the jerkoff Sunday Driver creeping along at 50 in the passing lane just has to be dealt with, I could not agree more. These people seem to take pleasure in being a complete obstacle. For the life of me, I cannot understand why someone would willingly drive slowly in the left lane it's insane and definitely a major contributing factor to this problem.
From GP:
my uncle once said: "in construction, clients are interested in 3 things: 1) build it fast, 2) build it cheap, and 3) build it right. realistically, you can have only two of these three". he was right. While your uncle was right, he's referring to the rather spectacular failures of This Guy. In other words, while an absolutely true credo, it's fairly standard.
From Parent:
I doubt that coverage in a subway is significantly more expensive than coverage any other place. The antennae will be a little different, the repeater is the same If the coverage is really that much more reliable (I don't know whether or not this is true) it is very likely that is will be more expensive. Not because of the type of equipment used, but because of the AMOUNT of equipment used. That is, if you have a truly "Mission Critical" scenario, you have redundancy to add those extra 9's to your 99.99%. While you're correct that the components themselves probably cost the same everywhere, the fact that several "extras" were put in place "just in case" is where things get expensive. See N+1 strategies for good examples of this in practice (i.e hospitals, data centers, etc)
Why would any law enforcement arm be so dumb as to send an army to a house based on a phone call One word: liability. Imagine the hell that would come down if just one actual event wasn't taken seriously and people were injured or died, you'd never hear the end of it and heads would roll.
Presumably he didn't post that on his blog... Don't be so sure. From FTA:
Lt. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV, who replaced Petraeus as the head of the Combined Arms Center and Fort Leavenworth, recently wrote (in a blog post, no less)
I applaud your penchant for mischief and your anecdotal prose. To hear such a juvenile prank story told with such eloquence borders on a work of art. In particular the "squee" had me laughing embarassingly loudly at my desk. Well done, sir.
As a parent who recently bought a home deliberately OUTSIDE the Charlotte-Mecklenburg system, let me assure you, these people don't have any idea what they're doing. This school district has been in the crapper for years and years. No small part of my wife's and my decision to move OUT of Charlotte was the schools. You can check CMS's test results or you can find lots of interesting facts, not to mention things like this or this. The list goes on and on.
First off, I'm not advocating this 95 years nonsense, I'm taking issue with the idea that music is merely the "copies" that can be made. In your example, there would have to be a way for people to somehow create exact "clones" or "copies" of the house you built without having to put in all the effort of hauling all that wood. So the two are not really comparable.
Are you the type of person who thinks price is related only to cost?
No. I do not think that the price is exclusive to cost. I can grasp that supply and demand are really the forces at work. However, you must bear in mind that cost is a factor, regardless of it not being the only factor. Yes, it's true that various products are priced differently in relation to their actual cost to produce, however none of them are priced less than they cost to produce. While it is difficult to quantify the "intangible expenses" like the time and effort to compose a piece of music, that doesn't mean that one can just gloss over them.
copies are so easy to make, that they become an infinite good. You cannot create a business around infinite goods alone. You have to sell something other than the copy, because copies are so easy to come by....Second, price and value are totally separate beasts....Again, because copies of music are infinite goods, prices come down. The value is still the same.
This isn't the point I'm trying to make, maybe I'm not communicating it well. I'm not suggesting a system where a person can compose/write a piece of music or song and be afforded the chance to become ludicrously wealthy based on (seemingly) minimal effort. On the other hand, I reject this notion that music/songs/compositions are merely the recordings or even the performances. The spirit and feel of a piece of music is the true value. It's the feelings and emotions that are brought out in the listener that make it more than just the physical medium through which the music is played or the combination of notes and how they're arranged. I'm simply saying that the argument that music should be free because it's easy to copy is very silly and misses the point entirely. I suppose you could hand out free copies of the Mona Lisa to everyone and everything would be OK, but for some reason that seems like a ridiculous idea to people. Unfortunately, music seems to get classified in a different way in terms of it being an art form and thus people feel more comfortable taking it lightly.
Now before you call me grandiose, I realize that not all music is "high art", but this issue is a very slippery slope. Why should it be that as an artist, my choice is to either only make music as a "hobby" or do it as a charity? I'm not expecting to make millions of dollars at it, I gave that dream up when I realized that my high school band wasn't going to be the opening act for Guns N Roses. But, I don't feel out of line in suggesting that if I can add value to someone else's life/work/production by creating a piece of music that affects them in some way, why should it be so bad that I would like to benefit from that to some small degree and not be in a position where my work becomes something that anyone can use for any purpose? I have a "real" job, and am fine with working to pay my bills. I have given many pieces of my own work for free to be used in independent films. But I've also received compensation for work in "real" productions and TV shows (The Soprano's for instance) and haven't felt the least bit guilty for a couple of (albeit small) checks I could cash.
You know, I've seen this argument used in similar threads a few times and it really bugs me. It completely reduces the art of songwriting/composing to the physical process, which is admittedly easier than ever. However, that does not mean that the ENTIRE process is easy. Recording the song(s) is fairly easy. Writing the songs is hard. I am a composer/musician and I assure you, the writing is the hard part. In the same way that buying paint, brushes and canvas is easy yet creating a masterpiece is difficult.
Oh gosh, mine are long gone. They were pretty worn out from RealSports Baseball and trying to time the jumps over the crocodiles in Pitfall. I had totally forgotten about the EVIL paddles. Why is it that they all seemed to develop that "stuttering" motion after a few uses? I hated using them because whatever you were trying to control with them never moved smoothly across the screen, so you'd end up overcompensating since you weren't sure where things were going to go.
I guess I'm just bitter that I could never get past level 9 playing Kaboom!
I'm aware of the geek alternative. 'Proper' depends on context.
Well, in fairness, wouldn't the true geek context be RPG/400, the tedious programming language I was forced to learn alongside COBOL and Pascal in college?
You insensitive clod! Don't you realize that all your hot grits covered base are belong to us (and our various newly welcomed overlords from Soviet Russia).
I'm sure you thought you were being clever, but you weren't.
Wow, aren't you a ray of sunshine?? I didn't say I knew anything about parallel algorithms, I admit I know nothing about them. I can grasp what you (and some others) have replied, but none of that information was stated in conjunction with the line I quoted from TFA. My point? It just struck me funny to have this odd statement that (at least on its surface) seems to state something OBVIOUS which is, 16 processors are faster than 1. So for crying out loud, lighten up, it was a joke.
From TFA
If you use a 16-core machine instead of a single-core machine then the frame rate increases by a factor of 15.2!
No kidding?? Well if you drive a car with a 16 cylinder, 1500 HP engine, it's a LOT faster than a 4 cylinder compact. More on this story as it develops.
You know, I thought this too. Along with this story, I can't help but think that these are suspiciously timed with the advertisements I'm hearing/seeing for Cloverfield. I wouldn't put it past movie studios to "plant" stuff like this.
We're not exactly voracious movie watchers either. We usually average 2 per week, so 2 per week times 4 weeks equals 8 per month. Now while your $1 per movie is admittedly cheaper, $13.99/8 movies = $1.75 per disc, and for us, that extra $0.75 per disc is pretty nominal given that in exchange we get first run movies, and never have to go into the store, wait in line, etc.
They have plans with fewer movies too. They've got one that's $8.99/mo where you can get DVDs 1 at a time, unlimited for the month. So that might work out cheaper for you, you'd only have to get 9 per month to be cheaper than your current arrangement. They also have a plan for $4.99/mo, but there's a 2 DVD per month limit.
Slashdot Mirror
I could not agree more. These people seem to take pleasure in being a complete obstacle. For the life of me, I cannot understand why someone would willingly drive slowly in the left lane it's insane and definitely a major contributing factor to this problem.
If police would enforce rules against driving too slowly (generally defined as being passed on the right
While I agree, and I would like to see that enforced better, we should be careful about what we wish for. I just recently got an education (from an area police officer with ticket book in hand....$375 later) that passing on the right is ALSO illegal. See various links below:
http://www.nysdmv.com/dmanual/chapter06-manual.htm
http://search.dmv.org/dmv/passing%20on%20the%20right
http://www.dmv.state.va.us/webdoc/pdf/dmv115.pdf
http://www.onlinetrafficschoolguide.com/me-maine/driving_laws.html
etc.
my uncle once said: "in construction, clients are interested in 3 things: 1) build it fast, 2) build it cheap, and 3) build it right. realistically, you can have only two of these three". he was right.
While your uncle was right, he's referring to the rather spectacular failures of This Guy. In other words, while an absolutely true credo, it's fairly standard.
From Parent:
I doubt that coverage in a subway is significantly more expensive than coverage any other place. The antennae will be a little different, the repeater is the same
If the coverage is really that much more reliable (I don't know whether or not this is true) it is very likely that is will be more expensive. Not because of the type of equipment used, but because of the AMOUNT of equipment used. That is, if you have a truly "Mission Critical" scenario, you have redundancy to add those extra 9's to your 99.99%. While you're correct that the components themselves probably cost the same everywhere, the fact that several "extras" were put in place "just in case" is where things get expensive. See N+1 strategies for good examples of this in practice (i.e hospitals, data centers, etc)
One word: liability. Imagine the hell that would come down if just one actual event wasn't taken seriously and people were injured or died, you'd never hear the end of it and heads would roll.
Well, in fairness, you are not required to join the armed forces either.
Don't be so sure. From FTA:
Well, yes, Dante, but in fairness, Quick Stop isn't exactly the epicenter of the corporate world. By the way, aren't you playing hockey today at 2?
I applaud your penchant for mischief and your anecdotal prose. To hear such a juvenile prank story told with such eloquence borders on a work of art. In particular the "squee" had me laughing embarassingly loudly at my desk. Well done, sir.
As a parent who recently bought a home deliberately OUTSIDE the Charlotte-Mecklenburg system, let me assure you, these people don't have any idea what they're doing. This school district has been in the crapper for years and years. No small part of my wife's and my decision to move OUT of Charlotte was the schools. You can check CMS's test results or you can find lots of interesting facts, not to mention things like this or this. The list goes on and on.
First off, I'm not advocating this 95 years nonsense, I'm taking issue with the idea that music is merely the "copies" that can be made. In your example, there would have to be a way for people to somehow create exact "clones" or "copies" of the house you built without having to put in all the effort of hauling all that wood. So the two are not really comparable.
No. I do not think that the price is exclusive to cost. I can grasp that supply and demand are really the forces at work. However, you must bear in mind that cost is a factor, regardless of it not being the only factor. Yes, it's true that various products are priced differently in relation to their actual cost to produce, however none of them are priced less than they cost to produce. While it is difficult to quantify the "intangible expenses" like the time and effort to compose a piece of music, that doesn't mean that one can just gloss over them.
copies are so easy to make, that they become an infinite good. You cannot create a business around infinite goods alone. You have to sell something other than the copy, because copies are so easy to come by....Second, price and value are totally separate beasts....Again, because copies of music are infinite goods, prices come down. The value is still the same.
This isn't the point I'm trying to make, maybe I'm not communicating it well. I'm not suggesting a system where a person can compose/write a piece of music or song and be afforded the chance to become ludicrously wealthy based on (seemingly) minimal effort. On the other hand, I reject this notion that music/songs/compositions are merely the recordings or even the performances. The spirit and feel of a piece of music is the true value. It's the feelings and emotions that are brought out in the listener that make it more than just the physical medium through which the music is played or the combination of notes and how they're arranged. I'm simply saying that the argument that music should be free because it's easy to copy is very silly and misses the point entirely. I suppose you could hand out free copies of the Mona Lisa to everyone and everything would be OK, but for some reason that seems like a ridiculous idea to people. Unfortunately, music seems to get classified in a different way in terms of it being an art form and thus people feel more comfortable taking it lightly.
Now before you call me grandiose, I realize that not all music is "high art", but this issue is a very slippery slope. Why should it be that as an artist, my choice is to either only make music as a "hobby" or do it as a charity? I'm not expecting to make millions of dollars at it, I gave that dream up when I realized that my high school band wasn't going to be the opening act for Guns N Roses. But, I don't feel out of line in suggesting that if I can add value to someone else's life/work/production by creating a piece of music that affects them in some way, why should it be so bad that I would like to benefit from that to some small degree and not be in a position where my work becomes something that anyone can use for any purpose? I have a "real" job, and am fine with working to pay my bills. I have given many pieces of my own work for free to be used in independent films. But I've also received compensation for work in "real" productions and TV shows (The Soprano's for instance) and haven't felt the least bit guilty for a couple of (albeit small) checks I could cash.
You know, I've seen this argument used in similar threads a few times and it really bugs me. It completely reduces the art of songwriting/composing to the physical process, which is admittedly easier than ever. However, that does not mean that the ENTIRE process is easy. Recording the song(s) is fairly easy. Writing the songs is hard. I am a composer/musician and I assure you, the writing is the hard part. In the same way that buying paint, brushes and canvas is easy yet creating a masterpiece is difficult.
Shhhhh! Do you really want to give the movie studios any ideas and then have to sit through "Home Alone Version 4.0"?
Oh gosh, mine are long gone. They were pretty worn out from RealSports Baseball and trying to time the jumps over the crocodiles in Pitfall. I had totally forgotten about the EVIL paddles. Why is it that they all seemed to develop that "stuttering" motion after a few uses? I hated using them because whatever you were trying to control with them never moved smoothly across the screen, so you'd end up overcompensating since you weren't sure where things were going to go.
I guess I'm just bitter that I could never get past level 9 playing Kaboom!
And while we're commenting on it, I think that SirBudgington (1232290) may be our troll given his last 5 comments. Can you say karma whore?
Little hint, Sir B, you might want to vary your "WARNING: GNAA" headline every once in a while, just for variety.
Yup. Her name is Karma, and she's a real bitch.
Well, in fairness, wouldn't the true geek context be RPG/400, the tedious programming language I was forced to learn alongside COBOL and Pascal in college?
Well maybe not a band name, but check out track # 15 on this great album.
I agree, as did Mark Twain, but he said it better.
You insensitive clod! Don't you realize that all your hot grits covered base are belong to us (and our various newly welcomed overlords from Soviet Russia).
Even better, on the "museum" website, there's this page where the guy explains why Giant Humans existed. Priceless.
Wow, aren't you a ray of sunshine?? I didn't say I knew anything about parallel algorithms, I admit I know nothing about them. I can grasp what you (and some others) have replied, but none of that information was stated in conjunction with the line I quoted from TFA. My point? It just struck me funny to have this odd statement that (at least on its surface) seems to state something OBVIOUS which is, 16 processors are faster than 1. So for crying out loud, lighten up, it was a joke.
No kidding?? Well if you drive a car with a 16 cylinder, 1500 HP engine, it's a LOT faster than a 4 cylinder compact. More on this story as it develops.
Ah, you must be going for one of these degree programs:
BS - Bullshit
MS - More Shit
PhD - Piled High and Deep
You know, I thought this too. Along with this story, I can't help but think that these are suspiciously timed with the advertisements I'm hearing/seeing for Cloverfield. I wouldn't put it past movie studios to "plant" stuff like this.
We're not exactly voracious movie watchers either. We usually average 2 per week, so 2 per week times 4 weeks equals 8 per month. Now while your $1 per movie is admittedly cheaper, $13.99/8 movies = $1.75 per disc, and for us, that extra $0.75 per disc is pretty nominal given that in exchange we get first run movies, and never have to go into the store, wait in line, etc.
They have plans with fewer movies too. They've got one that's $8.99/mo where you can get DVDs 1 at a time, unlimited for the month. So that might work out cheaper for you, you'd only have to get 9 per month to be cheaper than your current arrangement. They also have a plan for $4.99/mo, but there's a 2 DVD per month limit.