More than that, it's cheap money and easy to get insurance that's caused a huge portion of the problem. Then when you include incentives to make a lot of loans and no penalty for making bad ones, it doesn't take a Nobel winning economist to see that something's going to go horribly, horribly awry eventually.
Actually those 11% are too busy trying to figure out how to loot the Picasso from their office without people noticing before crashing the entire business and collecting a gold parachute to send the jobs overseas to care about corporate leadership.
Or perhaps we ought to go back to the system where you didn't need extra letters behind your name to get a promotion. Just evidence that you could do your job and the next one up. That's ultimately where we went wrong. No MBA or degree program in and of itself is a replacement for industry experience and knowledge. The fact that people see an MBA and assume that a person has any knowledge or capability at all on that basis is extremely terrifying to me. The evidence I've seen over the last decade or so is that it would be wise to put those applicants to the bottom of the pile if we're doing anything without a full thorough investigation.
The fact that businesses so routinely run themselves out of business and do great harm to themselves with ill conceived business strategies ought to be evidence that perhaps something is going horribly, horribly wrong as the status quo at business school.
I suspect that what we'll end up with in the relative near future is using that cloaking technology stuff to make what is basically equivalent to a small stage in a box, where there's layers of basically pixels that go transparent at various points. It's a ways off, but apart from the space, assuming they can do it, I'm sure it'll be superior to the other approaches ultimately.
To an extent, but the poor quality of things like say falling rain and breaking glass has a tendency to stretch the ability of the player to suspend his disbelief. Likewise, high quality effects tend to lend themselves to more cooperation on the part of the viewer. I remember reading something recently that we tend to notice poor video quality more when we're not fully engaged in the movie.
That being said, the thing is that we've always had poor quality movies and games, it's a question of what's available to the artisans of the industry, the Hitchcocks, Carmacks and Romeros both George and John of the world.
3D won't take off anytime soon as it's still primitive, not just in terms of technology, but in terms of how it's used. It's still mostly used for cheap shocks and often times isn't even done well. As directors and game programmers get better at it, there'll be more to it. But right now there isn't really that much difference between say Batman: Arkham Asylum GOTY edition in 3D versus the the 3D turned off, they just did way too good a job with the regular one in terms of giving it a 3D feel while being quite subtle with the 3D.
Unfortunately, rather than fixing the problem, I fear that's the "fix" we're going to get. There are legitimate reasons to consider a "kill switch." As in the ability to take the nation off the internet at a moment's notice, however none of them are as easy or practical as simply restricting the kill switch to separating the military and emergency infrastructure from the net. Although the stupid thing there is that they probably shouldn't be directly on the internet in the first place.
The problem ultimately is that a kill switch would have to touch a huge amount of infrastructure, including satellite links in order to work, and I have very little confidence that even with highly qualified engineers working on it that there isn't going to be a bug, glitch or vulnerability that ends up working its way into the system.
Yeah, the DoD is really known for being secure. Remind me again how it was that Gary McKinnon managed to get into all those military computers? Oh, right, they had no password or a default password and no firewall which anybody could've accessed had they the stones or the poor judgment to try. But beyond that, even in its default state BSD is more secure than Windows is in that respect because you can't mount anything by default without having root. Now, there is an exception on most computers by booting into single user mode, but there's ways of handling that which can greatly reduce the likelihood of being haxxored. Unless I'm mistaken you can do that with Linux and Mac OSX, although generally not by default.
But beyond that because most of the individuals with knowledge of securing computer systems are younger and lower in rank, it can be kind of a toughy actually getting proper orders and resources to secure things. Or at least I assume that's what happened, it's the only explanation I can think of that's even halfway plausible that doesn't involve outright treason.
I'd agree with you were it not for the fact that their computers often times end up in botnets attacking services I want to use, or just generally gobbling up bandwidth which is then not available for myself and others of legitimate purpose. Now, if they'd install an arm which would fold out and slap them whenever they did something stupid like that, perhaps then we could get some change. Either that or we could suggest that they make better use of their cup holder.
Windows does it alright. Personally, I prefer the way that OpenSUSE does it with the snap to monitor boundaries or the way that I've got my FreeBSD X set up so that they're completely separate X servers.
There's multiple schools of thought on the subject. MS releases a new version from time to time, Ubuntu has LTS and regular releases. Technically speaking FreeBSD does regular releases more or less as a snapshotting set up with a bit of extra QA to make sure they can promise it to work correctly, but they do technically continuously release updates and you can update at any point either with current or stable.
Which style you go with really depends upon what it is that you're doing and what hassles you're willing to put up with.
To be fair Ubuntu has some serious issues which nobody has felt like dealing with. For instance being unable to log in with a bluetooth keyboard. From what I gather you can do some configuration hacking to make it work, but it seems kind of silly that even once you do log in that it still frequently isn't enough to get the keyboard working.
Um it's not parenthetical. The amendment was written in a bizarre fashion even for that time period and strictly speaking, even by your interpretation it's grammatically screwy resulting in additional oddly placed commas. They wouldn't have included the language about the militia at all, if they didn't mean to require membership for gun rights. You also apparently missed the part of history class where they discussed why it is that we have a guaranteed right to form up militias. And that reason is that early on there was no military, there was basically no law enforcement in wide portions of the country, on top of which there were still Indians running about very pissed about having had their land stolen from them.
It does take a suspension of disbelief to come to the conclusion that most of the amendment is essentially just there, to be ignored, rather than a portion of the amendment. Notice that they didn't do such things with either the first,third or fourth amendments.
So to sum it up, you can't parse out precisely in that fashion language which wasn't precisely fashioned in the first place. It would be nice if they had written it correctly with normal grammatical conventions being adhered to, and with the copies being identical, but they didn't.
OTOH my sleep apnea and trouble swallowing mysterious went away when I started seeing a chiropractor. As did my migraines. But hey, why let a reasonably explainable treatment get in the way of bashing complementary medicine.
Forecasting the weather is really hard to do. Especially around here in the Pacific Northwest. Where on most days you can find the weather you want, there's some limitations in that finding snow falling in the summer is tough and finding hot during winter isn't going to happen, but apart from that you can find the weather you want pretty much all year round. You make is sound like they do a poor job of it. But around here at least the science has come a really long way since when I was a kid. Back then we all pretty much knew how to judge the weather coming up in the immediate future, but it was pretty much just reports coming in from ships at sea. Predictions by meteorologists were primitive because the climate systems around here are very complicated. These days they get it right most of the time.
If it's the case, then it would be a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act as a violation of the "rule of reason" as in anybody even without an economics or legal degree could see that a search engine with a 2/3 share of searches putting it's products higher in the rankings artificially is anti-competitive. But IANAL so I may have confounded the particular origin of that rule with a different act.
Um, why on Earth was this modded informative, because it's wrong. You don't have to be a monopoly to run afoul of antitrust regulations. Being the largest player and using that dominant position to harm other competitors is sufficient. There is no rule that you have to a be a monopoly, I'm not sure where you got that idea from, but it's not correct.
As an easy to explain example, the deal that saw Google acquire Double click almost certainly ran afoul of the Clayton Antitrust Act in that it substantially reduced the market competition in the on line advertising space. That's just an example, but it pretty clearly demonstrates that being a monopoly isn't necessary for running afoul of antitrust regulations.
Indeed, probably my biggest complaint is that there's a tendency for the first page or so to be links to other search engines. Beyond that the way they went about things makes it fast, but it causes all sorts of headaches. Like searching for free software, tends to require quite a bit of work as it will by default not be smart enough to recognize that free downloads as in shareware and trialware are probably not what the person doing the searching is wanting. And additionally by default if it finds the words anywhere in the page that's considered good enough, when most people are probably wanting them to be at least somewhat near each other.
I have a feeling that perhaps Google has long since grown stagnant in that portion of their business and perhaps by virtue of being stagnant and very large is harming the search engine business. Not in an antitrust violating sort of way, but just harming it simply by being.
Um, no, if the allegations are true, that would be a blatant violation of antitrust regulation. You're not allowed to use your dominant position in such a way. It's harmful to competition and definitely does cause problems for the market.
Doesn't matter who it is, the reality is that Google should never have been allowed to grow so large via acquisitions. It still blows my mind that the DoJ didn't see any problems with them buying out their nearest competitor in the online advertisement space, when they were already number one. While I doubt this suit in particular has merit, it's almost assured that Google isn't as not evil as they'd like us to believe.
Wow, ketchup is a surprisingly complex taste. But I wouldn't expect you to know that. Besides, what about Champagne, Switzerland, under your theory it wasn't legitimate for them to call their sparkling wine champagne, even though they've been doing it for centuries prior to being told they had to stop recently. There must've been some confusion. But thank goodness that French said non, because now wine connoisseurs won't have to read the label closely, wait, this doesn't actually help that as different portions of that region aren't identical every year?
That's largely because French Vineyards have been coasting for sometime on their previous reputation. In Germany for instance it wouldn't be considered acceptable to mix grapes from different portions of the vineyard because of subtle changes in the soil depending upon where precisely it is. Even here in the US, the wine industry has been getting extremely serious about it in recent years. And IIRC that's not just California either, other parts of the US as well. Then there's the other nations you mention, with the price going down and the increased competition the French produces have been forced to basically dump a lot of wine essentially down the drain as they sell it for conversion into alcohol for medical and lab use.
That's absurd, considering the large portion of the population that things it's red wine with red meat and white wine with white meat, you'll have to forgive me for being somewhat skeptical. Given the degree of change year to year within the same vineyard, or even in the same year across the same vineyard, it's somewhat fanciful to suggest that you really get that much information out of it. I mean there's a reason why they do wine tastings, and it isn't about free wine and socializing.
It was a really stupid idea in the first place. A lot of it makes some degree of sense in that it somewhat simplifies the necessary study to know what you're buying, but it's going way out of control. Probably the best example is with champagne, where Champagne, Switzerland is no longer allowed to use it's own name like it had previously to call it's sparkling wine. The village history of doing so dates back to the 17th century and the name of the village back to the 9th.
Slashdot Mirror
Ironic given that you apparently do your programming in MS Basic.
More than that, it's cheap money and easy to get insurance that's caused a huge portion of the problem. Then when you include incentives to make a lot of loans and no penalty for making bad ones, it doesn't take a Nobel winning economist to see that something's going to go horribly, horribly awry eventually.
Actually those 11% are too busy trying to figure out how to loot the Picasso from their office without people noticing before crashing the entire business and collecting a gold parachute to send the jobs overseas to care about corporate leadership.
Or perhaps we ought to go back to the system where you didn't need extra letters behind your name to get a promotion. Just evidence that you could do your job and the next one up. That's ultimately where we went wrong. No MBA or degree program in and of itself is a replacement for industry experience and knowledge. The fact that people see an MBA and assume that a person has any knowledge or capability at all on that basis is extremely terrifying to me. The evidence I've seen over the last decade or so is that it would be wise to put those applicants to the bottom of the pile if we're doing anything without a full thorough investigation.
The fact that businesses so routinely run themselves out of business and do great harm to themselves with ill conceived business strategies ought to be evidence that perhaps something is going horribly, horribly wrong as the status quo at business school.
I suspect that what we'll end up with in the relative near future is using that cloaking technology stuff to make what is basically equivalent to a small stage in a box, where there's layers of basically pixels that go transparent at various points. It's a ways off, but apart from the space, assuming they can do it, I'm sure it'll be superior to the other approaches ultimately.
To an extent, but the poor quality of things like say falling rain and breaking glass has a tendency to stretch the ability of the player to suspend his disbelief. Likewise, high quality effects tend to lend themselves to more cooperation on the part of the viewer. I remember reading something recently that we tend to notice poor video quality more when we're not fully engaged in the movie.
That being said, the thing is that we've always had poor quality movies and games, it's a question of what's available to the artisans of the industry, the Hitchcocks, Carmacks and Romeros both George and John of the world.
3D won't take off anytime soon as it's still primitive, not just in terms of technology, but in terms of how it's used. It's still mostly used for cheap shocks and often times isn't even done well. As directors and game programmers get better at it, there'll be more to it. But right now there isn't really that much difference between say Batman: Arkham Asylum GOTY edition in 3D versus the the 3D turned off, they just did way too good a job with the regular one in terms of giving it a 3D feel while being quite subtle with the 3D.
Unfortunately, rather than fixing the problem, I fear that's the "fix" we're going to get. There are legitimate reasons to consider a "kill switch." As in the ability to take the nation off the internet at a moment's notice, however none of them are as easy or practical as simply restricting the kill switch to separating the military and emergency infrastructure from the net. Although the stupid thing there is that they probably shouldn't be directly on the internet in the first place.
The problem ultimately is that a kill switch would have to touch a huge amount of infrastructure, including satellite links in order to work, and I have very little confidence that even with highly qualified engineers working on it that there isn't going to be a bug, glitch or vulnerability that ends up working its way into the system.
Yeah, the DoD is really known for being secure. Remind me again how it was that Gary McKinnon managed to get into all those military computers? Oh, right, they had no password or a default password and no firewall which anybody could've accessed had they the stones or the poor judgment to try. But beyond that, even in its default state BSD is more secure than Windows is in that respect because you can't mount anything by default without having root. Now, there is an exception on most computers by booting into single user mode, but there's ways of handling that which can greatly reduce the likelihood of being haxxored. Unless I'm mistaken you can do that with Linux and Mac OSX, although generally not by default.
But beyond that because most of the individuals with knowledge of securing computer systems are younger and lower in rank, it can be kind of a toughy actually getting proper orders and resources to secure things. Or at least I assume that's what happened, it's the only explanation I can think of that's even halfway plausible that doesn't involve outright treason.
I'd agree with you were it not for the fact that their computers often times end up in botnets attacking services I want to use, or just generally gobbling up bandwidth which is then not available for myself and others of legitimate purpose. Now, if they'd install an arm which would fold out and slap them whenever they did something stupid like that, perhaps then we could get some change. Either that or we could suggest that they make better use of their cup holder.
To be fair, it's an honest enough mistake. It just seems like it's been 30 years, what with all the waiting and the retro styling for all those years.
Windows does it alright. Personally, I prefer the way that OpenSUSE does it with the snap to monitor boundaries or the way that I've got my FreeBSD X set up so that they're completely separate X servers.
There's multiple schools of thought on the subject. MS releases a new version from time to time, Ubuntu has LTS and regular releases. Technically speaking FreeBSD does regular releases more or less as a snapshotting set up with a bit of extra QA to make sure they can promise it to work correctly, but they do technically continuously release updates and you can update at any point either with current or stable.
Which style you go with really depends upon what it is that you're doing and what hassles you're willing to put up with.
To be fair Ubuntu has some serious issues which nobody has felt like dealing with. For instance being unable to log in with a bluetooth keyboard. From what I gather you can do some configuration hacking to make it work, but it seems kind of silly that even once you do log in that it still frequently isn't enough to get the keyboard working.
Um it's not parenthetical. The amendment was written in a bizarre fashion even for that time period and strictly speaking, even by your interpretation it's grammatically screwy resulting in additional oddly placed commas. They wouldn't have included the language about the militia at all, if they didn't mean to require membership for gun rights. You also apparently missed the part of history class where they discussed why it is that we have a guaranteed right to form up militias. And that reason is that early on there was no military, there was basically no law enforcement in wide portions of the country, on top of which there were still Indians running about very pissed about having had their land stolen from them.
It does take a suspension of disbelief to come to the conclusion that most of the amendment is essentially just there, to be ignored, rather than a portion of the amendment. Notice that they didn't do such things with either the first,third or fourth amendments.
So to sum it up, you can't parse out precisely in that fashion language which wasn't precisely fashioned in the first place. It would be nice if they had written it correctly with normal grammatical conventions being adhered to, and with the copies being identical, but they didn't.
OTOH my sleep apnea and trouble swallowing mysterious went away when I started seeing a chiropractor. As did my migraines. But hey, why let a reasonably explainable treatment get in the way of bashing complementary medicine.
Forecasting the weather is really hard to do. Especially around here in the Pacific Northwest. Where on most days you can find the weather you want, there's some limitations in that finding snow falling in the summer is tough and finding hot during winter isn't going to happen, but apart from that you can find the weather you want pretty much all year round. You make is sound like they do a poor job of it. But around here at least the science has come a really long way since when I was a kid. Back then we all pretty much knew how to judge the weather coming up in the immediate future, but it was pretty much just reports coming in from ships at sea. Predictions by meteorologists were primitive because the climate systems around here are very complicated. These days they get it right most of the time.
If it's the case, then it would be a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act as a violation of the "rule of reason" as in anybody even without an economics or legal degree could see that a search engine with a 2/3 share of searches putting it's products higher in the rankings artificially is anti-competitive. But IANAL so I may have confounded the particular origin of that rule with a different act.
Um, why on Earth was this modded informative, because it's wrong. You don't have to be a monopoly to run afoul of antitrust regulations. Being the largest player and using that dominant position to harm other competitors is sufficient. There is no rule that you have to a be a monopoly, I'm not sure where you got that idea from, but it's not correct.
As an easy to explain example, the deal that saw Google acquire Double click almost certainly ran afoul of the Clayton Antitrust Act in that it substantially reduced the market competition in the on line advertising space. That's just an example, but it pretty clearly demonstrates that being a monopoly isn't necessary for running afoul of antitrust regulations.
Indeed, probably my biggest complaint is that there's a tendency for the first page or so to be links to other search engines. Beyond that the way they went about things makes it fast, but it causes all sorts of headaches. Like searching for free software, tends to require quite a bit of work as it will by default not be smart enough to recognize that free downloads as in shareware and trialware are probably not what the person doing the searching is wanting. And additionally by default if it finds the words anywhere in the page that's considered good enough, when most people are probably wanting them to be at least somewhat near each other.
I have a feeling that perhaps Google has long since grown stagnant in that portion of their business and perhaps by virtue of being stagnant and very large is harming the search engine business. Not in an antitrust violating sort of way, but just harming it simply by being.
Um, no, if the allegations are true, that would be a blatant violation of antitrust regulation. You're not allowed to use your dominant position in such a way. It's harmful to competition and definitely does cause problems for the market.
Doesn't matter who it is, the reality is that Google should never have been allowed to grow so large via acquisitions. It still blows my mind that the DoJ didn't see any problems with them buying out their nearest competitor in the online advertisement space, when they were already number one. While I doubt this suit in particular has merit, it's almost assured that Google isn't as not evil as they'd like us to believe.
Wow, ketchup is a surprisingly complex taste. But I wouldn't expect you to know that. Besides, what about Champagne, Switzerland, under your theory it wasn't legitimate for them to call their sparkling wine champagne, even though they've been doing it for centuries prior to being told they had to stop recently. There must've been some confusion. But thank goodness that French said non, because now wine connoisseurs won't have to read the label closely, wait, this doesn't actually help that as different portions of that region aren't identical every year?
That's largely because French Vineyards have been coasting for sometime on their previous reputation. In Germany for instance it wouldn't be considered acceptable to mix grapes from different portions of the vineyard because of subtle changes in the soil depending upon where precisely it is. Even here in the US, the wine industry has been getting extremely serious about it in recent years. And IIRC that's not just California either, other parts of the US as well. Then there's the other nations you mention, with the price going down and the increased competition the French produces have been forced to basically dump a lot of wine essentially down the drain as they sell it for conversion into alcohol for medical and lab use.
That's absurd, considering the large portion of the population that things it's red wine with red meat and white wine with white meat, you'll have to forgive me for being somewhat skeptical. Given the degree of change year to year within the same vineyard, or even in the same year across the same vineyard, it's somewhat fanciful to suggest that you really get that much information out of it. I mean there's a reason why they do wine tastings, and it isn't about free wine and socializing.
It was a really stupid idea in the first place. A lot of it makes some degree of sense in that it somewhat simplifies the necessary study to know what you're buying, but it's going way out of control. Probably the best example is with champagne, where Champagne, Switzerland is no longer allowed to use it's own name like it had previously to call it's sparkling wine. The village history of doing so dates back to the 17th century and the name of the village back to the 9th.