You are trying to create "rationality" for their lying. These plans are not truly "unlimited" but they are telling everyone they are. It doesn't matter what spew the marketing department comes up with in their advertisements. There needs to be an honest document that details exactly what you get. That's what those asterisks are for in the marketing spew. Unlike the others, T-Mobile is an example of being honest. Their marketing spew uses the term "unlimited data" but define the terms of that "unlimited," a certain chunk of data at full speed, thereafter you get a slower rate. The others didn't do that. Their marketing department sold a product their engineering department didn't deliver.
Your statement is simply not correct except when stored under ideal conditions and protected from casual scratching resultant from ordinary use which is atypical. There are also well known problems with certain DISCs from vars. manufacturers.
Maybe I'm not too bright on the subject but I thought that "representation" bit was about having a voice in their governance. Not that it matters much though. Much like the British monarchy, U.S. citizen representation in government is largely ceremonial.
You already have media that "self-destructs" after a period of time. Optical media has a shelf life after which the decomposition of the material prevents readability. If people were to attempt to play their media from 20 or so years ago chances are good that they might experience this to some extent. Certain media brands were/are better than others but their lifespans are generally not what people whom bought into the idea and created large collections of optical media expected.
Let's assume the data is valid. What can we deduce?.NET/C# is the language of the desktop/server. Did they bother to normalize the data accordingly? I doubt it. What I see is considerable buzz within the web/mobile space and the jobs resultant from that. For the most part I don't think they represent replacement jobs, they represent new demand.
Java is increasingly being seen as problematic and a liability, particularly as it relates to security. Much of Oracles efforts remind me more of throwing stuff against a wall and crossing fingers. Its history has given it a lot of momentum but people are starting to get nervous.
Let's for a second turn off the censor and cut strait to what the BMI is all about. It's about telling fat people that they're fat. A healthy person, particularly athletic persons knows that BMI is not applicable to them and generally ignore it. Could we come up with a metric that accommodates healthy people with above average muscle mass? Sure. But there's no point, and it would be over complicated, more difficult to apply by lay persons, and detract from the original objective.
The funny bit that doesn't make much sense is that fat people generally already know that they're fat. Why do we need a "scientific" method to call them out on it? I assume the point is to get them to do something about it. Trouble is, we've been groomed to consume large quantities of what I can only consider to be "feed" and shun actual food, nutritionally balanced, healthful food. We've been groomed to prefer extra ordinarily sweet, fatty, pre-digested calories. Of course since it's pre-digested, we have to eat more of the stuff since we feel hungry two minutes later if we don't. It's been tailored to hit all the right buttons in our brain's pleasure/reward centers so we become addicted to it. Even when people want to eat "healthy" the manufactured food companies deceive everyone with misinformation. They convince everyone that their candy bars are healthy by calling them "energy" bars. Their bowls of flake shaped sugar must be good for you since they use "whole" grains, never mind the fact that a serving contains less than 1 gram of fiber, and 25 grams of sugar. It's a treadmill, and fat people are meant to stay on it. The calorie companies prefer it that way. Don't like it? Tough, you're in the minority, you're not a shareholder and you don't get a vote.
Now can we please get back to geek subjects and allow us to stuff our face with Cheetos in peace.
I never said the only one. I'm not sufficiently educated in all the games that have and are being played by the major powers of the world in their endless pissing contests to say whose worse. What I can say is that of what I do know about the US' games, is that we've brought on disgusting amounts of misery around the world in the name of oil, and just generally sticking it to Russia for funsies. The bullsh*t presently being played out in the middle east would largely not exist but for US actions over the last four decades. Some f*cktards got a sick habit back during WWI and have been passing it down and serving it in secret ever since. Like a typical crack whore, most of the household income goes to supporting the habit and the children barely get any of the scraps.
Even if it was more expensive--which it isn't, actually about a third the price on F9/Dragon--shipping the money to Russian doesn't exactly employ the same number of Americans. Bleeding money is rarely a good thing compared to recirculating it within. In many cases the internal investment often comes with a multiplier effect. e.g. $1 generates $2 more.
While I can't disagree with your statement. As it relates to TFA I don't think Obama has really shown terribly much favoritism for the commercial programs. These programs seem to be championed by NASA and the general public more than the White House, or in particular the Congress. COTS and CCP are in some ways a vegan alternative to the traditional bacon served.
The Delta IV can't afford lose an engine either. The Falcon 9 is designed via their 9 pack to suffer multiple engine out and still complete mission objectives. Same reason most aeronautic systems have at least double redundancy. In the case of SpaceX, they went one better with triple redundancy in the flight control systems. ULA and Arianespace are developing new vehicles largely in response to SpaceX. You know, that terrible communist idea of market competition.
It doesn't help that the US--CIA, et. al.--has been in large part responsible for the destabilization of many parts of the world in their attempts to bend the world to suit their agenda. What we have today and the need for containment, is in very large part a consequence of all the proxy wars and government overthrows that have been instigated by the US.
SpaceX has been doing fine keeping pace with their milestones. NASA wasn't wanting to put all their eggs in one (CCP) basket. Boeing and SpaceX capsules aren't flying yet, and you don't know what you don't know. Better to have a rainy day contingency. That was a thin excuse to redirect the spigot to the good old boys. I wouldn't doubt in part payback for SpaceX stepping on toes with the Air Force launch contracts. In part because Bolden slapped Cruz around a bit and poked him in the eye with COTS recently.
At the moment they're kinda killing that reputation. Rampant corruption seems to be leading to terrible quality control. All it will take is the inevitable manned mission to go horribly wrong to redirect the spigot back where it belongs.
Setting other injustice aside. In many cases of cooperative spying, US tech companies had no means by which to refuse. They were legally compelled to comply. They were legally compelled to shut up. While it would have been an amazing act of courage, and rebellion, Apple, Google, etc. surely were not going to burn their businesses to the ground just to poke the spooks in the eye. Only a handful willingly volunteered to snoop such as Verizon, AT&T (if memory serves).
In many cases such as Cisco, and Juniper, the NSA and co were intercepting shipments of hardware to customers and modifying them. Google was victim of NSA man-in-the-middle attacks.
The power brokers in the military industrial complex need the slap down.
This kind of sounds like FIFA and the FBI. If it wasn't for the FBI sniffing around and uncovering poorly covered secrets FIFA wouldn't look so shameful. If it wasn't for the FBI FIFA wouldn't now be poised to go bankrupt from lawsuits. What's wrong with the status quo people? Come on people. Seriously...
It might seem easy. It might seem to make sense. But no matter what the thing is, guns, drugs, food, etc. you will never succeed in tackling a problem by dealing with the supply of something. Given sufficient demand, there will always be a supply or a near-equivalent alternative. History refuses to tell the story differently. Supply side restrictions always fail.
The problem itself must be tackled, not the tools, not the side-effects. You have to address demand. If someone wants to cause harm, they will, by whatever means are available to them be it a gun, a kitchen knife, or a number 2 pencil. Desperate people perform desperate deeds. Malfunctioning minds conceive malformed intentions. Start here first, not last, if ever.
Slashdot Mirror
You are trying to create "rationality" for their lying. These plans are not truly "unlimited" but they are telling everyone they are. It doesn't matter what spew the marketing department comes up with in their advertisements. There needs to be an honest document that details exactly what you get. That's what those asterisks are for in the marketing spew. Unlike the others, T-Mobile is an example of being honest. Their marketing spew uses the term "unlimited data" but define the terms of that "unlimited," a certain chunk of data at full speed, thereafter you get a slower rate. The others didn't do that. Their marketing department sold a product their engineering department didn't deliver.
ref 1 ref 2
Maybe I'm not too bright on the subject but I thought that "representation" bit was about having a voice in their governance. Not that it matters much though. Much like the British monarchy, U.S. citizen representation in government is largely ceremonial.
No need to pretend. There are far enough people asleep at the voting booth to compensate.
You already have media that "self-destructs" after a period of time. Optical media has a shelf life after which the decomposition of the material prevents readability. If people were to attempt to play their media from 20 or so years ago chances are good that they might experience this to some extent. Certain media brands were/are better than others but their lifespans are generally not what people whom bought into the idea and created large collections of optical media expected.
Let's assume the data is valid. What can we deduce? .NET/C# is the language of the desktop/server. Did they bother to normalize the data accordingly? I doubt it. What I see is considerable buzz within the web/mobile space and the jobs resultant from that. For the most part I don't think they represent replacement jobs, they represent new demand.
Java is increasingly being seen as problematic and a liability, particularly as it relates to security. Much of Oracles efforts remind me more of throwing stuff against a wall and crossing fingers. Its history has given it a lot of momentum but people are starting to get nervous.
Let's for a second turn off the censor and cut strait to what the BMI is all about. It's about telling fat people that they're fat. A healthy person, particularly athletic persons knows that BMI is not applicable to them and generally ignore it. Could we come up with a metric that accommodates healthy people with above average muscle mass? Sure. But there's no point, and it would be over complicated, more difficult to apply by lay persons, and detract from the original objective.
The funny bit that doesn't make much sense is that fat people generally already know that they're fat. Why do we need a "scientific" method to call them out on it? I assume the point is to get them to do something about it. Trouble is, we've been groomed to consume large quantities of what I can only consider to be "feed" and shun actual food, nutritionally balanced, healthful food. We've been groomed to prefer extra ordinarily sweet, fatty, pre-digested calories. Of course since it's pre-digested, we have to eat more of the stuff since we feel hungry two minutes later if we don't. It's been tailored to hit all the right buttons in our brain's pleasure/reward centers so we become addicted to it. Even when people want to eat "healthy" the manufactured food companies deceive everyone with misinformation. They convince everyone that their candy bars are healthy by calling them "energy" bars. Their bowls of flake shaped sugar must be good for you since they use "whole" grains, never mind the fact that a serving contains less than 1 gram of fiber, and 25 grams of sugar. It's a treadmill, and fat people are meant to stay on it. The calorie companies prefer it that way. Don't like it? Tough, you're in the minority, you're not a shareholder and you don't get a vote.
Now can we please get back to geek subjects and allow us to stuff our face with Cheetos in peace.
I thought humans were getting more spheroid? Cubes indeed...
I never said the only one. I'm not sufficiently educated in all the games that have and are being played by the major powers of the world in their endless pissing contests to say whose worse. What I can say is that of what I do know about the US' games, is that we've brought on disgusting amounts of misery around the world in the name of oil, and just generally sticking it to Russia for funsies. The bullsh*t presently being played out in the middle east would largely not exist but for US actions over the last four decades. Some f*cktards got a sick habit back during WWI and have been passing it down and serving it in secret ever since. Like a typical crack whore, most of the household income goes to supporting the habit and the children barely get any of the scraps.
They had to pay SpaceX and Bolden back for making them look bad.
Even if it was more expensive--which it isn't, actually about a third the price on F9/Dragon--shipping the money to Russian doesn't exactly employ the same number of Americans. Bleeding money is rarely a good thing compared to recirculating it within. In many cases the internal investment often comes with a multiplier effect. e.g. $1 generates $2 more.
While I can't disagree with your statement. As it relates to TFA I don't think Obama has really shown terribly much favoritism for the commercial programs. These programs seem to be championed by NASA and the general public more than the White House, or in particular the Congress. COTS and CCP are in some ways a vegan alternative to the traditional bacon served.
I suspect the later was a response to the former.
That was Bolden's jab in response. I personally feel it was well placed.
The Delta IV can't afford lose an engine either. The Falcon 9 is designed via their 9 pack to suffer multiple engine out and still complete mission objectives. Same reason most aeronautic systems have at least double redundancy. In the case of SpaceX, they went one better with triple redundancy in the flight control systems. ULA and Arianespace are developing new vehicles largely in response to SpaceX. You know, that terrible communist idea of market competition.
It doesn't help that the US--CIA, et. al.--has been in large part responsible for the destabilization of many parts of the world in their attempts to bend the world to suit their agenda. What we have today and the need for containment, is in very large part a consequence of all the proxy wars and government overthrows that have been instigated by the US.
SpaceX has been doing fine keeping pace with their milestones. NASA wasn't wanting to put all their eggs in one (CCP) basket. Boeing and SpaceX capsules aren't flying yet, and you don't know what you don't know. Better to have a rainy day contingency. That was a thin excuse to redirect the spigot to the good old boys. I wouldn't doubt in part payback for SpaceX stepping on toes with the Air Force launch contracts. In part because Bolden slapped Cruz around a bit and poked him in the eye with COTS recently.
At the moment they're kinda killing that reputation. Rampant corruption seems to be leading to terrible quality control. All it will take is the inevitable manned mission to go horribly wrong to redirect the spigot back where it belongs.
Setting other injustice aside. In many cases of cooperative spying, US tech companies had no means by which to refuse. They were legally compelled to comply. They were legally compelled to shut up. While it would have been an amazing act of courage, and rebellion, Apple, Google, etc. surely were not going to burn their businesses to the ground just to poke the spooks in the eye. Only a handful willingly volunteered to snoop such as Verizon, AT&T (if memory serves).
In many cases such as Cisco, and Juniper, the NSA and co were intercepting shipments of hardware to customers and modifying them. Google was victim of NSA man-in-the-middle attacks.
The power brokers in the military industrial complex need the slap down.
This kind of sounds like FIFA and the FBI. If it wasn't for the FBI sniffing around and uncovering poorly covered secrets FIFA wouldn't look so shameful. If it wasn't for the FBI FIFA wouldn't now be poised to go bankrupt from lawsuits. What's wrong with the status quo people? Come on people. Seriously...
I wonder if the masters giveth or threatened to taketh?
I'm not so much concerned with Media Center as I am with the underpinnings. What games are they playing with Media Foundation and DirectShow?
It might seem easy. It might seem to make sense. But no matter what the thing is, guns, drugs, food, etc. you will never succeed in tackling a problem by dealing with the supply of something. Given sufficient demand, there will always be a supply or a near-equivalent alternative. History refuses to tell the story differently. Supply side restrictions always fail.
The problem itself must be tackled, not the tools, not the side-effects. You have to address demand. If someone wants to cause harm, they will, by whatever means are available to them be it a gun, a kitchen knife, or a number 2 pencil. Desperate people perform desperate deeds. Malfunctioning minds conceive malformed intentions. Start here first, not last, if ever.