I haven't calculated the odds of both of the UPS units and the generator attached to the porn cluster failing at the exact same time, but that's just not a chance that I'm willing to take.
Funny that you mentioned Pyrex. Corning patented Pyrex in 1915 (#1304623). So far as I can tell, there hasn't been another one issued for Pyrex, yet Corning seems to be doing just fine despite ~80 years of imitators and competition.
Which makes it all the more important to be positioned to take the lead when the stumble occurs. Particularly in the tablet market where there's already a presumed #2 (Android) looming and other players in the space already making moves. Microsoft would be lucky to enter the top five at this point. Dropping Courier, which could have given them a unique niche in the tablet space and therefore at least some credibility within the tablet market as a whole, may have been the biggest mistake in their long history. After all, the iPad didn't become a huge hit because it was dropped into the public consciousness out of nowhere; Apple laid that groundwork for years with the iPhone and iPod Touch lines.
Broken window fallacy implies lack of choice and/or value in loss. In the example given, the yacht was a voluntary purchase that retained intrinsic value, therefore being a simple demonstration of the "invisible hand" of the market at work.
True, but I'm not going to chance buying any product that is specifically designed to catastrophically fail. I was considering going to the Droid X in November, but now I'm not sure I'll be using any Motorola devices after I replace my Droid.
You won't be scoffing when the world floods and Kevin Costner finds out that you have that precious, precious paper and steals it. But you'll still have that iPad!
The real problem that I have with it is that they actively block alternative means of installing applications, making their store an all-on-nothing affair. You either use the apps that Apple tells you that you should be using or you don't use them. If I have to utilize a technical solution to fix a policy problem then the product is inherently flawed. If I feel like using Flash to slow my device to a crawl and kill my battery (which I can speak to being bullshit arguments firsthand having used Flash on my Droid for a while now) then I'm going to kick my device's ass playing Flash games. THAT'S magical.
That said, Android has the opposite issue with the uncontrolled state of the Market actively dissuading developers and users, but given the choice I'll go with openness without question. I would prefer that Google put more restrictions on the official Market in order to provide more incentive to developers and users to adopt Android while still allowing alternative software repositories to exist. If someone wants to release an Android application that either violates Market terms, such as a hardcore pornography app, or that only runs in unsupported configurations, like rooted devices, then they are still perfectly capable of doing so and it really isn't a big deal for people to install those apps.
Very much so. Some people prefer one or the other. I like the regular keyboard better, especially since neither of those line-based keyboards have a voice button and I use that all of the time.
Not sure what source you want for the functionality of an application that is provided with nearly all Android devices. I guess www.android.com might work. Unless you were referring to apps to install the.apk files without using the Market, in which case Astro File Manager is awesome for all sorts of file types, including.apk files, although it may require root access to use. There are also standalone.apk installers that are available that work without needing root access.
Apple seems to be doing alright splitting their attention between Mac OS X and iPhone OS, although I did see gripes from some of their customers after their last developer conference regarding Mac OS X being treated as an afterthought. Yet the next Mac or i will likely still presell hundred of thousands of units sight-unseen.
Damn straight. Intel is a company that has always served multiple niches. Just as some people prefer Symbian, iPhoneOS, and Windows Mobiles, others will choose from Android and Meego. Smart move on their part to leave the all-in on a single platform strategy to other companies.
If I decide to start broadcasting information to the neighborhood via my shirt that is going to cause me to lose my shit and start threatening lawsuits because my shirt button wasn't properly secured then Granny is free to fire away.
How is it reasonable? I've known some of the dumbest of dumbasses who still know enough about the difference between secured and unsecured wi-fi access points to mooch off of the open ones. Seems more reasonable to me to expect that if you leave your connection open that people are going to jump on in.
To cope with the ceaseless realization that some day, no matter how hard you try to avoid it, you will die. Most people simply cannot cope with living every minute of their lives knowing that their very existence will end. Religion provides a hope that oblivion isn't inevitable. Of course, such a powerful psychological coping mechanism is ripe for use as a means of control, which is why the idea is reinforced in nearly every religion that the less that you accept the precepts on faith (passed down from the select few at the top, of course), the less chance that you have of avoiding the horrible fate that forms the basis of the desire to believe in the first place.
I wholeheartedly understand and sympathize with the religious. I just wish they'd keep it to themselves as I'd much prefer to spend the few precious years that I do have in a rational world.
Fair enough. My friend must have 1080p, 7.1 surround, etc, etc, while I've been perfectly content with my 27" CRT that probably doesn't even cover 480p. But I will be getting a 3D ready television in the next couple of months. My friend is sticking with what he has as he doesn't give a shit about 3D.
* can see the 3D display fine * don't get headaches, dizziness, or other symptoms that I have seen complaints about * don't mind having to wear the glasses at all when viewing 3D content (besides, I've hated headphones for years and still use them all of the time) * genuinely enjoy the 3D effect when it is applied appropriately
make up a tiny fraction of total television owners, that is still a shitload of potential sales of TVs, set-top boxes, glasses, and content. Why wouldn't they roll with it?
You're not taking into account the observer effect. Unlike all other species (as far as I am aware) humans are the only creatures to have conscious awareness of concepts such as evolution and biological diversity. Therefore, by definition we are no longer blindly subject to it, and in fact have not been for a long time. Even though we did not have these concepts defined as part of the common vernacular throughout most of human existence, we have made conscious decisions to guide evolutionary change by implementing selective breeding programs of animals and plants and by developing adaptive environments for climates that nature failed to otherwise equip us.
By taking the observer effect into account, the recognition of the importance of biological diversity to our quality of life is, in itself, an evolutionary trait of the species. It has grown from a kernel in early agrarian societies where the seed from more robust crops were favored for planting to the modern day, where we actively study and recognize evolutionary factors at the genetic level. We have superceded the lower levels of Maslow's heirarchy of needs, where most life still dwells, and have introduced creature comforts and emotional satisfaction as factors that are considered for "fitness." Therefore, the desire to have delicious bluefin tuna available for consumption, the guilt over having a role in events that directly threaten the existence of other species, and the satisfaction derived from moral relativism are all evolutionary "fitness" factors that are unique to humanity. Should a catastrophic event occur that wipes out all technology and strikes us all retarded then our evolution will once again be driven almost solely by the only factors that you associate with "fitness," but until then we're pretty much well beyond those concerns.
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't calculated the odds of both of the UPS units and the generator attached to the porn cluster failing at the exact same time, but that's just not a chance that I'm willing to take.
Funny that you mentioned Pyrex. Corning patented Pyrex in 1915 (#1304623). So far as I can tell, there hasn't been another one issued for Pyrex, yet Corning seems to be doing just fine despite ~80 years of imitators and competition.
Which makes it all the more important to be positioned to take the lead when the stumble occurs. Particularly in the tablet market where there's already a presumed #2 (Android) looming and other players in the space already making moves. Microsoft would be lucky to enter the top five at this point. Dropping Courier, which could have given them a unique niche in the tablet space and therefore at least some credibility within the tablet market as a whole, may have been the biggest mistake in their long history. After all, the iPad didn't become a huge hit because it was dropped into the public consciousness out of nowhere; Apple laid that groundwork for years with the iPhone and iPod Touch lines.
Broken window fallacy implies lack of choice and/or value in loss. In the example given, the yacht was a voluntary purchase that retained intrinsic value, therefore being a simple demonstration of the "invisible hand" of the market at work.
Only if they used the money to drop a SAN in his cubicle and walk away.
True, but I'm not going to chance buying any product that is specifically designed to catastrophically fail. I was considering going to the Droid X in November, but now I'm not sure I'll be using any Motorola devices after I replace my Droid.
I've bought a couple of apps that were well reviewed but that turned out not to be for me. Big deal; uninstall within 24 hours for a full refund.
You won't be scoffing when the world floods and Kevin Costner finds out that you have that precious, precious paper and steals it. But you'll still have that iPad!
The real problem that I have with it is that they actively block alternative means of installing applications, making their store an all-on-nothing affair. You either use the apps that Apple tells you that you should be using or you don't use them. If I have to utilize a technical solution to fix a policy problem then the product is inherently flawed. If I feel like using Flash to slow my device to a crawl and kill my battery (which I can speak to being bullshit arguments firsthand having used Flash on my Droid for a while now) then I'm going to kick my device's ass playing Flash games. THAT'S magical.
That said, Android has the opposite issue with the uncontrolled state of the Market actively dissuading developers and users, but given the choice I'll go with openness without question. I would prefer that Google put more restrictions on the official Market in order to provide more incentive to developers and users to adopt Android while still allowing alternative software repositories to exist. If someone wants to release an Android application that either violates Market terms, such as a hardcore pornography app, or that only runs in unsupported configurations, like rooted devices, then they are still perfectly capable of doing so and it really isn't a big deal for people to install those apps.
Very much so. Some people prefer one or the other. I like the regular keyboard better, especially since neither of those line-based keyboards have a voice button and I use that all of the time.
Nah, plenty are open: http://android.git.kernel.org/. Dunno about Market, though.
Not sure what source you want for the functionality of an application that is provided with nearly all Android devices. I guess www.android.com might work. Unless you were referring to apps to install the .apk files without using the Market, in which case Astro File Manager is awesome for all sorts of file types, including .apk files, although it may require root access to use. There are also standalone .apk installers that are available that work without needing root access.
Apple seems to be doing alright splitting their attention between Mac OS X and iPhone OS, although I did see gripes from some of their customers after their last developer conference regarding Mac OS X being treated as an afterthought. Yet the next Mac or i will likely still presell hundred of thousands of units sight-unseen.
Damn straight. Intel is a company that has always served multiple niches. Just as some people prefer Symbian, iPhoneOS, and Windows Mobiles, others will choose from Android and Meego. Smart move on their part to leave the all-in on a single platform strategy to other companies.
Wouldn't that be "nearly normal?"
Ah yes, the "Psychic Detection of How Much of an Ignorant Dumbass the Other Person Is Clause." Almost worthy of a semester of study by itself.
If I decide to start broadcasting information to the neighborhood via my shirt that is going to cause me to lose my shit and start threatening lawsuits because my shirt button wasn't properly secured then Granny is free to fire away.
I suppose that could be one criteria used to decide when to throw someone in a cage.
Well Google won't be laughing when they're not getting laid because of this, now will they?!?
How is it reasonable? I've known some of the dumbest of dumbasses who still know enough about the difference between secured and unsecured wi-fi access points to mooch off of the open ones. Seems more reasonable to me to expect that if you leave your connection open that people are going to jump on in.
To cope with the ceaseless realization that some day, no matter how hard you try to avoid it, you will die. Most people simply cannot cope with living every minute of their lives knowing that their very existence will end. Religion provides a hope that oblivion isn't inevitable. Of course, such a powerful psychological coping mechanism is ripe for use as a means of control, which is why the idea is reinforced in nearly every religion that the less that you accept the precepts on faith (passed down from the select few at the top, of course), the less chance that you have of avoiding the horrible fate that forms the basis of the desire to believe in the first place.
I wholeheartedly understand and sympathize with the religious. I just wish they'd keep it to themselves as I'd much prefer to spend the few precious years that I do have in a rational world.
Fair enough. My friend must have 1080p, 7.1 surround, etc, etc, while I've been perfectly content with my 27" CRT that probably doesn't even cover 480p. But I will be getting a 3D ready television in the next couple of months. My friend is sticking with what he has as he doesn't give a shit about 3D.
Different strokes. It's nice having options.
Even if those of us who:
* can see the 3D display fine
* don't get headaches, dizziness, or other symptoms that I have seen complaints about
* don't mind having to wear the glasses at all when viewing 3D content (besides, I've hated headphones for years and still use them all of the time)
* genuinely enjoy the 3D effect when it is applied appropriately
make up a tiny fraction of total television owners, that is still a shitload of potential sales of TVs, set-top boxes, glasses, and content. Why wouldn't they roll with it?
Given how infrequently any of the events that you listed actually occur, you make this methodology sound incredibly safe.
You're not taking into account the observer effect. Unlike all other species (as far as I am aware) humans are the only creatures to have conscious awareness of concepts such as evolution and biological diversity. Therefore, by definition we are no longer blindly subject to it, and in fact have not been for a long time. Even though we did not have these concepts defined as part of the common vernacular throughout most of human existence, we have made conscious decisions to guide evolutionary change by implementing selective breeding programs of animals and plants and by developing adaptive environments for climates that nature failed to otherwise equip us.
By taking the observer effect into account, the recognition of the importance of biological diversity to our quality of life is, in itself, an evolutionary trait of the species. It has grown from a kernel in early agrarian societies where the seed from more robust crops were favored for planting to the modern day, where we actively study and recognize evolutionary factors at the genetic level. We have superceded the lower levels of Maslow's heirarchy of needs, where most life still dwells, and have introduced creature comforts and emotional satisfaction as factors that are considered for "fitness." Therefore, the desire to have delicious bluefin tuna available for consumption, the guilt over having a role in events that directly threaten the existence of other species, and the satisfaction derived from moral relativism are all evolutionary "fitness" factors that are unique to humanity. Should a catastrophic event occur that wipes out all technology and strikes us all retarded then our evolution will once again be driven almost solely by the only factors that you associate with "fitness," but until then we're pretty much well beyond those concerns.