Pssst. 1/500 of 1Tb/s is 2Gb/s not 2Mb/s. I think they are saying you can download 500 movies in 1 second, not the equivilent of streaming continually at 1Tb/s. 1Tb/s just blows my mind.
"The gun works by listening in with a directional microphone, and then, after a short delay of around 0.2 seconds, playing it back with a directional speaker."
Basically, this messes with your brain, causing you to stop talking. Two very simple techiques for stopping this 1. Put a finger in each ear or cover them with your hands 2. Train yourself to block out the echo. I understand those in the radio industry already do this.
100% agreed. Call it a "loss leader' or the price of doing business, but the OS certainly is not their revenue generator. Amazing how many smart people don't understand how companies make their money.
It is funny. We agree on all the facts but disagree with the interpretation. I view it as the "loss leader", you view it as part of the whole. Perhaps we simply are viewing the two sides of the same coin. What I won't budge from, however, is that true to the OP, Google will not give away its crown jewels through open sourcing.
You need to read the whole sentence. The OS isn't the revenue generating part of Android. The hardware is. The other Google services are. The open source OS is just the way they get their product (you) and their paying customer (also you but third parties who want your eyeballs) in the door.
The OS isn't where they make their money off this product. Being the open source alternative gives them a good market position, but their money is made from selling the hardware and tying it into the other Google services. Think of the OS as the loss leader that gets you in their store.
I log into my Slashdot account today and notice flags on each post (bottom right, near the social networking icons). Any clue what this is about? Is Slashdot suddenly going to allow us to censor posts? I won't jump to conclusions yet, but this is the typical use of flags in a forum.
This poor news coverage by _SLASHDOT_ is clearly aimed at making the Russian People's leader look bad to this _AMERICAN_ audience. As a Russian _MAN_ aged _32_, I can conclusively state that Mr. Putin has been a blessing to my country. I look forward to his continuing to lead us throught _2012_ and in the future.
Good question. I don't have an answer for you except for "eternal vigilance" which is admittedly difficult when one works 50 hours a week and your opponents can pay people to focus on it 50 hours a week.
Do you know the difference between the debt and the deficit? One is cumulative, the other is one-year.
For the record, I voted for Bush Jr. but regretted it when he turned in the 500B deficit. I voted for Obama but regretted it when he started turning in his 1.5T deficits. I just can't win...
National deficits that have already put us into an impossible situation. Gitmo still open. Still in Afghanistan. Tried to keep us in Iraq. Signed into law a bill that would allow for indefinite detention of American citizens. Votes to lower funding for Social Security payroll taxes, making the system more insolvent than it was when he took office.
Not so sure the only way to get a raise is to change jobs.
In 1998, I started my career @ 28K in the midwest and moved up to $60K in nine years. I did move jobs for $82K/yr almost four years ago and now make an even $100K with another 25-30% in bonuses and other benefits.
"It is legal for companies to put agreements not to work for a competitor in a contract. "
They can put it in the agreement. It is, however, for the most part is unenforceable. One thing that people don't seem to realize is that if a contract is deemed to be against the public interest, it is null and void. Non-competes fall in this category except for some specific exceptions.
These "anti-compete" rules have no teeth except in a few isolated cases. My company has hired people from competitors and vice versa. Execs sometimes get all red in the face and talk about taking it to court (the same execs that poached from their competitors). The company lawyers get involved and break the bad news that there is no case. I've seen it happen enough times that it is comical.
There appear to be two exceptions: The trade secrets "rule" (have never seen this one applied) and the book of business rule (which I have seen... typically there is a waiting period before solicitation of existing clients). I made up these two "rules" based on my observations, there may be more nuance than what I am aware of.
So, to your point, these lawsuits have already been greatly shut down.
Yup. People sucked down this motto and believed it. The fast is that the nature of business is often contrary to the general public interest. This is why we citizens band together in the form of governments to counterbalance some of the negative side of business. No, this isn't a diatribe against capitalism. It is simple a recognition that capitalism has its weaknesses that must be addressed and reckoned with.
Put two saints in charge of a business and you will find that they begin behaving in ways that the wouldn't if they weren't in a powerful position. it doesn't make them evil. It is simply a response to the environment and the forces around them. Our gov't should place restraints in place to minimize anti-society behavior.
When Google puts in the "no poaching" agreement, it is acting in its own best interest, but not in the best interest of society as a whole. Citizens should be free to work in the best environment for them. This isn't a profit driven value. It is a freedom based value. Google is acting against that and should be slapped in the language that corporations understand -- the bottom line. The slap must be hard enough to change behavior, or else it will be deemed a cost of doing business.
And if you still think that we just need the right people in charge of companies, people with the right ethics and then everything will be perfect, you are absolutely deluded. Granted, we DO need strong ethics in those who hold power. But be damned sure that even those people will act against the interest of the rest of us.
Did you participate in the rankings? Otherwise your "disingenuous" comment is off the mark.
Are you really telling me that the press in the US is less free than their counterparts in the UK? In Poland? In the UK, there are restrictions on the press that would be unconstitutional in the US. And Poland doesn't even respect the right to criticize religion
No, the US is not perfect. And yes, there should be a spotlight on such stupidity as "free speech zones". But if you are really claiming that these rankings represent the relative freedoms in many of these countries, you are way off base.
I did an analysis and found out that the 192 countries average rank was 96.5 the same as last year. We can rest easy knowing that we held steady this year.
Slashdot Mirror
No. No drop of a unit. 2GB is about the size of a typical movie, right? If you need 2GB/s, I want to know what DPI and framerate you are using.
And, yes I don't see how 2Gb is enough for a movie. Perhaps the press release folks confused bits with bytes?
Agreed. That is why I am looking forward to the driverless car. It would be a true revolution and save millions of lives.
Pssst. 1/500 of 1Tb/s is 2Gb/s not 2Mb/s. I think they are saying you can download 500 movies in 1 second, not the equivilent of streaming continually at 1Tb/s. 1Tb/s just blows my mind.
"The gun works by listening in with a directional microphone, and then, after a short delay of around 0.2 seconds, playing it back with a directional speaker."
Basically, this messes with your brain, causing you to stop talking. Two very simple techiques for stopping this
1. Put a finger in each ear or cover them with your hands
2. Train yourself to block out the echo. I understand those in the radio industry already do this.
Interesting little research, but not practical.
100% agreed. Call it a "loss leader' or the price of doing business, but the OS certainly is not their revenue generator. Amazing how many smart people don't understand how companies make their money.
It is funny. We agree on all the facts but disagree with the interpretation. I view it as the "loss leader", you view it as part of the whole. Perhaps we simply are viewing the two sides of the same coin. What I won't budge from, however, is that true to the OP, Google will not give away its crown jewels through open sourcing.
*pssst* Wrong story.
You need to read the whole sentence. The OS isn't the revenue generating part of Android. The hardware is. The other Google services are. The open source OS is just the way they get their product (you) and their paying customer (also you but third parties who want your eyeballs) in the door.
The OS isn't where they make their money off this product. Being the open source alternative gives them a good market position, but their money is made from selling the hardware and tying it into the other Google services. Think of the OS as the loss leader that gets you in their store.
That is because they have a positive IQ.
Ah, so no deletion will occur. Thank you for the clarification.
I don't get the text box. But I am stuck with IE at work, so perhaps that it the issue.
I log into my Slashdot account today and notice flags on each post (bottom right, near the social networking icons). Any clue what this is about? Is Slashdot suddenly going to allow us to censor posts? I won't jump to conclusions yet, but this is the typical use of flags in a forum.
This poor news coverage by _SLASHDOT_ is clearly aimed at making the Russian People's leader look bad to this _AMERICAN_ audience. As a Russian _MAN_ aged _32_, I can conclusively state that Mr. Putin has been a blessing to my country. I look forward to his continuing to lead us throught _2012_ and in the future.
Signed,
_MyLongNickName_
Good question. I don't have an answer for you except for "eternal vigilance" which is admittedly difficult when one works 50 hours a week and your opponents can pay people to focus on it 50 hours a week.
Do you know the difference between the debt and the deficit? One is cumulative, the other is one-year.
For the record, I voted for Bush Jr. but regretted it when he turned in the 500B deficit. I voted for Obama but regretted it when he started turning in his 1.5T deficits. I just can't win...
National deficits that have already put us into an impossible situation.
Gitmo still open.
Still in Afghanistan. Tried to keep us in Iraq.
Signed into law a bill that would allow for indefinite detention of American citizens.
Votes to lower funding for Social Security payroll taxes, making the system more insolvent than it was when he took office.
Not so sure the only way to get a raise is to change jobs.
In 1998, I started my career @ 28K in the midwest and moved up to $60K in nine years.
I did move jobs for $82K/yr almost four years ago and now make an even $100K with another 25-30% in bonuses and other benefits.
But, often, moving to another company is useful.
You know what. I did misunderstand the summary. Thanks for pointing out my error.
"It is legal for companies to put agreements not to work for a competitor in a contract. "
They can put it in the agreement. It is, however, for the most part is unenforceable. One thing that people don't seem to realize is that if a contract is deemed to be against the public interest, it is null and void. Non-competes fall in this category except for some specific exceptions.
These "anti-compete" rules have no teeth except in a few isolated cases. My company has hired people from competitors and vice versa. Execs sometimes get all red in the face and talk about taking it to court (the same execs that poached from their competitors). The company lawyers get involved and break the bad news that there is no case. I've seen it happen enough times that it is comical.
There appear to be two exceptions: The trade secrets "rule" (have never seen this one applied) and the book of business rule (which I have seen... typically there is a waiting period before solicitation of existing clients). I made up these two "rules" based on my observations, there may be more nuance than what I am aware of.
So, to your point, these lawsuits have already been greatly shut down.
Yup. People sucked down this motto and believed it. The fast is that the nature of business is often contrary to the general public interest. This is why we citizens band together in the form of governments to counterbalance some of the negative side of business. No, this isn't a diatribe against capitalism. It is simple a recognition that capitalism has its weaknesses that must be addressed and reckoned with.
Put two saints in charge of a business and you will find that they begin behaving in ways that the wouldn't if they weren't in a powerful position. it doesn't make them evil. It is simply a response to the environment and the forces around them. Our gov't should place restraints in place to minimize anti-society behavior.
When Google puts in the "no poaching" agreement, it is acting in its own best interest, but not in the best interest of society as a whole. Citizens should be free to work in the best environment for them. This isn't a profit driven value. It is a freedom based value. Google is acting against that and should be slapped in the language that corporations understand -- the bottom line. The slap must be hard enough to change behavior, or else it will be deemed a cost of doing business.
And if you still think that we just need the right people in charge of companies, people with the right ethics and then everything will be perfect, you are absolutely deluded. Granted, we DO need strong ethics in those who hold power. But be damned sure that even those people will act against the interest of the rest of us.
Did you participate in the rankings? Otherwise your "disingenuous" comment is off the mark.
Are you really telling me that the press in the US is less free than their counterparts in the UK? In Poland? In the UK, there are restrictions on the press that would be unconstitutional in the US. And Poland doesn't even respect the right to criticize religion
No, the US is not perfect. And yes, there should be a spotlight on such stupidity as "free speech zones". But if you are really claiming that these rankings represent the relative freedoms in many of these countries, you are way off base.
I did an analysis and found out that the 192 countries average rank was 96.5 the same as last year. We can rest easy knowing that we held steady this year.