Comments like these on/. puzzle me. On the one hand the majority of slashdotters have made it pretty clear that they're willing to pay for news (apologies if the parent is not in this category). On the other hand, the bemoan all the cutting and pasting, and absence of 'real' journalism. You can't have it both ways...
I suspect that in general, consumers are willing to give up a lot in terms of quality for products which are 'free.' (Yeah, yeah, I know it's not 'really' free, users see ads, sell their privacy blah blah blah, but Joe Average user would consider FB 'free.')
If FB were to charge for their services it would be a different story. For example, I pay $25 per year for a flickr account. As a result, I have a much lower tolerance for quality issues with flickr than I do with facebook. Luckily, flickr issues are few and far between.
Because in a mobile environment, people leave their usb 'sticks' in their laptop bag. When their laptop bag is stolen, so is the 'key' to the network.
In a desktop environment, people leave their 'stick' in the top drawer of their desk, so all the cleaner needs to do is open the desk drawer to have full access to the network.
That might all be true, but it does not really change my point.
Sure, but 'your point' isn't really germane to the discussion at hand - It doesn't really matter whether my parents took out a loan, sold the family jewels or won the lottery. The point is that in the 70s airfares were hella expensive, to the point where one had to lay their hands on a large pile of cash just to buy a few tickets, whereas today you can almost buy a ticket to Europe simply by smashing open your piggy bank.
In 1990 I flew YVR-LHR. It was my first big backpacking trip after university. I remember the fare was around $950 - Around $1540 in today's dollars. By comparison, that same trip on those same dates would cost $1400 today - Almost $150 less.
In the mid 70s my parents flew the family to England to visit the relatives. My parents had to take out a bank loan to cover the airfares - They were that high.
Now they fly to England twice a year without thinking about it.
Well guess what stupid, you're not flying cheaper.
Sure you are - Here's some anecdotal examples:
In 1990 I flew YVR-LHR. It was my first big backpacking trip after university. I remember the fare was around $950 - Around $1540 in today's dollars. By comparison, that same trip on those same dates would cost $1465 today - Almost $100 less.
I remember around 1999 I used to fly YVR-DEN once a month on United. The flight, purchased three weeks ahead without a Saturday stay was around $1000. Indexed to today's dollars, that's nearly $1300.
Today the fare is about half that.
In the mid 70s my parents flew the family to England to visit the relatives. My parents had to take out a bank loan to cover the airfares.
Now they fly to England twice a year without thinking about it.
So are fares marginally higher than they might have been 2 or 3 years ago? Maybe, but in looking at the big picture fares have never been lower.
The producers of Forrest Gump used the same math to claim a loss on that one too
Winston Groom wrote the book "Forrest Gump" upon which the movie was based. As you suggest, he made very little money due to creative Hollywood accounting. When the producers approached him about making a movie off his sequel novel "Gump and Co." Groom apparently refused - Apparently he said something like "Why would you want to make a sequel when you lost so much money on the first movie?"
It's not hard to spit it out into the wrapper and toss it into one of the bajillion trash cans on an average city walkway
I'm not much of a gum-guy, but if I am chewing some, when I'm 'done' I usually just swallow it. I assume it makes its way into the sewer system, but I've never really checked...
Hotels frequently have a bank of converters, each tuned to a different digital channel. The outputs of all of the converter boxes are put onto separate analog channels, multiplexed and fed through a distribution amplifier.
You sir, are a steely-eyed missile man. Thanks for posting - I've always wondered how that worked.
If the Saudi in question already has a billion dollars it doesn't matter if America buys any more of their oil. Besides, even if the USA stopped buying Saudi oil tomorrow, China and India would just take up the slack - So the Saudis can fund terror in America, financed by China.
In my opinion, the only long-term multi-generational solution is for the west (yes, that's you, USA) to fund education in Pakistan, Afghanistan and their ilk. If you educate the populace out of ignorance, then the Saudis lose their proxy-'warriors.'
Afghanistan, who harbored the 9-11 terrorists, in not an oil producer
Yes, but the Afghan terrorists (and others) are funded by Saudi Arabia. They Saudis don't want to get their hands dirty, so they sit at home or in their villas in Cannes and fund the poor gullible brainwashed Afghan boys.
No, fundamentalist Christians are, not the bible. You ever read the New Testament? Good stuff in there...
Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets.
- Matthew 7:12
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness's sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
- From the Sermon on the Mount
Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.
- Matthew 7.1
I would expect any nation that starts a war will have asked and answered to them with backup plans
Well, yes and no. If North Korea were to lob missiles at Seattle and Portland tomorrow (yeah, yeah, unlikely, I know, it's just an example) then the USA would likely immediately (re)declare war on North Korea and begin whoopin' some commie ass. It's unlikely there'd be a period of analysis asking and answering these questions and generating backup plans.
Apple's entries into the business PC market are extremely limited
Another example - Let's say you want to put some kind of forms-based data collection application onto an iMaxiPad... How do you get the thing on there? There's been some vague talk of "enterprises" being allowed to put their own apps on an iPad, but it's all very nebulous...
Why are people so willing to show how dumb they are by posting endless tirades against different races?
Because the trolls know someone will *always* reply. The replies feed them, so they post again... If nobody every replied to trolls, they'd starve and die off, but that goes against human nature, so they continue to thrive.
So what do you do? Fly the prisoners to Afghanistan or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia and then kick them out of the plane onto the tarmac, then fly off? How exactly do you repatriate them when the governments say "don't bring them back"?
When you capture someone on the field of war, you hold them until the war is over [snip] when we're done fighting in Afghanistan, then everyone captured in Afghanistan should be released
Where this falls down is when the 'home country' doesn't want them back. When WW2 ended and the US released the German and Italian POWs, they went back home to Germany and Italy and wherever. Problem with the "War on Terrorism" "soldiers" is they're stateless. Afghanistan doesn't want them, Pakistan doesn't want them. This is one of the many problems Obama is having with his plan to close Guantanamo - There's nowhere to send the released combatants.
It's very rare for a car to out and out 'break down' and quit. The CV joints might start to click or the brakes might need an overhaul or the front end might need rebuilding after 250K miles or the AC compressor fails, but the power almost always get delivered to the wheels, the brakes almost always stop the car and the steering wheel almost always turns it, unless you ignore a problem for months.
I've never really understood this urge to trade cars in so quickly.... Even if a fully paid off ten-year-old car is costing you $1500 per year in maintenance (CV joints, timing belt etc.) you're still way further ahead compared to a $400 per month payment on a new car. Every time my friends say "I can't afford the upkeep on this car so I'm getting a new one" I roll my eyes...
Slashdot Mirror
Investigative journalism is dead
Comments like these on /. puzzle me. On the one hand the majority of slashdotters have made it pretty clear that they're willing to pay for news (apologies if the parent is not in this category). On the other hand, the bemoan all the cutting and pasting, and absence of 'real' journalism. You can't have it both ways...
I would assume the nuclear plants found on submarines and large warships both provide a lot of energy and are not in the category of 'extra large.'
I suspect that in general, consumers are willing to give up a lot in terms of quality for products which are 'free.' (Yeah, yeah, I know it's not 'really' free, users see ads, sell their privacy blah blah blah, but Joe Average user would consider FB 'free.')
If FB were to charge for their services it would be a different story. For example, I pay $25 per year for a flickr account. As a result, I have a much lower tolerance for quality issues with flickr than I do with facebook. Luckily, flickr issues are few and far between.
but why not use USB sticks for login
Because in a mobile environment, people leave their usb 'sticks' in their laptop bag. When their laptop bag is stolen, so is the 'key' to the network.
In a desktop environment, people leave their 'stick' in the top drawer of their desk, so all the cleaner needs to do is open the desk drawer to have full access to the network.
That might all be true, but it does not really change my point.
Sure, but 'your point' isn't really germane to the discussion at hand - It doesn't really matter whether my parents took out a loan, sold the family jewels or won the lottery. The point is that in the 70s airfares were hella expensive, to the point where one had to lay their hands on a large pile of cash just to buy a few tickets, whereas today you can almost buy a ticket to Europe simply by smashing open your piggy bank.
but fares over the Atlantic are much higher
In 1990 I flew YVR-LHR. It was my first big backpacking trip after university. I remember the fare was around $950 - Around $1540 in today's dollars. By comparison, that same trip on those same dates would cost $1400 today - Almost $150 less.
In the mid 70s my parents flew the family to England to visit the relatives. My parents had to take out a bank loan to cover the airfares - They were that high.
Now they fly to England twice a year without thinking about it.
Historically, TATL fares have never been lower.
Well guess what stupid, you're not flying cheaper.
Sure you are - Here's some anecdotal examples:
In 1990 I flew YVR-LHR. It was my first big backpacking trip after university. I remember the fare was around $950 - Around $1540 in today's dollars. By comparison, that same trip on those same dates would cost $1465 today - Almost $100 less.
I remember around 1999 I used to fly YVR-DEN once a month on United. The flight, purchased three weeks ahead without a Saturday stay was around $1000. Indexed to today's dollars, that's nearly $1300.
Today the fare is about half that.
In the mid 70s my parents flew the family to England to visit the relatives. My parents had to take out a bank loan to cover the airfares.
Now they fly to England twice a year without thinking about it.
So are fares marginally higher than they might have been 2 or 3 years ago? Maybe, but in looking at the big picture fares have never been lower.
But they did not lower the prices
Cite?
I fly about six times per year and in almost all cases the base fares are lower than they were ten years ago (indexed to today's dollars).
Don't even get me started on LyingAir (RyanAir) who wouldn't let me take my Nikon 200-400mm Lens (worth $6K) in the cabin with me
Ryanair's conditions of carriage are all very clearly laid out their web site, include baggage allowances and liability.
Tarkovsky should have used more explosions.
http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/07/07/he-hates-your-favourite-movie/
You'd figure with YT being owned by Google and all that their search would be great, but it's still largely rubbish. When're they going to fix that?
The producers of Forrest Gump used the same math to claim a loss on that one too
Winston Groom wrote the book "Forrest Gump" upon which the movie was based. As you suggest, he made very little money due to creative Hollywood accounting. When the producers approached him about making a movie off his sequel novel "Gump and Co." Groom apparently refused - Apparently he said something like "Why would you want to make a sequel when you lost so much money on the first movie?"
step left and go 100 miles an hour
Holy cats, Mabel! This here sidewalk shure is windy!
It's not hard to spit it out into the wrapper and toss it into one of the bajillion trash cans on an average city walkway
I'm not much of a gum-guy, but if I am chewing some, when I'm 'done' I usually just swallow it. I assume it makes its way into the sewer system, but I've never really checked...
Hotels frequently have a bank of converters, each tuned to a different digital channel. The outputs of all of the converter boxes are put onto separate analog channels, multiplexed and fed through a distribution amplifier.
You sir, are a steely-eyed missile man. Thanks for posting - I've always wondered how that worked.
If the Saudi in question already has a billion dollars it doesn't matter if America buys any more of their oil. Besides, even if the USA stopped buying Saudi oil tomorrow, China and India would just take up the slack - So the Saudis can fund terror in America, financed by China.
In my opinion, the only long-term multi-generational solution is for the west (yes, that's you, USA) to fund education in Pakistan, Afghanistan and their ilk. If you educate the populace out of ignorance, then the Saudis lose their proxy-'warriors.'
Afghanistan, who harbored the 9-11 terrorists, in not an oil producer
Yes, but the Afghan terrorists (and others) are funded by Saudi Arabia. They Saudis don't want to get their hands dirty, so they sit at home or in their villas in Cannes and fund the poor gullible brainwashed Afghan boys.
seeing as the bible is clearly anti-asspounding
No, fundamentalist Christians are, not the bible. You ever read the New Testament? Good stuff in there...
Do to others whatever you would like them to do to you. This is the essence of all that is taught in the law and the prophets.
- Matthew 7:12
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness's sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
- From the Sermon on the Mount
Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you.
- Matthew 7.1
I would expect any nation that starts a war will have asked and answered to them with backup plans
Well, yes and no. If North Korea were to lob missiles at Seattle and Portland tomorrow (yeah, yeah, unlikely, I know, it's just an example) then the USA would likely immediately (re)declare war on North Korea and begin whoopin' some commie ass. It's unlikely there'd be a period of analysis asking and answering these questions and generating backup plans.
Apple's entries into the business PC market are extremely limited
Another example - Let's say you want to put some kind of forms-based data collection application onto an iMaxiPad... How do you get the thing on there? There's been some vague talk of "enterprises" being allowed to put their own apps on an iPad, but it's all very nebulous...
Why are people so willing to show how dumb they are by posting endless tirades against different races?
Because the trolls know someone will *always* reply. The replies feed them, so they post again... If nobody every replied to trolls, they'd starve and die off, but that goes against human nature, so they continue to thrive.
So what do you do? Fly the prisoners to Afghanistan or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia and then kick them out of the plane onto the tarmac, then fly off? How exactly do you repatriate them when the governments say "don't bring them back"?
When you capture someone on the field of war, you hold them until the war is over [snip] when we're done fighting in Afghanistan, then everyone captured in Afghanistan should be released
Where this falls down is when the 'home country' doesn't want them back. When WW2 ended and the US released the German and Italian POWs, they went back home to Germany and Italy and wherever. Problem with the "War on Terrorism" "soldiers" is they're stateless. Afghanistan doesn't want them, Pakistan doesn't want them. This is one of the many problems Obama is having with his plan to close Guantanamo - There's nowhere to send the released combatants.
if it broke down along the way?
It's very rare for a car to out and out 'break down' and quit. The CV joints might start to click or the brakes might need an overhaul or the front end might need rebuilding after 250K miles or the AC compressor fails, but the power almost always get delivered to the wheels, the brakes almost always stop the car and the steering wheel almost always turns it, unless you ignore a problem for months.
I've never really understood this urge to trade cars in so quickly.... Even if a fully paid off ten-year-old car is costing you $1500 per year in maintenance (CV joints, timing belt etc.) you're still way further ahead compared to a $400 per month payment on a new car. Every time my friends say "I can't afford the upkeep on this car so I'm getting a new one" I roll my eyes...