Amazon already flags "verified purchases". Aside from that, I think limiting reviewers to Amazon-only purchases is too limiting. After all, if it is a new product to Amazon, there will be no reviews until after someone buys it, but we know that not all purchasors write reviews.
Once I started writing reviews at Amazon, I'd find myself looking at reviews for other products I already owned. If there were no good reviews available for those products, or if I felt I had something of value to contribute, I wrote a review. I think it's a good system. Most reasoned shoppers will be able to wade through the schlock and identify useful reviews.
The thing that really gets me is when you see 100+ people have flagged a review as helpful when it might be as non-substantive as (a made up example) "It's pretty cool. I always wanted one and I got it, and it does what it's supposed to do."
Do you still read only the negative reviews if they are overwhelmingly outnumbered by positive ones (e.g., 1 in 50)? At Amazon, I tend to look at the overall rating, and then the percentage of negative reviews. A quick scan of the negative reviews, and the more substantive positive reviews, typically gives me a good feel for a product/brand/seller.
Have you ever run into instances where all the negative reviews are from a few years ago? I've run into some products that, though they still have the same model number, have been significantly improved between when the negative reviews were posted and the present day.
I was just wondering--no other reason for this reply.
BTW--I've never bothered with epinions--I never considered it a reliable source, but I also trust reviews at consumerreports.
That's why they started including the "verified purchase" link. If the reviewer bought the product through Amazon before leaving the review, that flag is applied to the review. It's intended to make consumers more confident that the reviews are from real owners of the product.
At the same time, it was another way Amazon was trying to put some parameters around its reviewer community. A lot of them out there are very picky about their status as reviewers, and many voiced concerns about people who were just going online and writing reviews for anything and everything. The way I figure it, most shoppers will be able to tell the difference between a well-thought out review, and a lot of the brief first impressions, one-liners, and flames ("It didn't work out of the box--I'll never buy from that company again!") that abound.
For the record, I am a regular reviewer at Amazon, but don't get my undies in a bunch about the interal squabbles. I'm happy being a top-2,000 reviewer for now, and hope to make the top 100 someday. Contrary to Amazon's advice, which states that shorter reviews are most helpful, some of my highest rated reviews are quite long and fairly detailed. I always try to include information that might make a difference in someone's purchasing decision--the same type of information I was often seeking before making a purchase.
IMO, this will just provide more reasons for the black hat community to focus on compromising MS' cloud environment. Government sites and services have long been the playground of developing crackers, so I'm guessing many will just see getting into the USDA's cloud presence as a new challenge.
It's far more likely that the proposed solar cells serve an ancillary function (e.g., stimulating the metabolism, aiding circulation, aiding digestion), rather than being a true energy source. Even the article notes that the researchers "assume that some of the energy is transformed in a photo-biochemical process which aids the hornets with their energy demanding digging activity." If they get their energy from sunlight, and use the energy for digging underground, then far more important would be the mechanism whereby the wasps store that solar energy (if so used).
I wonder if any other explanations were considered for why these particular wasps would be more active mid-day (many insects are less active when it is cooler). Could it relate to the conditions on the ground at different times of the day (e.g., dew on the ground in the morning, relatively drier soil mid-day)? When are its own food sources most available? When are its predators most active?
If they move ahead to a pay-as-you-go model, I believe more people will knowingly and willfully become software and media pirates. It will create a huge black market for downloaded media files, which will get exchanged via sneakernets around the country. Once they start charging per Mb/Gb, more and more people will take the risks associated with piracy, because it will make the relative cost of digital media far too high.
I have a friend who lives in a rural area where his only Internet access options are Deep Blue or Hughes.net. He's been trying to leave Deep Blue because their service has been horrible (very inconsistant throughput rates), but Hughes.net has caps set at 200Mb,300Mb, and 400Mb, depending on the plan you choose. They come straight out and call it their "Fair Play" policy--that they automatically throttle anyone who reaches a daily bit limit, and they specifically note that their service is not suitable for streaming video services like Netflix. The funny thing is that they push potential customers who want to download streaming video toward their premium plan, which still has a 400Mb cap--it still would be largely worthless for pulling online video.
Phone company plans always used to be pay-as-you-go. The development of unlimited use plans arose as a marketing tool to win more customers in competitive markets, and it eventually became a very common option in the consumer market (businesses almost always have pay-as-you-go plans). If this really happens, it won't take a rocket scientist to realize that any ISPs who stick to no-cap unlimited use plans will immediately have a competitive advantage over others (like [...ahem..] Comcast) who are likely to try to milk the new cash cow afforded by such changes.
...to post a new submission today (actually tied up with tech issues on a Win7 box, but the same net result), but ran into a colleage last night who mentioned that the most recent AVG pro update whacked all 64-bit boxes. Anyone hear any more on that one?
Actually, my understanding of US copyright law (and no, IANAL) is that such use (dissecting whole chapters for commentary or discourse) would be considered fair use if not in a for-profit setting (e.g., publishing your commentary alongside the complete text of the target work). Fair use is not dead in the United States, but it is has moved from a general assumption to the status of requiring (especially at secondary schools, colleges, and universities) CYA policies, disclosure documents, and (imo) unnecessary licensing agreements with many content providers.
Taking the risk of going too far off on a tangent, I believe current trends in copyright law stem from the fact that corporations, rather than artists, control more and more copyrighted content. While corporations may be treated as legal persons under the law (granting them the rights of ownership, contract negotiation, and redress of grievances), they clearly lack something that is possible amongst true persons: the ability to take in stimuli and then re-present it in a transformed fashion. That, my friends, is why there is such a battle of ideologies surrounding copyright. Classical composers were known for listening to the earlier masters, or their peers, and then composing works in the style of the original artist. Similarly, some "stole" riffs and melodies directly from other works, but transformed them into their own unique creations. In our age, you have a group like Men at Work that lost a lawsuit for using a flute riff that paralleled the tune used in association with the song/nursery rhyme "Kookaburra", written and copyrighted in 1932, and renrewed in 1989 (by Larrikin Music). Current corporate structures and legal systems do not see such use as valid and, unfortunatly, that directly impedes the expansion and development of other creative output. While my example focused on music, the same can be said for most any media type: just think of all the buddy comedies or action stories churned out by Hollywood since that genre was developed. Yet, for some reason, those studios did not waste their time trying to shut down those smililar stories, even if they contained segments that paralleled the original, because they realized that the complete work is what warranted copyright protection, not the concepts or themes. Isn't a riff nothing more than a musical theme?
Had I been the composer or copyright owner of "Kookabura", I would have been appreciative of the homage in Men at Work's "Down Under", and would have wondered how many listeners would have recognized the riff and remembered fondly the rhyme they learned as children.
Sure, while most of the western world is (at a minimum) tolerant of the symbol of Christianity, the cross, it is something that is offensive to much of the Muslim world, because of its connection to the Crusades (and, for other dissenters within and around the church, the Inquisition). Are they banned because of these connotations?
The swastika, like the cross, is a symbol, and symbols derive their meaning from the culture. Prior to the rise of Nazism and WWII, the swastika was a symbol that appeared in many cultures (Chinese, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Greek, native American) with connotations far different from those now associated with it. It became a German nationalist symbol in the early 20th Century, but was still present in symbology around the globe (and much architecture pre-dating WWII). According the the 45th Infantry Division Museum, that storied US Military unit (http://www.45thdivisionmuseum.com/History/SwastikaToThunderbird.html) wore the swastika as their unit insignia. It was chosen because it was a native American symbol for "good luck".
Clearly, the meanings associated with such symbols change over time.
I couldn't agree more. Unlike some companies, Apple does not see (or, perhaps more correctly, no longer sees) its future tied to one specific device, though it is glad to ride the successes it has had with the iPod, iPhone, and the iPad. As best I can tell, it views itself broadly as a consumer electronics company, with a focus on delivering innovative and/or stylish products with a reputation (only mildly marred by the recent antenna fiasco) for quality and stability.
By not pinning all their hopes on one device or one market segment, and by seeking to continually improve and innovate, they position themselves well to remain a player in the years to come. This advantage is theirs to keep, or to lose, and only time will tell which way it will be.
I recently finished my M.A. degree and am not surprised by this individual's line of work, nor the ease with which he (and the hiring students) pull it off. I, too, am a writer and, given enough reference material, can work up a reasonable paper on almost any topic in a relatively short period of time. As I neared the end of my program, I considered hiring someone to write one nagging paper, just because life was crazy (with a full time job, wife, kids, etc.), but chose not to go down that path. As painful as the process was, I got it finished, and caught up on my sleep over the next two weekends.
I've used the methodolgy he described before--using Internet sources to bring me up to speed (or narrow my focus tightly) on a topic before settling down to write, and then using online resources to help me identify additional supporting citations and materials. Finding a quote you like in another paper on the same topic isn't harmful, so long as you cite it propery, or simply use it to direct your search to other sources. All of my papers were expressions of my own knwolege and/or views, but I often needed to find additional sources and citations to satisify specific requirement for an assignment. I had one prof who required the use of different source material for each week's essays (beyond those listed as required reading, though the topics were covered fully by the multiple course texts), and this effectively turned the assignment into a farce (I'd write the essay and then seach my bookshelf or online to find other citations I could work in to support my existing arguments/points).
I only had one paper that I came close to BS-ing my way through, and only because it was for an elective course that I really hadn't wanted to take (but did because the next available graduate elective I could use would have delayed my graduate another semester). You know what makes BS possible these days (imo)? It's the ability to write cohesively, with good sentence structure and grammar, and with an easy-to-follow flow (i.e., good transitions between paragraphs). I think most profs have seen writing skills sink so much that they are just awed when they encounter (outside of English or Journalism programs)students who can write well. A good writer can place enough specificity amidst ambiguity to come across as well-read and well-reasoned. Other factors are (imo, as both a recent graduate and as a one-time instructor myself) the push towards cookie-cutter education (standardization of course materials across all sections each and every term), a checklist mentality regarding required elements in a paper (e.g., syllabi listing that the final paper shall address specific points {details--not themes or topics} or include 'x' citations and sources), and time pressures on the instructors/TAs that are reviewing the papers.
I do disagree with one of your summarized points, however:
Everything else he spins from educated guesswork and outright bullshit with lots and lots of filler
That may have been how it began, but if he has been doing it as long as he suggests, covering the range of topics he listed, he likely has learned much of it as well as if he had taken the courses himself. While I don't agree with what he's facilitating, he provides an example of someone who can acquire much knowledge without obtaining a degree in a specific field.
I, for one, believe oral examinations should be part of every college program (except where not possible due to disability or medical condition), in addition to required papers, essays, and exams.
Actually, I was one of those kids who, when allowed, filled my crib sheet with facts and figures in miniscule type, writing in multiple orientations on the paper, and using multiple ink colors for multiple "layers" of information. The prof later confided to me what I discovered on my own--the creation of a crib sheet is just one more interaction with information that helps students internalize it.
After writing those crib sheets, I found I rarely used them (unless I was looking for some specific, obscure points that was sure to score brownie points with the instructor).
This would effectively create two Internets--one free and one premium. The free one would likely become clogged in time--much like the model envisioned by Orson Scott Card in Ender's Game. For something written in the mid-'80s, Card's picture of a two-tier Internet was quite prescient.
It just seems that the relevant laws have poor definitions. Since the hotels likely must contract with ISPs to connect to the Internet, they are really no more of an ISP than I am when I host a LAN party. They need to define what backbone providers are, and then define ISPs as those companies that offer consumer access plans that make the connection from the consumer to the backbone provider.
Do you forget that the term "piracy" had its origins before the digital age? When the ship with the Jolly Roger approached a vessel, overtook it, and stole the cargo, it was called "piracy". While originally describing theft at sea, its (vernacular) meaning can include any act of theft from a merchant or carrier before the "cargo" reaches the intended customer or destination.
Given the apparent complexity of this worm, what are the chances that it was actually developed by the US Military, Israeli intelligence, or a US ally? Just because the US military has a poor history of securing many of its servers doesn't mean it couldn't pull together a sophisticated attack. None of the major US media outlets have (to my knowledge) even seriously raised the idea that Uncle Sam could be behind it. It's one "conspiracy theory" that seems just plausible enough to believe.
Here in the northern U.S., electric block heaters are common. Before I ever had a car with a real block heater, however, I used an incandescent bulb tucked under the hood to keep the engine block (really, the oil pan) warm on those -20F nights. You just put the bulb in a trouble light cage, hooked it somewhere in the lower half of the engine compartment, and left the light on all night.
If you have a customized Google homepage (an iGoogle page), you don't get the instant results. Most often, that's fine for me. As I've worked on others' PCs however, I've noticed the behavior and have found it useful. It doesn't always get it right with the first word, but once it does, I just stop typing and select my preferred link. Admittedly, it took me a number of uses to get myself to stop typing my search term, but once I felt comfortable that the results were comparable (or even identical) to the results I'd receive typing in a full string of terms, I adapted quickly.
I think most people can catch on, and it can save time. Only time will tell, however.
My son, a lefty, uses the mouse in his right hand. I, on the other hand, a righty, most often use my left hand to manipulate the mouse. I made the switch one year when I broke my right arm. After the cast was removed, I found that mousing with my non-dominant hand left my dominant hand free for (limited) typing, writing notes, or dialing the phone.
But I would expect an insurance agent to understand the law regarding insurance policies, required limits, and similar topics. Those are overarching concepts that govern the world of insurance agents. Sure. They can look up some things, even many things, but there are still things they must know and understand without constantly looking at a crib sheet.
Slashdot Mirror
Amazon already flags "verified purchases". Aside from that, I think limiting reviewers to Amazon-only purchases is too limiting. After all, if it is a new product to Amazon, there will be no reviews until after someone buys it, but we know that not all purchasors write reviews.
Once I started writing reviews at Amazon, I'd find myself looking at reviews for other products I already owned. If there were no good reviews available for those products, or if I felt I had something of value to contribute, I wrote a review. I think it's a good system. Most reasoned shoppers will be able to wade through the schlock and identify useful reviews.
The thing that really gets me is when you see 100+ people have flagged a review as helpful when it might be as non-substantive as (a made up example) "It's pretty cool. I always wanted one and I got it, and it does what it's supposed to do."
Do you still read only the negative reviews if they are overwhelmingly outnumbered by positive ones (e.g., 1 in 50)? At Amazon, I tend to look at the overall rating, and then the percentage of negative reviews. A quick scan of the negative reviews, and the more substantive positive reviews, typically gives me a good feel for a product/brand/seller.
Have you ever run into instances where all the negative reviews are from a few years ago? I've run into some products that, though they still have the same model number, have been significantly improved between when the negative reviews were posted and the present day.
I was just wondering--no other reason for this reply.
BTW--I've never bothered with epinions--I never considered it a reliable source, but I also trust reviews at consumerreports.
That's why they started including the "verified purchase" link. If the reviewer bought the product through Amazon before leaving the review, that flag is applied to the review. It's intended to make consumers more confident that the reviews are from real owners of the product.
At the same time, it was another way Amazon was trying to put some parameters around its reviewer community. A lot of them out there are very picky about their status as reviewers, and many voiced concerns about people who were just going online and writing reviews for anything and everything. The way I figure it, most shoppers will be able to tell the difference between a well-thought out review, and a lot of the brief first impressions, one-liners, and flames ("It didn't work out of the box--I'll never buy from that company again!") that abound.
For the record, I am a regular reviewer at Amazon, but don't get my undies in a bunch about the interal squabbles. I'm happy being a top-2,000 reviewer for now, and hope to make the top 100 someday. Contrary to Amazon's advice, which states that shorter reviews are most helpful, some of my highest rated reviews are quite long and fairly detailed. I always try to include information that might make a difference in someone's purchasing decision--the same type of information I was often seeking before making a purchase.
IMO, this will just provide more reasons for the black hat community to focus on compromising MS' cloud environment. Government sites and services have long been the playground of developing crackers, so I'm guessing many will just see getting into the USDA's cloud presence as a new challenge.
It's far more likely that the proposed solar cells serve an ancillary function (e.g., stimulating the metabolism, aiding circulation, aiding digestion), rather than being a true energy source. Even the article notes that the researchers "assume that some of the energy is transformed in a photo-biochemical process which aids the hornets with their energy demanding digging activity." If they get their energy from sunlight, and use the energy for digging underground, then far more important would be the mechanism whereby the wasps store that solar energy (if so used).
I wonder if any other explanations were considered for why these particular wasps would be more active mid-day (many insects are less active when it is cooler). Could it relate to the conditions on the ground at different times of the day (e.g., dew on the ground in the morning, relatively drier soil mid-day)? When are its own food sources most available? When are its predators most active?
If they move ahead to a pay-as-you-go model, I believe more people will knowingly and willfully become software and media pirates. It will create a huge black market for downloaded media files, which will get exchanged via sneakernets around the country. Once they start charging per Mb/Gb, more and more people will take the risks associated with piracy, because it will make the relative cost of digital media far too high.
I have a friend who lives in a rural area where his only Internet access options are Deep Blue or Hughes.net. He's been trying to leave Deep Blue because their service has been horrible (very inconsistant throughput rates), but Hughes.net has caps set at 200Mb,300Mb, and 400Mb, depending on the plan you choose. They come straight out and call it their "Fair Play" policy--that they automatically throttle anyone who reaches a daily bit limit, and they specifically note that their service is not suitable for streaming video services like Netflix. The funny thing is that they push potential customers who want to download streaming video toward their premium plan, which still has a 400Mb cap--it still would be largely worthless for pulling online video.
Phone company plans always used to be pay-as-you-go. The development of unlimited use plans arose as a marketing tool to win more customers in competitive markets, and it eventually became a very common option in the consumer market (businesses almost always have pay-as-you-go plans). If this really happens, it won't take a rocket scientist to realize that any ISPs who stick to no-cap unlimited use plans will immediately have a competitive advantage over others (like [...ahem..] Comcast) who are likely to try to milk the new cash cow afforded by such changes.
I was thinking precisely the same thing. They call them "Remakes". I call them "schlock".
It should only take a week for someone to write an app that will intercept text input and REPLACE ALL TYPED CHARACTERS WITH CAPITAL LETTERS!
...to post a new submission today (actually tied up with tech issues on a Win7 box, but the same net result), but ran into a colleage last night who mentioned that the most recent AVG pro update whacked all 64-bit boxes. Anyone hear any more on that one?
Actually, my understanding of US copyright law (and no, IANAL) is that such use (dissecting whole chapters for commentary or discourse) would be considered fair use if not in a for-profit setting (e.g., publishing your commentary alongside the complete text of the target work). Fair use is not dead in the United States, but it is has moved from a general assumption to the status of requiring (especially at secondary schools, colleges, and universities) CYA policies, disclosure documents, and (imo) unnecessary licensing agreements with many content providers.
Taking the risk of going too far off on a tangent, I believe current trends in copyright law stem from the fact that corporations, rather than artists, control more and more copyrighted content. While corporations may be treated as legal persons under the law (granting them the rights of ownership, contract negotiation, and redress of grievances), they clearly lack something that is possible amongst true persons: the ability to take in stimuli and then re-present it in a transformed fashion. That, my friends, is why there is such a battle of ideologies surrounding copyright. Classical composers were known for listening to the earlier masters, or their peers, and then composing works in the style of the original artist. Similarly, some "stole" riffs and melodies directly from other works, but transformed them into their own unique creations. In our age, you have a group like Men at Work that lost a lawsuit for using a flute riff that paralleled the tune used in association with the song/nursery rhyme "Kookaburra", written and copyrighted in 1932, and renrewed in 1989 (by Larrikin Music). Current corporate structures and legal systems do not see such use as valid and, unfortunatly, that directly impedes the expansion and development of other creative output. While my example focused on music, the same can be said for most any media type: just think of all the buddy comedies or action stories churned out by Hollywood since that genre was developed. Yet, for some reason, those studios did not waste their time trying to shut down those smililar stories, even if they contained segments that paralleled the original, because they realized that the complete work is what warranted copyright protection, not the concepts or themes. Isn't a riff nothing more than a musical theme?
Had I been the composer or copyright owner of "Kookabura", I would have been appreciative of the homage in Men at Work's "Down Under", and would have wondered how many listeners would have recognized the riff and remembered fondly the rhyme they learned as children.
Sure, while most of the western world is (at a minimum) tolerant of the symbol of Christianity, the cross, it is something that is offensive to much of the Muslim world, because of its connection to the Crusades (and, for other dissenters within and around the church, the Inquisition). Are they banned because of these connotations?
The swastika, like the cross, is a symbol, and symbols derive their meaning from the culture. Prior to the rise of Nazism and WWII, the swastika was a symbol that appeared in many cultures (Chinese, Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, Greek, native American) with connotations far different from those now associated with it. It became a German nationalist symbol in the early 20th Century, but was still present in symbology around the globe (and much architecture pre-dating WWII). According the the 45th Infantry Division Museum, that storied US Military unit (http://www.45thdivisionmuseum.com/History/SwastikaToThunderbird.html) wore the swastika as their unit insignia. It was chosen because it was a native American symbol for "good luck".
Clearly, the meanings associated with such symbols change over time.
You should post that as your own "Ask Slashdot" question.
I couldn't agree more. Unlike some companies, Apple does not see (or, perhaps more correctly, no longer sees) its future tied to one specific device, though it is glad to ride the successes it has had with the iPod, iPhone, and the iPad. As best I can tell, it views itself broadly as a consumer electronics company, with a focus on delivering innovative and/or stylish products with a reputation (only mildly marred by the recent antenna fiasco) for quality and stability.
By not pinning all their hopes on one device or one market segment, and by seeking to continually improve and innovate, they position themselves well to remain a player in the years to come. This advantage is theirs to keep, or to lose, and only time will tell which way it will be.
I've used the methodolgy he described before--using Internet sources to bring me up to speed (or narrow my focus tightly) on a topic before settling down to write, and then using online resources to help me identify additional supporting citations and materials. Finding a quote you like in another paper on the same topic isn't harmful, so long as you cite it propery, or simply use it to direct your search to other sources. All of my papers were expressions of my own knwolege and/or views, but I often needed to find additional sources and citations to satisify specific requirement for an assignment. I had one prof who required the use of different source material for each week's essays (beyond those listed as required reading, though the topics were covered fully by the multiple course texts), and this effectively turned the assignment into a farce (I'd write the essay and then seach my bookshelf or online to find other citations I could work in to support my existing arguments/points).
I only had one paper that I came close to BS-ing my way through, and only because it was for an elective course that I really hadn't wanted to take (but did because the next available graduate elective I could use would have delayed my graduate another semester). You know what makes BS possible these days (imo)? It's the ability to write cohesively, with good sentence structure and grammar, and with an easy-to-follow flow (i.e., good transitions between paragraphs). I think most profs have seen writing skills sink so much that they are just awed when they encounter (outside of English or Journalism programs)students who can write well. A good writer can place enough specificity amidst ambiguity to come across as well-read and well-reasoned. Other factors are (imo, as both a recent graduate and as a one-time instructor myself) the push towards cookie-cutter education (standardization of course materials across all sections each and every term), a checklist mentality regarding required elements in a paper (e.g., syllabi listing that the final paper shall address specific points {details--not themes or topics} or include 'x' citations and sources), and time pressures on the instructors/TAs that are reviewing the papers.
I do disagree with one of your summarized points, however:
Everything else he spins from educated guesswork and outright bullshit with lots and lots of filler
That may have been how it began, but if he has been doing it as long as he suggests, covering the range of topics he listed, he likely has learned much of it as well as if he had taken the courses himself. While I don't agree with what he's facilitating, he provides an example of someone who can acquire much knowledge without obtaining a degree in a specific field.
I, for one, believe oral examinations should be part of every college program (except where not possible due to disability or medical condition), in addition to required papers, essays, and exams.
Actually, I was one of those kids who, when allowed, filled my crib sheet with facts and figures in miniscule type, writing in multiple orientations on the paper, and using multiple ink colors for multiple "layers" of information. The prof later confided to me what I discovered on my own--the creation of a crib sheet is just one more interaction with information that helps students internalize it.
After writing those crib sheets, I found I rarely used them (unless I was looking for some specific, obscure points that was sure to score brownie points with the instructor).
This would effectively create two Internets--one free and one premium. The free one would likely become clogged in time--much like the model envisioned by Orson Scott Card in Ender's Game. For something written in the mid-'80s, Card's picture of a two-tier Internet was quite prescient.
It just seems that the relevant laws have poor definitions. Since the hotels likely must contract with ISPs to connect to the Internet, they are really no more of an ISP than I am when I host a LAN party. They need to define what backbone providers are, and then define ISPs as those companies that offer consumer access plans that make the connection from the consumer to the backbone provider.
Do you forget that the term "piracy" had its origins before the digital age? When the ship with the Jolly Roger approached a vessel, overtook it, and stole the cargo, it was called "piracy". While originally describing theft at sea, its (vernacular) meaning can include any act of theft from a merchant or carrier before the "cargo" reaches the intended customer or destination.
Given the apparent complexity of this worm, what are the chances that it was actually developed by the US Military, Israeli intelligence, or a US ally? Just because the US military has a poor history of securing many of its servers doesn't mean it couldn't pull together a sophisticated attack. None of the major US media outlets have (to my knowledge) even seriously raised the idea that Uncle Sam could be behind it. It's one "conspiracy theory" that seems just plausible enough to believe.
Here in the northern U.S., electric block heaters are common. Before I ever had a car with a real block heater, however, I used an incandescent bulb tucked under the hood to keep the engine block (really, the oil pan) warm on those -20F nights. You just put the bulb in a trouble light cage, hooked it somewhere in the lower half of the engine compartment, and left the light on all night.
No more rocking chair in front of the PC for me...
If you have a customized Google homepage (an iGoogle page), you don't get the instant results. Most often, that's fine for me. As I've worked on others' PCs however, I've noticed the behavior and have found it useful. It doesn't always get it right with the first word, but once it does, I just stop typing and select my preferred link. Admittedly, it took me a number of uses to get myself to stop typing my search term, but once I felt comfortable that the results were comparable (or even identical) to the results I'd receive typing in a full string of terms, I adapted quickly.
I think most people can catch on, and it can save time. Only time will tell, however.
My son, a lefty, uses the mouse in his right hand. I, on the other hand, a righty, most often use my left hand to manipulate the mouse. I made the switch one year when I broke my right arm. After the cast was removed, I found that mousing with my non-dominant hand left my dominant hand free for (limited) typing, writing notes, or dialing the phone.
iWhine.
But I would expect an insurance agent to understand the law regarding insurance policies, required limits, and similar topics. Those are overarching concepts that govern the world of insurance agents. Sure. They can look up some things, even many things, but there are still things they must know and understand without constantly looking at a crib sheet.