You know republicans usually hang-out with fellow republicans and read right slanted crap with Fox News in the background, the far left does the same with their own crap, etc. The point is that most people listen to others who share their viewpoints the most, when it would probably do them more good to hear a different viewpoint from someone they don't have too much in common with. If they did that, they would be forced to actually confront and look at the situation and make up their own minds.
I don't know what he has been reading, and who he has been talking to, but I am pretty certain of one thing: that he hasn't touched enough mac's to know whether or not they are hard to troubleshoot when something breaks.
"Isn't 99 cents too much to pay for music that appeals to just a few people?"
You are looking at if from the LABELS POINT OF VIEW. Obviously, if you are the CONSUMER, and you are interested in purchasing that song, it appeals to you.
This game the labels are playing is just so obvious: find any possible reason--any--to have the power to adjust the pricing. That's their Trojan Horse. Once they have it, they'll get busy gouging and fucking the consumer. If we let that happen, better just bend over and lube up.
Easy, just have a monitor installed in their heads, thereby seeing everything they see, hearing everything they hear, and observing everything they do.
Up until a certain age of course, and only for any child who shows "promise.";-)
1) An unfashionable or socially inept person.
[with adj.] A person with an eccetric devotion to a particular interest.
2) A carnival performer who does wild or disgusting acts.
Source: Oxford Dictionary.
Geeks may have come into some power, but they'll never be cool. By definition. Now the association that someone into computers or the internet is a geek is a fallacy. And this is what Business publications particulary (and the people who write for them), and the frat-boy guys who later are the management of your average Joe corporations think. Generally speaking, these guys never were "into computers". And anyone who was (or is) is a geek. Now, online is where the change and the opportunity are, so they need these "geeks". The "geeks" now have power.
And then there are people who are really into something...like movies, art, etc. who self label themselves "movie geek," "art geek," etc. But these people aren't socially akward, by definition. In the past, they would have been called "passionate" or an "afficionado" (Spanish for passionate). I prefer afficionado.
You can be intelligent and you can be into computers, even (gasp) programming (though more rare), and not be a geek. Being a geek has to do with social akwardness. And therefore, by definition, isn't cool.
Personally, I think that anyone with real intelligence and ambition now is learning how to, or starting, a web based venture because that is where ALL the oppurtinity is. And the people who don't understand why, but merely recognize the importance, are the ones who write shitty articles about geeks being cool.
Yes! EDrive Systems (maker of the Prius+) has this to say from their FAQ page:
"The EDrive system was designed for only a 1kW charger with the intent of being slow charged at night when spare electricity is most available on the grid."
And they had this to say (same page):
"One thing that is often overlooked when electric power plant pollution is discussed, is the upstream pollution required to extract oil, transport it, refine it, distribute the gasoline then refuel a vehicle (vapor emissions). Comparing the national electrical grid to the average gallon of refined gasoline shows that the upstream pollution for gasoline production on average is much higher than that of the average electricity source.
Plug in vehicles charge at night when electricity is cheapest and most widely available on the grid. While electricity may be produced by renewable or non-CO2 producing sources, ossil fuels at present cannot."
"truth is we're in for a moderate price climb, but it'll result in a pardigm shift."
With all due respect, I'd like to see you prove that statement.
As former CEO of Haliburton, and now for better or worse, Vice President, consider what Dick Cheney had to say on the matter in a 1999 speech:
"By some estimates, there will be an average of two-percent
annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead,
along with, conservatively, a three-percent natural decline
in production from existing reserves.That means by 2010 we
will need on the order of anadditional 50 million barrels a
day."
Only now, I believe the situation is worse.
Checkout this site for a viewpoint that differs. They are too apocolyptic for me, but it provides some good links and interesting data.
I believe that there will be some major changes, but not pandaemonium, and yes a change to alternate energy sources. I also believe that based on the data that is available--all indicators point to the fact that we have indeed reached peak oil (see the above site for more info).
There are a couple of wildcards, however. Do a search for Alan Chamberlin, Eden Energy or The Great Basin (in Nevada/Utah). Chamberlin is a geologist who believes to have found oil prospects in Nevada that exceed even Saudi reserves and has spent the last 20 years of his life (privately) on this quest after leaving Exxon, Gulf and Marathon. While major corporations such as Shell Oil spent nearly $200 million a half century ago sampling and measuring the area, then later abandoning it (along with others), advances in geological analysis might prove they left to soon. I recently stumbled across some of Dr. Chamerlin's literature and it was an interesting read. His company Eden Enegy, purchased 210,000 acres at the epicenter of the basin and begin drilling this fall. Just a few months ago, a company known as Wolverine announced a prospect on the eastern edge of the basin estimated at ~1 billion barrels that they have already drilled to success (they sat on this for nearly a year allegedly, as they purchased more property).
In any case, there is a lot of oil activity now going on in that area and my whole point is to illustrate that we may have a lot more petrolium than the current status quo agreement leads you to believe. I also believe that demand will exceed our expectations (led by China), along with environmental impact and that the switch to alternative energies might be more abrupt and driven by a greater necessity than a "gradual shift".
No, no, they've been doing this sort of thing for as long as they have been in existence. And anyone who maintains a position against Microsoft is just a troll. Right?
Wrong. Just because you have an anti-Microsoft viewpoint doesn't make you a troll. It just means that you can remember what happened last year, and the year before that, and the year before that, and the year before that, ad infinitum.
So here's a message to my fellow/.ers: Don't be so f*cking fickle. Analyze the broad view for, well, the past decade, if you have the capacity to do so, and make up your mind! And when doing so take the viewpoint of a corporation, who operates on fiscal-quarters and calendar years--not day to day pettiness of small minded existence. As a proof, I too reference that it was just yesterday that this was posted.
Slashdot Mirror
Precisely.
You know republicans usually hang-out with fellow republicans and read right slanted crap with Fox News in the background, the far left does the same with their own crap, etc. The point is that most people listen to others who share their viewpoints the most, when it would probably do them more good to hear a different viewpoint from someone they don't have too much in common with. If they did that, they would be forced to actually confront and look at the situation and make up their own minds.
I don't know what he has been reading, and who he has been talking to, but I am pretty certain of one thing: that he hasn't touched enough mac's to know whether or not they are hard to troubleshoot when something breaks.
"The glory of great men should always be measured by the means they have used to acquire it."
-Francois de La Rochefoucauld
Quote:
"Isn't 99 cents too much to pay for music that appeals to just a few people?"
You are looking at if from the LABELS POINT OF VIEW. Obviously, if you are the CONSUMER, and you are interested in purchasing that song, it appeals to you.
This game the labels are playing is just so obvious: find any possible reason--any--to have the power to adjust the pricing. That's their Trojan Horse. Once they have it, they'll get busy gouging and fucking the consumer. If we let that happen, better just bend over and lube up.
What is this from?
I really don't care what OS I am running either.
As long as it is Mac OS.
Easy, just have a monitor installed in their heads, thereby seeing everything they see, hearing everything they hear, and observing everything they do. Up until a certain age of course, and only for any child who shows "promise." ;-)
Thanks.
Crzmblski's Limit. Doesn't come up on Google. Doesn't come up on Yahoo.
closest match of any kind is: Krzmenski...but I got nothing from a quick scan of the results.
Can you provide some kind of link?
To quote you Sean,
"To accuse them of favoring any particular stratum of that chain is awfully unfouned IMHO unless there are some specific examples."
Yeah, unless you're one of the billion people in China.
Defintion: Geek:
1) An unfashionable or socially inept person.
[with adj.] A person with an eccetric devotion to a particular interest.
2) A carnival performer who does wild or disgusting acts.
Source: Oxford Dictionary.
Geeks may have come into some power, but they'll never be cool. By definition. Now the association that someone into computers or the internet is a geek is a fallacy. And this is what Business publications particulary (and the people who write for them), and the frat-boy guys who later are the management of your average Joe corporations think. Generally speaking, these guys never were "into computers". And anyone who was (or is) is a geek. Now, online is where the change and the opportunity are, so they need these "geeks". The "geeks" now have power.
And then there are people who are really into something...like movies, art, etc. who self label themselves "movie geek," "art geek," etc. But these people aren't socially akward, by definition. In the past, they would have been called "passionate" or an "afficionado" (Spanish for passionate). I prefer afficionado.
You can be intelligent and you can be into computers, even (gasp) programming (though more rare), and not be a geek. Being a geek has to do with social akwardness. And therefore, by definition, isn't cool.
Personally, I think that anyone with real intelligence and ambition now is learning how to, or starting, a web based venture because that is where ALL the oppurtinity is. And the people who don't understand why, but merely recognize the importance, are the ones who write shitty articles about geeks being cool.
Geeks be damned.
Thanks for the clarification.
Did Melinda Gates ever make a quip about the origins of the name Microsoft?
Yes! EDrive Systems (maker of the Prius+) has this to say from their FAQ page:
"The EDrive system was designed for only a 1kW charger with the intent of being slow charged at night when spare electricity is most available on the grid."
And they had this to say (same page):
"One thing that is often overlooked when electric power plant pollution is discussed, is the upstream pollution required to extract oil, transport it, refine it, distribute the gasoline then refuel a vehicle (vapor emissions). Comparing the national electrical grid to the average gallon of refined gasoline shows that the upstream pollution for gasoline production on average is much higher than that of the average electricity source.
Plug in vehicles charge at night when electricity is cheapest and most widely available on the grid. While electricity may be produced by renewable or non-CO2 producing sources, ossil fuels at present cannot."
." IE supports everything."
I cannot believe that I am seeing these letters strung together into these words, thus formlating this sentence.
I hereby discredid any utterance that you manage to put forth!
Shame on you!
"truth is we're in for a moderate price climb, but it'll result in a pardigm shift."
With all due respect, I'd like to see you prove that statement.
As former CEO of Haliburton, and now for better or worse, Vice President, consider what Dick Cheney had to say on the matter in a 1999 speech:
"By some estimates, there will be an average of two-percent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead, along with, conservatively, a three-percent natural decline in production from existing reserves.That means by 2010 we will need on the order of anadditional 50 million barrels a day."
Only now, I believe the situation is worse.
Checkout this site for a viewpoint that differs. They are too apocolyptic for me, but it provides some good links and interesting data.
I believe that there will be some major changes, but not pandaemonium, and yes a change to alternate energy sources. I also believe that based on the data that is available--all indicators point to the fact that we have indeed reached peak oil (see the above site for more info).
There are a couple of wildcards, however. Do a search for Alan Chamberlin, Eden Energy or The Great Basin (in Nevada/Utah). Chamberlin is a geologist who believes to have found oil prospects in Nevada that exceed even Saudi reserves and has spent the last 20 years of his life (privately) on this quest after leaving Exxon, Gulf and Marathon. While major corporations such as Shell Oil spent nearly $200 million a half century ago sampling and measuring the area, then later abandoning it (along with others), advances in geological analysis might prove they left to soon. I recently stumbled across some of Dr. Chamerlin's literature and it was an interesting read. His company Eden Enegy, purchased 210,000 acres at the epicenter of the basin and begin drilling this fall. Just a few months ago, a company known as Wolverine announced a prospect on the eastern edge of the basin estimated at ~1 billion barrels that they have already drilled to success (they sat on this for nearly a year allegedly, as they purchased more property).
In any case, there is a lot of oil activity now going on in that area and my whole point is to illustrate that we may have a lot more petrolium than the current status quo agreement leads you to believe. I also believe that demand will exceed our expectations (led by China), along with environmental impact and that the switch to alternative energies might be more abrupt and driven by a greater necessity than a "gradual shift".
Some food for thought.
Isn't it funny how short people's attention spans really are.
It's not like Microsoft hasn't been doing this for a long time. Using these tactics, that is.
No, no, they've been doing this sort of thing for as long as they have been in existence. And anyone who maintains a position against Microsoft is just a troll. Right?
Wrong. Just because you have an anti-Microsoft viewpoint doesn't make you a troll. It just means that you can remember what happened last year, and the year before that, and the year before that, and the year before that, ad infinitum.
So here's a message to my fellow /.ers: Don't be so f*cking fickle. Analyze the broad view for, well, the past decade, if you have the capacity to do so, and make up your mind! And when doing so take the viewpoint of a corporation, who operates on fiscal-quarters and calendar years--not day to day pettiness of small minded existence. As a proof, I too reference that it was just yesterday that this was posted.
Done ranting. I'm out.Welcome brother!
Come take a bite of the forbidden fruit. Once you taste it, you'll never eat anything else again!
Well... perhaps penguins from time to time ;-)
This is for you.jk ;-)
When I read his name I had to go back and reread the sentence as that is what my first reaction was to his name in the article.
You gotta be kidding me.
But hey, the truth is often stranger than fiction.
Appropriate name for Microsoft's Linux guy.Didn't Tesla's lab invent radio?