Or as a serious guyss, 2,050,000. I mean, come on guys. How many people really downloaded RC3? Or use Ubuntu? When we're talking about downloads in the millions, we're talking about what normal people are doing. The stats of nerds don't significantly contribute.
Personally, I don't have cable. At $60/month, it isn't worth it. Everything I watch is on broadcast for free: local sports, news, reruns and what have you.
Everything, that is, except for the two channels I would pay for: Comedy Central, and Cartoon Network. I don't watch a lot of TV. I don't have time to watch a lot of TV. But I'd love to catch the Daily Show for 20 minutes of my life every day. And you're telling me I should shell out $60 to Comcast for 30 minutes per day + lots of crap I don't have time for, instead of $10 to Apple but be limited to what I actually want? (It's only on 4 times a week, so it really is only $10 a month.) I don't think so.
Well...maybe it's my version of Adobe, and I certainly wouldn't blame FireFox or IE (entirely), but it's Acrobat Reader that crashes most for me on both FF and IE. And it's more on FF. While the IT folk of slashdot may not care very much, some of us in academia do nothing but read pdfs all day! A well-integrated Adobe/browser combination is pretty high up on the list of features I want.
The other is to make it easy to have different sessions, so that I can save my cookies (ie be able to stay logged in to gmail) while my wife (yes, a real one) can keep hers, and we could use the same browser. For now the workaround is one of us uses IE, and the other FF.
Actually, the article mentions that Canada will have increased LNG at least through 2020, at a rate of 2% per year. However, Canada is also expected to have increased consumption throughout that time period at a slightly higher rate, resulting in a net decrease in exports.
But I guess you just looked at the money graph, and didn't bother to RTFA, eh?
"Google has some of the best scientists around." ?!?
This is where you go wrong...Google is filled with some of the best programmers around. But programmers aren't scientists, and they certainly aren't the engineers one used to find in Xerox Parc or Bell Labs. Software is never going to be revolutionary. It's hardware that has us in awe. How can we possibly compare R&D of programmers vs engineers?!?
True. But if you go to the actual article and look at the first image they have, this is in fact what they meant. Except the sides are sort of curved, so it's actually a three-arced star:
_
| |
/ \
/ \
/ ___ \
\_/ \_/
There are actually no angles in the entire shape, and it approximates an interpolation between a triangle and the mercedes-benz 3-pointed star I referenced above.
Sure, it's a great philosophy if you can manage to get seen there. On the other hand, if that actually leads to an increase in time spent per patient for each doctor, than the throughput of the hospital is much less. Which means if this were instituted across the country...some people would get great care, but many just wouldn't get the opportunity to see a doctor at all. There's a shortage of doctors (or perhaps an abundance of patients) as it is!
Ummm, isn't this the definition of profit? You can operate up to 99.99999% less profit, and still be in the black. The problem is when you lose 80% of your gross...that would spell trouble.
Of course, even an 80% profit loss can be a problem...the execs are less likely to make multi-million-dollar bonuses (and the workers less likely to get thousand-dollar bonuses).
Just because you believe in a strictly limited government doesn't mean you don't take advantage of the services offered. So going back into *our* hands...even if unwillingly for some folk.
Of course we're paying for it; we are the government. When the new revenue stream is created for the government, that's money that is then going back into our hands--in lower taxes, or more public services. Who do you want to pay to free up the analog frequencies?
Double-blind placebo-controlled?
And tell me, dear sir, how are you supposed to blind the patient so they know if they are walking on cobblestone or not? What exactly is the placebo in question? They had a control group walking on non-cobblestone, and that's as good as you can do in this case. Design the better experiment and put it up if you want to really be modded informative!
Well, in recent developments (the last half hour) I can no longer reach every page. But I could before...either a fluke, or Google's fast response times at work.
The script is easier to write than you may think; since the scan includes the page numbers, you can search by page number. The web page is conveniently entitled "Page xxx" so it's not so hard to figure out which returned link is the right one. (See here or here for example). The only problem is the IP checking which now mysteriously works...is there a way to fool Google about your IP though? Either by cycling it as routing your requests through somewhere else?
While only 70 pages are shown in the search, you can click on any one and go a few pages forward and back. I didn't try to go to all 400 pages, but I probably visited about 60. I noticed no gaps, and was never warned I viewed too many from my IP.
I said it was annoying, but I'm sure someone could easily write a script to do all those page visits in order and download the entire thing.
Are you sure Google doesn't let you read a whole book? I looked for and tested this with the current book I'm reading ("Small Gods" by Terry Pratchet) -- and it sure looks like they a) scanned the whole book and b) let me read any page (although it's somewhat annoying too).
Errr, pardon me for inquiring, but why is it so expensive to produce both an edited and unedited version of a DVD? All the edits have already taken place (for TV, VHS, whatever)...so where's the expense?
Slashdot Mirror
Alright, they're up to 2,000,003.
Or as a serious guyss, 2,050,000. I mean, come on guys. How many people really downloaded RC3? Or use Ubuntu? When we're talking about downloads in the millions, we're talking about what normal people are doing. The stats of nerds don't significantly contribute.
Personally, I don't have cable. At $60/month, it isn't worth it. Everything I watch is on broadcast for free: local sports, news, reruns and what have you.
Everything, that is, except for the two channels I would pay for: Comedy Central, and Cartoon Network. I don't watch a lot of TV. I don't have time to watch a lot of TV. But I'd love to catch the Daily Show for 20 minutes of my life every day. And you're telling me I should shell out $60 to Comcast for 30 minutes per day + lots of crap I don't have time for, instead of $10 to Apple but be limited to what I actually want? (It's only on 4 times a week, so it really is only $10 a month.) I don't think so.
Well...maybe it's my version of Adobe, and I certainly wouldn't blame FireFox or IE (entirely), but it's Acrobat Reader that crashes most for me on both FF and IE. And it's more on FF. While the IT folk of slashdot may not care very much, some of us in academia do nothing but read pdfs all day! A well-integrated Adobe/browser combination is pretty high up on the list of features I want.
The other is to make it easy to have different sessions, so that I can save my cookies (ie be able to stay logged in to gmail) while my wife (yes, a real one) can keep hers, and we could use the same browser. For now the workaround is one of us uses IE, and the other FF.
Actually, the article mentions that Canada will have increased LNG at least through 2020, at a rate of 2% per year. However, Canada is also expected to have increased consumption throughout that time period at a slightly higher rate, resulting in a net decrease in exports.
But I guess you just looked at the money graph, and didn't bother to RTFA, eh?
In biology, 100% of the field is modern. Better yet, in my field of computational biology, the oldest papers around are 20 years at a reach!
I had an argument with my stats prof today about what environment to use to analyze some data. He responded:
"Don't SAS(s) me boy, use (arrrrr)R."
You do mean a record in that it took so long, right?
"Google has some of the best scientists around." ?!?
This is where you go wrong...Google is filled with some of the best programmers around. But programmers aren't scientists, and they certainly aren't the engineers one used to find in Xerox Parc or Bell Labs. Software is never going to be revolutionary. It's hardware that has us in awe. How can we possibly compare R&D of programmers vs engineers?!?
True. But if you go to the actual article and look at the first image they have, this is in fact what they meant. Except the sides are sort of curved, so it's actually a three-arced star:
_
| |
/ \
/ \
/ ___ \
\_/ \_/
There are actually no angles in the entire shape, and it approximates an interpolation between a triangle and the mercedes-benz 3-pointed star I referenced above.
Sure, it's a great philosophy if you can manage to get seen there. On the other hand, if that actually leads to an increase in time spent per patient for each doctor, than the throughput of the hospital is much less. Which means if this were instituted across the country...some people would get great care, but many just wouldn't get the opportunity to see a doctor at all. There's a shortage of doctors (or perhaps an abundance of patients) as it is!
Isn't a three-sided star the shape of a mercedes-benz logo? I guess they really meant three-pointed star...
Ummm, isn't this the definition of profit? You can operate up to 99.99999% less profit, and still be in the black. The problem is when you lose 80% of your gross...that would spell trouble.
Of course, even an 80% profit loss can be a problem...the execs are less likely to make multi-million-dollar bonuses (and the workers less likely to get thousand-dollar bonuses).
"...is all human hair the same thickness?"
Somewhat on topic: NO, human hair isn't all the same thickness, and this problem is even leading to lawsuits!
Standardize hair thickness now!
Then again, let's focus in on the actualy nearby city of Bridgeport:
MSN Virtual Earth
Google Maps
When Google comes out with beta, the Slashdot community: Come on, don't give them a hard time about any bugs. It's still BETA!
When Microsoft comes out with a service in beta: It's rushed, it's shitty, it's copycat, it's evil empire!
The truth: MS's product had new and different features to google's, and both still have bugs. Can we get a little objectivity please?
...However, he has already had his name besmirched by Welshy.
Just because you believe in a strictly limited government doesn't mean you don't take advantage of the services offered. So going back into *our* hands...even if unwillingly for some folk.
Of course we're paying for it; we are the government. When the new revenue stream is created for the government, that's money that is then going back into our hands--in lower taxes, or more public services. Who do you want to pay to free up the analog frequencies?
Double-blind placebo-controlled?
And tell me, dear sir, how are you supposed to blind the patient so they know if they are walking on cobblestone or not?
What exactly is the placebo in question? They had a control group walking on non-cobblestone, and that's as good as you can do in this case. Design the better experiment and put it up if you want to really be modded informative!
At the risk of touting MSFT...
h %3D100%7D&FORM=QBRE vs. http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=linux+%7Bfrsh %3D0%7D&FORM=QBRE
search.msn.com let's you do this too.
In the "search builder" tab (subtab results ranking) there are slidebars that let you rank based on page freshness. Or just include it in your search: http://search.msn.com/results.aspx?q=linux+%7Bfrs
Well, in recent developments (the last half hour) I can no longer reach every page. But I could before...either a fluke, or Google's fast response times at work.
The script is easier to write than you may think; since the scan includes the page numbers, you can search by page number. The web page is conveniently entitled "Page xxx" so it's not so hard to figure out which returned link is the right one. (See here or here for example). The only problem is the IP checking which now mysteriously works...is there a way to fool Google about your IP though? Either by cycling it as routing your requests through somewhere else?
While only 70 pages are shown in the search, you can click on any one and go a few pages forward and back. I didn't try to go to all 400 pages, but I probably visited about 60. I noticed no gaps, and was never warned I viewed too many from my IP.
I said it was annoying, but I'm sure someone could easily write a script to do all those page visits in order and download the entire thing.
Are you sure Google doesn't let you read a whole book? I looked for and tested this with the current book I'm reading ("Small Gods" by Terry Pratchet) -- and it sure looks like they a) scanned the whole book and b) let me read any page (although it's somewhat annoying too).
Errr, pardon me for inquiring, but why is it so expensive to produce both an edited and unedited version of a DVD? All the edits have already taken place (for TV, VHS, whatever)...so where's the expense?
Who uses "if (X.isY() == true)". SO ineffecient! AND less readable. Can we please stick with "if(XisY())"?
Thank you for your cooperation.