office, use SaveAs and change the file type to Microsoft Word", and "The computer comes preconfigured to access the internet. Just plug it into your DSL".
Unfortunately, it is clear that this woman is lying, and lying poorly. There are all sorts of reasons that people drop out of school. There are all sorts of lies that people tell to rationalize their choice. Often to themselves.
I too find the bill to be vulgar. I expect all members of legislature that vote for this to remand themselves to their nearest law enforcement official upon the passage of the law in order to server their five year sentence.
Ah yes. I do recall it being used like that now.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.
That quote is designed to cover the ass of smart malicious people. It gets repeated by the malicious to excuse their behavior, and by the stupid to try and make them feel smart. That being said, there are many mistakes that don't require stupidity or malice. I don't know enough of the man, or his position to know if what category the situation falls into, or if it is even a problem at all.
That's what I was thinking. The first time I heard zero day was with the DirectTV attack on illegally hacked satellite boxes. The reason it was called zero-day was because DirectTV sent little pieces of code that didn't do anything malicious in small segments. This resulted in the hackers ignoring each little piece of code. After all, the code didn't do anything harmful. Then on Superbowl Sunday, when the absolute highest quantity of hacked boxes would be running, they sent the last little bit of code that by itself didn't do anything harmful, but assembled all the other bits of code into a routine that literally fried the access cards. As I understand it, it actually put a burn hole in some of them. The term zero-day was used because the plan to burn the access cards was put in place long before the attack, and it took many small set up attacks to prep the system for the day that their count down reached zero.
Now, it seems that zero-day just means malware. Anyone know if there is a previous usage of the term before DirectTV?
I see no reason that a six year old could not play Counter Strike. My four year old plays many many games that would be considered adult with no problem. While he isn't quite up to the complexity of sophisticated Counter Strike, he certainly could play it badly today. He is unlikely to type "Greetings my fellow players, it is I, Jimmy the 6-year old Counter Strike player"; He would more likely type something like "Hi, I am Conan. I am 4."
Another two years, and I have no doubt that he could play a decent game of Counter Strike.
I have to tell you, that I fell into that misconception for a lot of years. It is poorly described almost universally. On the plus side, it did give a pal of mine who I have frequent friendly rivalries with, a good chance to be right.
Honestly, that isn't even the worst misconception people have about taxes. Many people (most?) don't even realize that the taxes that come out of their paychecks are "withheld". They think that they have to pay one set of taxes through the year, and a seperate set of taxes at the end of the year. Just look at the tax preparation commercials that are now running where they are bragging that "95% of our customers receive a refund". They say it like it is their great service that gets the government to give you money and that the fact that you have been overpaying throughout the year has nothing to do with it.
Scarier yet are the commercials that ran last year by H&R Block. Their commercial boiled down to telling people that they should trust them with their money because they were holding a lottery.
cancer isn't the only problem and possibly not the biggest problem caused by smoking.
But because it also included the 100% true statement of:
if the negative effects of smoking were removed, then there should be no problem with it.
A stream of rebuttals started pouring in about how even if there were no negative effects, there would be problems. They proceeded to try and rationalize their conditioning by pointing out negative effects that the premise of the argument already said did not exist. There is no other explanation for this than conditioning by the anti-smoking industry.
You know, it's kind of funny that you are posting this on a web browser with HTML, as it is a perfect example of your second type of application.
Don't take that as an insult, as I am also posting to a discussion thread using a giant slow buggy program with every feature under the sun.
The question is though, would you rather be using a stable and fast application with a tiny set of features to read and post to Slashdot, or do you like using a huge generic buggy app?
Yes. Those would be SOME of the "cancer isn't the only problem".