Post taxes, probably. Post the 10%+ of them that are unemployed, certainly. Maybe their US counterparts in the automotive field will catch up to them in the latter category in the next decade, but they're not there yet.
According to Harvard cognitive scientist Steven Pinker, "It would be hard to overstate how politically incorrect this paper is... [though] it's certainly a thorough and well-argued paper, not one that can easily be dismissed outright."
Am I reading this wrong, or is this implied in his statement (i.e. we might not be able to dismiss it outright, but it will eventually be disproven because it is politically incorrect and, therefore, cannot be correct).?
I would be more interested to see how he would fair if there wasn't the imposed restriction that the contestants must wait until the question has been read to ring in.
It turned out that the software was even better than us, picking up spam we'd incorrectly classified as legitimate emails.
Who cares if a few get through incorrectly. The interesting statistic is how it does on incorrectly labelling legitimate mail as spam.
Google's IPO doesn't help individual investors any more than going the traditional route via distribution through an underwriter. It helps them (Google) get more for the IPO and the bankers less.
Slashdot Mirror
they mean isolating themselves?
the number of results anyways? Who makes it to page 5000 when doing a search?
They really missed the boat. Windows Nova was the obvious choice!
I wouldn't necessarily lay the blame solely on the unions here. The management signed off on the pay/benefits plans too, right?
Post taxes, probably. Post the 10%+ of them that are unemployed, certainly. Maybe their US counterparts in the automotive field will catch up to them in the latter category in the next decade, but they're not there yet.
1. Catch medium sized catfish 2. Inject with osmium 3. ?????? 4. Profit!
it must be wrong?
According to Harvard cognitive scientist Steven Pinker, "It would be hard to overstate how politically incorrect this paper is... [though] it's certainly a thorough and well-argued paper, not one that can easily be dismissed outright."
Am I reading this wrong, or is this implied in his statement (i.e. we might not be able to dismiss it outright, but it will eventually be disproven because it is politically incorrect and, therefore, cannot be correct).?
These already exist in Lineage II. They farm currency mostly, though, instead of making characters.
People would prefer programs without adware? What a stunning concept. At what point did "manifesto" replace "common sense"?
I would be more interested to see how he would fair if there wasn't the imposed restriction that the contestants must wait until the question has been read to ring in.
It turned out that the software was even better than us, picking up spam we'd incorrectly classified as legitimate emails. Who cares if a few get through incorrectly. The interesting statistic is how it does on incorrectly labelling legitimate mail as spam.
The SEC has also requested further information about their Playboy interview, which will delay the IPO further.
You would think this would be possible in hockey already.
Google's IPO doesn't help individual investors any more than going the traditional route via distribution through an underwriter. It helps them (Google) get more for the IPO and the bankers less.