I thought he was a nipple on national television...
Re:More money than brains I guess
on
Re-Pet a Reality
·
· Score: 1
That makes no sense.
By spending money, the wealthy are INCREASING the labor resource. If your local Wal-Mart's sales go up 150%, what are they going to do? They are going to hire more laborers to meet the increased demand. DUH!
However, money spent has a ripple effect, like a pebble hitting the surface of water. The money spreads out in a circle, but getting smaller and smaller as it travels out from the source because it is being spread between more and more people.
The reason you aren't rich from rich people spending money is that you haven't figured out how to get closer to the pebble when it hits the water...
I honestly believe "Lawn Jarts" (as our family's set was called) was a Darwinist conspiracy by the government and toy industry to cull the herd a bit.
Fortunately my brother and I made the cut. Society is probably better off without those who didn't. Now we have these confounded safety commissions that prevent us from shedding our weak links.
...except that in one of the high-profile lawsuits against lawndarts, it was the next-door neighbor's daughter who was killed, not the kids throwing the darts. One boy threw it up in the air, and it went over the fence and pierced the little girl's skull. She died in her father's arms.
2) Yes my wonderful lover. Our 30 year relationship, cheating on my husband has been great. He doesn't even realize that my child is really yours.
Actually, that's fairly important information for trying to establish a geneology. Think two or three generations ahead, when nobody knows any of these people personally because they're ALL dead. Point #2 would actually be an argument IN FAVOR or reading the departed's private emails.
Also, don't you think that it would be important for the child to know who his REAL father is? If the birth father died at a young age of heart disease, wouldn't it be fairly important for the kid to know that he's at risk for heart disease?
I assume you own some stocks... at the very least, you probably have a mutual fund with some stock holdings. When was the last time you were asked to vote on employee pay changes? Never, right?
That's because stock holders don't run the company; they hire managers (a board of directors) to act as agents on their behalf to run the company for them.
The real power of the stockholder is in choosing who should be on the Board. If a board member's term is expiring or if stockholders vote to fire a board member, then each of the stockholders is looking to support a candidate that supports their idea of how the company should be run. And they don't need a majority of shares to do it.
A board seat opens, and there are 6 candidates, and the votes are evenly divided among the candidates, EXCEPT that EA holds a 20% stake. EA will choose the new board member.
"Hi, I'm Al Gore, inventor of the internet. When I'm surfing the web, I like to use a little program I invented called Mozilla Firefox. It's got moxie!"
Gmail also has a similar feature, although it's a little more aggressive than Apple's Mail. Mail will block images only on email suspected of being spam, Gmail seems to block it on all messages.
I don't know about these other browsers, but it seems that what Safari does amounts to a search of the page title and the URL -- which is of limited usefulness if you're trying to find an important point among several research papers that you previously read online.
I'd like to see a searchable history feature. I may hit 500 web pages in a day, and trying to remember on what page I read something can be a maddening experience. It would be great to be able to search the cache.
not to defend IE, but isn't IE for Mac less dangerous than IE for Windows?
A live hand grenade with the pin pulled is less dangerous than IE for Windows.
True, IE for Mac doesn't have any of the vulnerabilities of its Windows cousin. For one thing, when malware tries to install to "c:\windows", Mac OS says, "Huh? What?" That, plus the fact that the Mac development team wrote the browser from scratch, so the two have little or no code in common.
IE for Mac is getting quite old, but it still has its uses. It's the only Mac browser that runs VBScript, and a client site that we inherited from another company makes heavy use of VBScript on the client side, so I end up having to use IE once or twice a week.
It used to be the best browser on any platform, back in the day. Now it looks as bare-bones next to Firefox as Notepad looks next to MS Word.
True, but POTA suffered from a miscast protagonist. Mark Wahlburg is not the person to follow in Charlton Heston's footsteps; he doesn't have anywhere near the same amount of presence that Heston does.
Johnny Depp, OTOH, seems perfectly cast to follow in the spirit, if not the style, of Gene Wilder.
It should be interesting, nonetheless, but I doubt it will cause me to permanently shelve my well-worn DVD of Willy Wonka.
My parents live three states away. I'd love for my grandkids to be able to see them on a regular basis like that. Or talk to friends like this. Or talk to that "special someone".
Video phones for the average consumer have been around in one form or another for fifteen or twenty years. I don't think the problem is the demand for the service. The problems are a cascade effect:
1) Cost-prohibitive: $500 for a friggen phone?!? Better figure on buying two, because I can guarantee that whoever you're going to want to talk to isn't going to want to shell out five big ones for a phone. This technology has always been and continues to be, priced for the early EARLY adopters.
2) Slow adoption rate: You finally decide to break down and buy one, but who are you going to talk to? Nobody. So fuhgeddaboutit. Cost is high, so adoption is slow.
3) Changing technology: Like I said, this technology has been available commercially for almost two decades; if you forked over hundreds of dollars years ago, what can you do with your investment today? Nothing. Toss that phone and put another $500 on the AMEX. The adoption rate is so slow and the technological progress so fast that the phones you buy today, like your computers, will be obsolete in a couple of years (unlike the POTS phone that I've been using for 15+ years). Then again, maybe it's a good thing that the adoption rate is so slow right now, allowing the technology to mature before it really goes mainstream.
I'll also toss this in... who wants to stare at a tiny LCD screen while they talk on the phone? We've been liberated by cordless phones; I like to move around while I talk. A smarter move would be to integrate this technology into the television. A nice big screen that everyone can see and with the camera mounted on top, you're still free to move about the room. Maybe this is what Vonage is thinking, too. I hope so.
The demand is there for video phones, though. They just need to cut the price to under $200, and then they'll see the floodgates open.
The basis of this whole story is that Apple is absent from the PPC Consortium roster? Yikes!
For all we know, some editor could have forgot to put Apple's name in there. Or maybe Apple is still sitting on the fence about it, who knows. But this isn't even a "rumor" yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Gotta watch out for those Martian kids and their squeegees. They always try to hustle a buck out of you at the stoplights.
was that goatse.cx went offline this year.
Let's have a moment of silence, please...
I thought he was a nipple on national television...
That makes no sense.
By spending money, the wealthy are INCREASING the labor resource. If your local Wal-Mart's sales go up 150%, what are they going to do? They are going to hire more laborers to meet the increased demand. DUH!
However, money spent has a ripple effect, like a pebble hitting the surface of water. The money spreads out in a circle, but getting smaller and smaller as it travels out from the source because it is being spread between more and more people.
The reason you aren't rich from rich people spending money is that you haven't figured out how to get closer to the pebble when it hits the water...
Fortunately my brother and I made the cut. Society is probably better off without those who didn't. Now we have these confounded safety commissions that prevent us from shedding our weak links.
2) Yes my wonderful lover. Our 30 year relationship, cheating on my husband has been great. He doesn't even realize that my child is really yours.
Actually, that's fairly important information for trying to establish a geneology. Think two or three generations ahead, when nobody knows any of these people personally because they're ALL dead. Point #2 would actually be an argument IN FAVOR or reading the departed's private emails.
Also, don't you think that it would be important for the child to know who his REAL father is? If the birth father died at a young age of heart disease, wouldn't it be fairly important for the kid to know that he's at risk for heart disease?
No, Celsius...
The coffee is free; the metal tongs you use to pick it up are $39.95.
I assume you own some stocks... at the very least, you probably have a mutual fund with some stock holdings. When was the last time you were asked to vote on employee pay changes? Never, right?
That's because stock holders don't run the company; they hire managers (a board of directors) to act as agents on their behalf to run the company for them.
The real power of the stockholder is in choosing who should be on the Board. If a board member's term is expiring or if stockholders vote to fire a board member, then each of the stockholders is looking to support a candidate that supports their idea of how the company should be run. And they don't need a majority of shares to do it.
A board seat opens, and there are 6 candidates, and the votes are evenly divided among the candidates, EXCEPT that EA holds a 20% stake. EA will choose the new board member.
"Hi, I'm Al Gore, inventor of the internet. When I'm surfing the web, I like to use a little program I invented called Mozilla Firefox. It's got moxie!"
As long as the paper is the Slidell Sentry-News, I'd say you have a pretty good shot.
Gmail also has a similar feature, although it's a little more aggressive than Apple's Mail. Mail will block images only on email suspected of being spam, Gmail seems to block it on all messages.
I don't know about these other browsers, but it seems that what Safari does amounts to a search of the page title and the URL -- which is of limited usefulness if you're trying to find an important point among several research papers that you previously read online.
I'd like to see a searchable history feature. I may hit 500 web pages in a day, and trying to remember on what page I read something can be a maddening experience. It would be great to be able to search the cache.
Ummm... do you mean to say that developing IE drove him out of software development altogether?
Automatic nose picker, while you talk on the phone.
...and Apple could take all of this carbon dioxide floating around and convert it into oxygen.
not to defend IE, but isn't IE for Mac less dangerous than IE for Windows?
A live hand grenade with the pin pulled is less dangerous than IE for Windows.
True, IE for Mac doesn't have any of the vulnerabilities of its Windows cousin. For one thing, when malware tries to install to "c:\windows", Mac OS says, "Huh? What?" That, plus the fact that the Mac development team wrote the browser from scratch, so the two have little or no code in common.
IE for Mac is getting quite old, but it still has its uses. It's the only Mac browser that runs VBScript, and a client site that we inherited from another company makes heavy use of VBScript on the client side, so I end up having to use IE once or twice a week.
It used to be the best browser on any platform, back in the day. Now it looks as bare-bones next to Firefox as Notepad looks next to MS Word.
True, but POTA suffered from a miscast protagonist. Mark Wahlburg is not the person to follow in Charlton Heston's footsteps; he doesn't have anywhere near the same amount of presence that Heston does.
Johnny Depp, OTOH, seems perfectly cast to follow in the spirit, if not the style, of Gene Wilder.
It should be interesting, nonetheless, but I doubt it will cause me to permanently shelve my well-worn DVD of Willy Wonka.
The candy had a problem. That just can't be good.
It was Slugworth! It was his fault!!!
My parents live three states away. I'd love for my grandkids to be able to see them on a regular basis like that. Or talk to friends like this. Or talk to that "special someone".
Video phones for the average consumer have been around in one form or another for fifteen or twenty years. I don't think the problem is the demand for the service. The problems are a cascade effect:
1) Cost-prohibitive: $500 for a friggen phone?!? Better figure on buying two, because I can guarantee that whoever you're going to want to talk to isn't going to want to shell out five big ones for a phone. This technology has always been and continues to be, priced for the early EARLY adopters.
2) Slow adoption rate: You finally decide to break down and buy one, but who are you going to talk to? Nobody. So fuhgeddaboutit. Cost is high, so adoption is slow.
3) Changing technology: Like I said, this technology has been available commercially for almost two decades; if you forked over hundreds of dollars years ago, what can you do with your investment today? Nothing. Toss that phone and put another $500 on the AMEX. The adoption rate is so slow and the technological progress so fast that the phones you buy today, like your computers, will be obsolete in a couple of years (unlike the POTS phone that I've been using for 15+ years). Then again, maybe it's a good thing that the adoption rate is so slow right now, allowing the technology to mature before it really goes mainstream.
I'll also toss this in... who wants to stare at a tiny LCD screen while they talk on the phone? We've been liberated by cordless phones; I like to move around while I talk. A smarter move would be to integrate this technology into the television. A nice big screen that everyone can see and with the camera mounted on top, you're still free to move about the room. Maybe this is what Vonage is thinking, too. I hope so.
The demand is there for video phones, though. They just need to cut the price to under $200, and then they'll see the floodgates open.
Ummm... I thought that's what the prequels were.
Oddly enough, the search engine that was recently endorsed by Bill Clinton, Accoona.com, makes no mention of the game, while Google pulls a ton of sites right up.
The basis of this whole story is that Apple is absent from the PPC Consortium roster? Yikes!
For all we know, some editor could have forgot to put Apple's name in there. Or maybe Apple is still sitting on the fence about it, who knows. But this isn't even a "rumor" yet.
In 1981, Apple ran a famous full-page ad saying, "Welcome, IBM. Seriously."
I wonder if Apple is going to run another full-page ad: "Goodbye, IBM. Seriously."
Ask and ye shall receive.
Looks like it's coming out December 14th, same day that ROTK:EE ships.