blah blah blah I wasted a ton of money blah blah blah i am unreasonably obsessed with HD because I blew 2 grand on HiDef shit.
Good for you. I like 'fun,' and like lots of fun enthusiasts, I'm going to get a Nintendo, because they have 'fun games,' which is true no matter the resolution. I'd enjoy playing Nintendo games even if they still made them at original NES specs. Some people are really into graphics, but most people I know don't have the money to obsess about that crap, and just look for fun games.
Notice how your little story started "Two guys walk into a computer store" and ends with one of the 'guys' being that most mythical of beasts, a cute Linux chick (though I have met one or two)? I think that's called letting your imagination run away with you.
The West's warming toward China is, hopefully, going to be responsible for making sure those mistakes aren't made again. It's worked with Germany and Japan, though obviously in more drastic circumstances, and you could argue that it's worked somewhat in Taiwan (teh Chang Kai-shek government wasn't exactly the best in the world). Hong Kong is another good example of relations with the West helping maintain a certain level of openness and autonomy, albeit on a limited scale. I don't think that Hitler's Reich is a fair comparison for modern China, regardless of what past incarnations of their government may have been responsible for. As we move to the first generation of Chinese leaders not directly from the old (revolutionary) guard, I think we should encourage China in its good actions, rather than always having a single knee-jerk response, and dismissing anything good the government does.
Your comparison is specious and intended to appeal at an emotional rather than rational level, as almost any comparison to Nazi Germany is. There's no need to say "Hey, Hitler did good things too," in order to prove that bad people/governments can do bad things. Please refer to Godwin's law.
I suppose some people don't want to have to change email addresses when they find a cheaper ISP. In my case, Yahoo is my ISP, so when I signed up, I got a free yahoo account! woohoo! Some people prefer having something that's easy for their friends to remember (everyone knows yahoo.com). And maybe some people, windows users for instance, are scared of using pop mail programs like outlook, and they like the yahoo/google interface (compared to other choices).
In case either of you two who responded to me come back and read this, here's a basic response. To the first objection, I understood "was built on" to mean the thing that most helped america become what it is today, not "the purpose of colonization," which also was not "kinking out the brits" (obviously). To yours, eric, please, calm down. "Native Americans" is the term for them. If you want to be a pedantic asshole, there are no such things as "native" people to any area, as once upon a time, their ancestors lived elsewhere: in the oceans. I assume you realize that you sound like an asshole when you say this shit, but if not: You do. And there are lots of people who like to say that the genocide of the native americans by spain/england/america(yeah, it still was happening after 1789!) by pointing out that they weren't all saints. Oh well, if it's cool to kill anyone who's not a saint because you want your land, let me know where you live, and I can expand my assets!
Remember, the USA wasn't built on political correctness, it was built on us kicking out the brits.
Actually, it was built on kicking out the Native Americans. It was renamed on kicking out the Brits. I'd love to fulfill your paranoid fantasies with low karma, but I have no mod points . . . . sorry!
"A paper providing details on the chip will run in Nature on Wednesday".
Anyone have a link to this considering that it is Thursday?
Interesting thing about Wednesdays . . . they're much more frequent then some people assume. Look for this sometime in the middle part of next week (doesn't appear to be on their website, anyway).
Re:Employees not happy?
on
Pixar For Sale?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
"Shareholders own and manage the company, not employees. If employees dont like it they can leave."
So can shareholders, except they don't have to move or disturb their life in any way. Just because someone doesn't own a company doesn't mean that we shouldn't feel sympathy for them, especially considering/.ers are much more likely to be employees at pixar than major stockholders.
"A lifetime of evil" is a huge stretch for Mr. Gates. Regardless of your opinions of his business practices, he has done little harm to people who can't handle it, and is dedicated to helping the poor of other countries. Not only has he already given away enormous amounts of money through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, but he shows no signs of stopping. Rather than just give away money to showy projects for the publicity, the Gates Foundation tries to increase the productivity and viability of the poor around the world through well-thought-out gifts.
I for one am perfectly willing to deal with a Windows world, if it means that kids around the world will be able to survive malaria, or the poor in America have a better shot at a high-level technical education.
From TFA, before it gets slashdotted and someone asks:
Well, a shortcut will only work when used from within the Windows shell, it is a construct of the shell, and other apps don't understand short-cuts. To other apps, short-cuts look just like a file. With symbolic links, this concept is taken and is implemented within the file system. Apps when they open a symbolic link will now open the target by default (i.e. what the link points to), unless they explicitly ask for the symbolic link itself to be opened.
That's a good website you linked to, but unfortunately irrelevant, as Mr. Kerry is a United States Senator, not a state senator (someone who serves in the state senate). As you might be aware, most decisions like this, internal to a state, are not under the purview of the United States Senate, but are made on the local level. Hence "Romney administration" rather than "Bush administration," etc. On a side note, I'm happy that Romney, a Republican, is willing to push this issue, it seems that Republicans in a less liberal state would be unlikely to, though that might be making some assumptions . . .
from Annie Hall: There's an old joke - um... two elderly women are at a Catskill mountain resort, and one of 'em says, "Boy, the food at this place is really terrible." The other one says, "Yeah, I know; and such small portions." Well, that's essentially how I feel about life - full of loneliness, and misery, and suffering, and unhappiness, and it's all over much too quickly.
I want my state (disclusure: I don't live in America at the moment) to become a receiver state, instead of a donor state! It would be great if every state became a receiver state! On a more serious note, that's the kind of short-sighted thinking on the part of our representatives that leads to enormous amounts of pork. Game theory has a lot to say about this, but suffice to say that the favor-trading of pork projects leads to tremendous waste, as there is insufficient disincentive on the people who write these bills.
Yes, people with good genes should "subsidize" the people with bad genes. Everyone has their own ideas of a just society, but it seems pretty brutal to make everyone suffer for their genetic problems more than they inherently do. I know I certainly wouldn't want to live in a society where we just left the mentally handicapped to die on their own, instead of taking care of them, for instance. Some people disagree, but I think it's important that the genetically blessed help those not blessed. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Or something like that, in an ideal world.
This brings us closer to confronting the issue of genetic discrimination on a large scale. IBM made a nice announcementhttp://www.out-law.com/page-6217> that they will avoid this, but there's not much legal protection from genetic profiling in the laws of most countries. Fortunately for those of us not currently in America, health care access in most developed countries won't be affected by this. Unfortunately, for those of us who intend to live in America at some point in the future, health insurance could certainly be affected by this. For example, it's well known that Amish, Ashkenazi Jews, and other groups suffer from certain genetic maladies far above the average. This kind of research will make it possible to pinpoint other groups with risks not yet known, and raise their health insurance costs, avoid hiring them (a la Wal-Mart's recent memo regarding hiring healthy people to cut down on benefits costs), etc. While I don't want to spread too much paranoia on the issue, I think it's very important that we make sure to protect people from genetic discrimination before it becomes widespread and harder to stop.
Actually, while most of the Japanese population lives in the major metropolitan areas (about 25% alone in Tokyo metro), most people here live in rural areas, as I do. Despite this, everyone here has cell phones (DoCoMo, probably having the best phones, also being the most popular). By everyone, I mean EVERYONE. Most schoolchildren start carrying cell phones when they go to school alone in grade school, and even the very old have them.
Likewise, the above statement about cheaper phones with better offers is completely true. Whenever I notice the difference between the phones, I am amazed. That 2 megapixels would be something apparently extraordinary enough to draw such attention on/. surprises me, as I have even seen 3 megapixel phones advertised recently. Sure, technology here might not be miles ahead of America, but the truth behind the stereotype is that the availability of certain technologies is miles ahead here, regardless of the reasons.
Most shareholder meetings in Japan are traditionally held at the same time (late June), so as to dilute the power of the shareholders who shares in multpile companies. Of course, I don't have the resources to buy the amount of stock it would take to make Sony responsive to my concerns.
While corporations here are not responsive to shareholders, in comparison to America, anyway, they do often respond well to consumer pressure. Though the music industry has been an exception, I have faith they will come around someday.
This lack of participation is a Very Bad Thing for anyone who likes to buy digital music easily online. As a consumer in Japan, I have been much-thwarted in my attempts to buy songs I hear on the radio or wherever. Though iTunes is very convenient, I haven't spent any money on iTunes Japan because it's so crippled. Obviously, I don't think this is good for either Apple or Sony-BMG, and hopefully they work something out eventually.
Just imagine the mechanic shortage when there were no cars at all, and then they started selling them! Or the shortage of tech people when the first desktop computers were sold (I don't know if you are old enough to remember, but everybody made it through that transition ok). The bottom line is, if there were suddenly 2.7 million more hybrids sold next year than predicted, mechanics would up and get trained, to meet the demand. It's how economics works to drive training in a society where technology advances. Don't worry too much about the number of mechanics, new things happen, this is certainly the kind of change that can be absorbed.
I completely agree! It's a horrible idea to use the power of the government to convince citizens to contribute to the public good! Obviously, the best way would be to just avoid giving the public any incentives to avoid behavior that is dangerous to public health, because it's never the case that what is most beneficial in the short term for an individual can lead to long-term problems.
All sarcasm aside, perhaps you have never heard of the tragedy of the commons? I suggest you look it up, it's one of the best ways to see that self-interest can lead to problematic results for the community.
I think you are somewhat emotional and irrational in your dismissal of 'paternalistic' tax incentives and the like to encourage behavior which benefits the community in the long term but is immediately somewhat difficult for individuals without help. Governments fulfill important functions besides making sure that the rich don't have to worry about the poor stealing their money, among these is the protection of public health and the long-term prospects of that government's society (environmental concerns being a key component of this, obviously).
Like other political movements/parties, the Green parties in various countries around the world try not to stick to one issue, though they are named after their signature issue.
Surely the desire to keep governments from being held hostage by software companies with monopolies through the use of open formats and open source software is something that would make sense in a party that is suspicious of multinational corporations?
Perhaps you were being sarcastic and I misinterpreted?
Of course, you look at it very differently from how I do. You say "killing people supports research" (implying that war is good or some shit), whereas I say "killing people co-opts our best researchers," implying that we have better things to do.
Likewise, if we weren't directing all our resources towards killing each other, we could have more for pure research into things like dry-land agriculture or basic physics.
Slashdot Mirror
Notice how your little story started "Two guys walk into a computer store" and ends with one of the 'guys' being that most mythical of beasts, a cute Linux chick (though I have met one or two)? I think that's called letting your imagination run away with you.
The West's warming toward China is, hopefully, going to be responsible for making sure those mistakes aren't made again. It's worked with Germany and Japan, though obviously in more drastic circumstances, and you could argue that it's worked somewhat in Taiwan (teh Chang Kai-shek government wasn't exactly the best in the world). Hong Kong is another good example of relations with the West helping maintain a certain level of openness and autonomy, albeit on a limited scale. I don't think that Hitler's Reich is a fair comparison for modern China, regardless of what past incarnations of their government may have been responsible for. As we move to the first generation of Chinese leaders not directly from the old (revolutionary) guard, I think we should encourage China in its good actions, rather than always having a single knee-jerk response, and dismissing anything good the government does.
Your comparison is specious and intended to appeal at an emotional rather than rational level, as almost any comparison to Nazi Germany is. There's no need to say "Hey, Hitler did good things too," in order to prove that bad people/governments can do bad things. Please refer to Godwin's law.
I suppose some people don't want to have to change email addresses when they find a cheaper ISP. In my case, Yahoo is my ISP, so when I signed up, I got a free yahoo account! woohoo! Some people prefer having something that's easy for their friends to remember (everyone knows yahoo.com). And maybe some people, windows users for instance, are scared of using pop mail programs like outlook, and they like the yahoo/google interface (compared to other choices).
In case either of you two who responded to me come back and read this, here's a basic response. To the first objection, I understood "was built on" to mean the thing that most helped america become what it is today, not "the purpose of colonization," which also was not "kinking out the brits" (obviously). To yours, eric, please, calm down. "Native Americans" is the term for them. If you want to be a pedantic asshole, there are no such things as "native" people to any area, as once upon a time, their ancestors lived elsewhere: in the oceans. I assume you realize that you sound like an asshole when you say this shit, but if not: You do. And there are lots of people who like to say that the genocide of the native americans by spain/england/america(yeah, it still was happening after 1789!) by pointing out that they weren't all saints. Oh well, if it's cool to kill anyone who's not a saint because you want your land, let me know where you live, and I can expand my assets!
"A lifetime of evil" is a huge stretch for Mr. Gates. Regardless of your opinions of his business practices, he has done little harm to people who can't handle it, and is dedicated to helping the poor of other countries. Not only has he already given away enormous amounts of money through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, but he shows no signs of stopping. Rather than just give away money to showy projects for the publicity, the Gates Foundation tries to increase the productivity and viability of the poor around the world through well-thought-out gifts. I for one am perfectly willing to deal with a Windows world, if it means that kids around the world will be able to survive malaria, or the poor in America have a better shot at a high-level technical education.
That's a good website you linked to, but unfortunately irrelevant, as Mr. Kerry is a United States Senator, not a state senator (someone who serves in the state senate). As you might be aware, most decisions like this, internal to a state, are not under the purview of the United States Senate, but are made on the local level. Hence "Romney administration" rather than "Bush administration," etc. On a side note, I'm happy that Romney, a Republican, is willing to push this issue, it seems that Republicans in a less liberal state would be unlikely to, though that might be making some assumptions . . .
from Annie Hall: There's an old joke - um... two elderly women are at a Catskill mountain resort, and one of 'em says, "Boy, the food at this place is really terrible." The other one says, "Yeah, I know; and such small portions." Well, that's essentially how I feel about life - full of loneliness, and misery, and suffering, and unhappiness, and it's all over much too quickly.
I want my state (disclusure: I don't live in America at the moment) to become a receiver state, instead of a donor state! It would be great if every state became a receiver state! On a more serious note, that's the kind of short-sighted thinking on the part of our representatives that leads to enormous amounts of pork. Game theory has a lot to say about this, but suffice to say that the favor-trading of pork projects leads to tremendous waste, as there is insufficient disincentive on the people who write these bills.
Yes, people with good genes should "subsidize" the people with bad genes. Everyone has their own ideas of a just society, but it seems pretty brutal to make everyone suffer for their genetic problems more than they inherently do. I know I certainly wouldn't want to live in a society where we just left the mentally handicapped to die on their own, instead of taking care of them, for instance. Some people disagree, but I think it's important that the genetically blessed help those not blessed. From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. Or something like that, in an ideal world.
my apologies for the ugly link. I should "Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!" Feel free to learn from my mistakes.
This brings us closer to confronting the issue of genetic discrimination on a large scale. IBM made a nice announcementhttp://www.out-law.com/page-6217> that they will avoid this, but there's not much legal protection from genetic profiling in the laws of most countries. Fortunately for those of us not currently in America, health care access in most developed countries won't be affected by this. Unfortunately, for those of us who intend to live in America at some point in the future, health insurance could certainly be affected by this. For example, it's well known that Amish, Ashkenazi Jews, and other groups suffer from certain genetic maladies far above the average. This kind of research will make it possible to pinpoint other groups with risks not yet known, and raise their health insurance costs, avoid hiring them (a la Wal-Mart's recent memo regarding hiring healthy people to cut down on benefits costs), etc. While I don't want to spread too much paranoia on the issue, I think it's very important that we make sure to protect people from genetic discrimination before it becomes widespread and harder to stop.
Actually, while most of the Japanese population lives in the major metropolitan areas (about 25% alone in Tokyo metro), most people here live in rural areas, as I do. Despite this, everyone here has cell phones (DoCoMo, probably having the best phones, also being the most popular). By everyone, I mean EVERYONE. Most schoolchildren start carrying cell phones when they go to school alone in grade school, and even the very old have them. Likewise, the above statement about cheaper phones with better offers is completely true. Whenever I notice the difference between the phones, I am amazed. That 2 megapixels would be something apparently extraordinary enough to draw such attention on /. surprises me, as I have even seen 3 megapixel phones advertised recently. Sure, technology here might not be miles ahead of America, but the truth behind the stereotype is that the availability of certain technologies is miles ahead here, regardless of the reasons.
Most shareholder meetings in Japan are traditionally held at the same time (late June), so as to dilute the power of the shareholders who shares in multpile companies. Of course, I don't have the resources to buy the amount of stock it would take to make Sony responsive to my concerns. While corporations here are not responsive to shareholders, in comparison to America, anyway, they do often respond well to consumer pressure. Though the music industry has been an exception, I have faith they will come around someday.
This lack of participation is a Very Bad Thing for anyone who likes to buy digital music easily online. As a consumer in Japan, I have been much-thwarted in my attempts to buy songs I hear on the radio or wherever. Though iTunes is very convenient, I haven't spent any money on iTunes Japan because it's so crippled. Obviously, I don't think this is good for either Apple or Sony-BMG, and hopefully they work something out eventually.
Just imagine the mechanic shortage when there were no cars at all, and then they started selling them! Or the shortage of tech people when the first desktop computers were sold (I don't know if you are old enough to remember, but everybody made it through that transition ok). The bottom line is, if there were suddenly 2.7 million more hybrids sold next year than predicted, mechanics would up and get trained, to meet the demand. It's how economics works to drive training in a society where technology advances. Don't worry too much about the number of mechanics, new things happen, this is certainly the kind of change that can be absorbed.
I completely agree! It's a horrible idea to use the power of the government to convince citizens to contribute to the public good! Obviously, the best way would be to just avoid giving the public any incentives to avoid behavior that is dangerous to public health, because it's never the case that what is most beneficial in the short term for an individual can lead to long-term problems. All sarcasm aside, perhaps you have never heard of the tragedy of the commons? I suggest you look it up, it's one of the best ways to see that self-interest can lead to problematic results for the community. I think you are somewhat emotional and irrational in your dismissal of 'paternalistic' tax incentives and the like to encourage behavior which benefits the community in the long term but is immediately somewhat difficult for individuals without help. Governments fulfill important functions besides making sure that the rich don't have to worry about the poor stealing their money, among these is the protection of public health and the long-term prospects of that government's society (environmental concerns being a key component of this, obviously).
Like other political movements/parties, the Green parties in various countries around the world try not to stick to one issue, though they are named after their signature issue. Surely the desire to keep governments from being held hostage by software companies with monopolies through the use of open formats and open source software is something that would make sense in a party that is suspicious of multinational corporations? Perhaps you were being sarcastic and I misinterpreted?
Of course, you look at it very differently from how I do. You say "killing people supports research" (implying that war is good or some shit), whereas I say "killing people co-opts our best researchers," implying that we have better things to do. Likewise, if we weren't directing all our resources towards killing each other, we could have more for pure research into things like dry-land agriculture or basic physics.
a dupe of this: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/17/042221 2&tid=215&tid=230
that has disappeared in the past couple minutes?