Considering how tiny the selection is, it's a moot point. It doesn't seem to matter whether one likes new or old, they're both gimped in terms of selection. And it doesn't seem to improve if you're interested in more obscure movies.
Bottom line is that you don't get $8 worth of service, unless you've got weird tastes. And certainly not enough to justify them taking the savings on warehouse and postage and keeping it for themselves.
Yes, but for $8 a month you can get access to the entire DVD catalog, so $8 for the streaming library which is tiny comparatively speaking is way too much money.
The main reason that my parents still have a satellite is sports. MLB sells their online package, but you can't see local market games on it until after the point where it's worth watching. The price is reasonable, but because it's only really useful for seeing out of market games, it's not something that somebody who likes the home team is likely to be able to get much use out of.
Personally, I don't really care, I rarely watch new programming and when I do, I'm willing to wait a week to see it online.
Precisely, commercial bandwidth is one of the few areas where capitalism seems to be working. The price has come down substantially over the last decade. If they can't afford to provide what Netflix needs, then they should raise the rates and build out the infrastructure.
As anonymous said, there's reason to believe that there's active pump and dump activity going on. And there should be at least an investigation to determine the facts.
B&N stock is not a currency, it's an ownership stake in the business and has risks inherent in doing so. But, B&N also produces things that people value and is regulated, whereas BTC provides no added value and is completely unregulated.
As for your fiat currency argument there, bottom line is that it's predictable and relatively slow to happen. If you're planning on retiring next year, then yes most of that should be in cash and low risk securities. But, BTC which has had a 30% fluctuation over the last year is even riskier than a conservative stock portfolio.
As for the taxes, I'm not paid in Euros, I'm paid in USD which is the only legal tender guaranteed for use in the US to pay for debt. When I'm in China I get paid in RMB and generally am not required to pay tax in the US. My tax bill there is denominated in RMB. Or, it would be, but the employer pays the taxes for me before giving me my money.
What's more, there's enough use of both USD and RMB that even if I do have tax liabilities in the US that there's a thriving market for exchanging the two and the rates tend to be pretty consistent.
It's not a tie. You would just do like any sane person would and pay cash for those transactions. The silk road itself is just a black market and historically people use cash for those transactions.
It's not just as broken as BTC. The Federal Reserve has engaged in incompetent management over the last 30 or so odd years, but that can still be fixed. With BTC, there's nothing anybody can do to fix that, because the curve at which new BTC come into existence is defined and the maximum number is also defined. If they need more coins, because people are hoarding them, they can't create new ones. Whereas with USD, or any other paper currency, they can print more or print less, the fact that the current Federal Reserve is so incompetent as to think long term inflation is acceptable does not mean that somebody competent to run the reserve couldn't be appointed at some point.
I can't pay my taxes in BTC and even with that "relatively stable" 90-120 range you're still talking about a 30% fluctuation, which is both unpredictable and dangerous for people who are trying to use it for normal currency stuff.
As for overall confidence, there's a sucker born every minute, as long as there are suckers having confidence in it, it will remain, until such a time as it becomes so mind blowingly obvious that even the most idiotic supporter can't deny it.
In the long term it will deflate out of existence, I just hope that there are some criminal prosecutions for the folks that are boosting the currency for personal gain.
As Anubis said, it might mean that it's a regional term, or that it's slang of the day or that it was commonly used, but not typically in print. The OED itself is mostly composed of words that you don't typically encounter. If you typically encountered most of those words, you probably wouldn't need to look them up.
Even a more modest dictionary which only aims to contain the commonly used words is likely to have far more words than what a typical person is likely to come into contact with on a regular basis.
There are degrees of emotional stability. Most people are relatively stable, otherwise nothing would get done and we couldn't have a society. The folks that fit in well with society are generally not suitable for reality programming. It would be like going to a movie called "accounts: the motion picture" where they were actual accountants engaged in regular accounting practices. I shouldn't spoil it, but about halfway in, they find a misplaced comma and have to redo the numbers.
The unabridged OED is pretty much just for libraries and research institutions. It's not just a matter of price, previous to them coming up with an online edition, the books took up like 3m of shelf space. And many of the additional words in there are used once or twice in the entire body of known literature.
If it's not in the largest single book version of the OED, you're not likely to encounter a word that isn't in it. Now, if you do, then paying for the full unabridged version might make sense.
Yeah right, we can't even get the government to maintain the bridges, and you think they're going to convince the tax payers to fund something like this? Especially seeing as most of them are not going to directly benefit.
It was hard enough convincing people that we needed health care reform, and that's something that ultimately affects everybody who hasn't aged into medicare.
That's what backups are for. You're not going to memorize more than a dozen good passwords, and especially not if you're changing them regularly. I can back up my password database every day and then I don't have to worry about corruption or something else.
The only real downside to it is if my password to the database is stolen. But, then again, they would also have to steal the file itself and the 2nd factor to it.
Well, keep in mind that everybody demands a log in these days and often times just to view something that you might not want to ever use again. That's probably 15 or so years worth of accounts that I've created and many of them are probably no longer usable, but it's not really worth going back through all of them on a regular basis.
And under this scenario, who precisely pays to create these textbooks?
This kind of attitude is why people don't take geeks seriously. Somebody has to pay for the cost of writing these books. And yes, you could probably use a book from 80 or so odd years ago, but the way that it's presented is archaic and is going to lack the progress that we've made in terms of teaching math. It's unlikely to represent the practical applications that have become much more important in recent years.
But, ultimately, somebody at some point had to write those books, just because it's public domain now, doesn't mean that it's consequence free. If we only use public domain works, then that's all we're likely to ever have. Which means that no new work being created and placed into the public domain. For something like math which is relatively settled, that's not the worst thing ever, but for many other subjects things aren't as cut and dry.
Or just use something like keepass and give them all strong passwords. It's not like you're going to be remembering hundreds of passwords anyways. Last count I had over 400 log ins and little or no clue as to how many of them I actually will ever need to use again. For most people, even a dozen passwords is more than they can reliably remember.
Which is completely missing the point. Do you have any idea how expensive it would be for them to give away books with no time limits attached to them? I'm as opposed to DRM as anybody else, but this is one of the few instances where it makes any sense.
I'm not really sure where coursera would get the money to buy all those books or why the publishers should have to give them out for free.
These are free books during the class. You have the option of buying them for the class, but I'm curious where you're going to be able to buy them for less than $0.
Targeting a specific browser version in such a way that it can't be replaced easily, is badly broken code. At some point you're going to have to replace it and the only times I can think of it being worthwhile to not do it right are if you're going to just toss the code away.
If it's this important to the enterprise, then it is in fact badly broken code that can't be run on the next version of the browser without having to be rewritten from scratch. Employees don't care why the application is down, they care that it's down and at some point they're going to have to replace all these computers with ones that aren't supported by XP.
That's only true if the replacement is ready before the system fails and can't be fixed. Downtime can be extremely expensive, which is why I'm always so shocked that things like this are the way that they are. Perhaps they can extend it to 15 years, but by that time it's likely that the programmers that worked on it are going to be retired, and if you didn't pay them sufficiently to properly document the system and engineer the code, then you're in for some trouble.
The interest you can make by putting it off can easily be outweighed by the cost of a crash program to replace the software when you realize that you can't get the necessary hardware if any of it breaks.
The problem there is reliability and repairability. Yes, it might be working just fine right now. But, what happens if the RAM starts to go bad and nobody makes replacement RAM? Or processors, the 386sx was discontinued in 2005, and at some point those are going to be hard to find.
Bottom line here is that if you've got code that only runs on ancient hardware, you're asking to get bit, and hard, at an unpredictable moment. If the code is so important that you can't risk what happens with imperfect reimplementation, then that's a compelling reason to start doing that now, rather than waiting to discover that you can't buy a new HDD to replace that 20 year old piece of junk that's in the current computer.
If the software is that badly broken, you've got other very serious problems to deal with. At some point the upgrade is going to have to be made. Either MS stops releasing patches for it next year or the hardware that's available doesn't have drivers for XP.
The point is that IE 6 is ancient. It's 12 years old with the most recent stable release being about 5 years ago. This isn't something that just happened, there has been years for them to deal with that.
I've heard that before. And I'm going to have to go and see that for myself.
Even around here where the problem with drivers is primarily the opposite, it's no fun to drive. You get the occasional driver that's extremely aggressive, but for the most part folks are so passive that nothing moves. Driverless cars would go a long way towards solving that problem.
I imagine that it would also greatly improve traffic as you'd reduce the time it takes for the cars to get moving again at stop lights.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering how tiny the selection is, it's a moot point. It doesn't seem to matter whether one likes new or old, they're both gimped in terms of selection. And it doesn't seem to improve if you're interested in more obscure movies.
Bottom line is that you don't get $8 worth of service, unless you've got weird tastes. And certainly not enough to justify them taking the savings on warehouse and postage and keeping it for themselves.
Yes, but for $8 a month you can get access to the entire DVD catalog, so $8 for the streaming library which is tiny comparatively speaking is way too much money.
The main reason that my parents still have a satellite is sports. MLB sells their online package, but you can't see local market games on it until after the point where it's worth watching. The price is reasonable, but because it's only really useful for seeing out of market games, it's not something that somebody who likes the home team is likely to be able to get much use out of.
Personally, I don't really care, I rarely watch new programming and when I do, I'm willing to wait a week to see it online.
Precisely, commercial bandwidth is one of the few areas where capitalism seems to be working. The price has come down substantially over the last decade. If they can't afford to provide what Netflix needs, then they should raise the rates and build out the infrastructure.
Problem solved.
As anonymous said, there's reason to believe that there's active pump and dump activity going on. And there should be at least an investigation to determine the facts.
B&N stock is not a currency, it's an ownership stake in the business and has risks inherent in doing so. But, B&N also produces things that people value and is regulated, whereas BTC provides no added value and is completely unregulated.
As for your fiat currency argument there, bottom line is that it's predictable and relatively slow to happen. If you're planning on retiring next year, then yes most of that should be in cash and low risk securities. But, BTC which has had a 30% fluctuation over the last year is even riskier than a conservative stock portfolio.
As for the taxes, I'm not paid in Euros, I'm paid in USD which is the only legal tender guaranteed for use in the US to pay for debt. When I'm in China I get paid in RMB and generally am not required to pay tax in the US. My tax bill there is denominated in RMB. Or, it would be, but the employer pays the taxes for me before giving me my money.
What's more, there's enough use of both USD and RMB that even if I do have tax liabilities in the US that there's a thriving market for exchanging the two and the rates tend to be pretty consistent.
It's not a tie. You would just do like any sane person would and pay cash for those transactions. The silk road itself is just a black market and historically people use cash for those transactions.
What you're arguing there is semantics. It's got far more in common with a pyramid scheme than any other currency I've ever heard of.
It's not just as broken as BTC. The Federal Reserve has engaged in incompetent management over the last 30 or so odd years, but that can still be fixed. With BTC, there's nothing anybody can do to fix that, because the curve at which new BTC come into existence is defined and the maximum number is also defined. If they need more coins, because people are hoarding them, they can't create new ones. Whereas with USD, or any other paper currency, they can print more or print less, the fact that the current Federal Reserve is so incompetent as to think long term inflation is acceptable does not mean that somebody competent to run the reserve couldn't be appointed at some point.
I can't pay my taxes in BTC and even with that "relatively stable" 90-120 range you're still talking about a 30% fluctuation, which is both unpredictable and dangerous for people who are trying to use it for normal currency stuff.
As for overall confidence, there's a sucker born every minute, as long as there are suckers having confidence in it, it will remain, until such a time as it becomes so mind blowingly obvious that even the most idiotic supporter can't deny it.
In the long term it will deflate out of existence, I just hope that there are some criminal prosecutions for the folks that are boosting the currency for personal gain.
As Anubis said, it might mean that it's a regional term, or that it's slang of the day or that it was commonly used, but not typically in print. The OED itself is mostly composed of words that you don't typically encounter. If you typically encountered most of those words, you probably wouldn't need to look them up.
Even a more modest dictionary which only aims to contain the commonly used words is likely to have far more words than what a typical person is likely to come into contact with on a regular basis.
There are degrees of emotional stability. Most people are relatively stable, otherwise nothing would get done and we couldn't have a society. The folks that fit in well with society are generally not suitable for reality programming. It would be like going to a movie called "accounts: the motion picture" where they were actual accountants engaged in regular accounting practices. I shouldn't spoil it, but about halfway in, they find a misplaced comma and have to redo the numbers.
The unabridged OED is pretty much just for libraries and research institutions. It's not just a matter of price, previous to them coming up with an online edition, the books took up like 3m of shelf space. And many of the additional words in there are used once or twice in the entire body of known literature.
If it's not in the largest single book version of the OED, you're not likely to encounter a word that isn't in it. Now, if you do, then paying for the full unabridged version might make sense.
Yeah right, we can't even get the government to maintain the bridges, and you think they're going to convince the tax payers to fund something like this? Especially seeing as most of them are not going to directly benefit.
It was hard enough convincing people that we needed health care reform, and that's something that ultimately affects everybody who hasn't aged into medicare.
That's what backups are for. You're not going to memorize more than a dozen good passwords, and especially not if you're changing them regularly. I can back up my password database every day and then I don't have to worry about corruption or something else.
The only real downside to it is if my password to the database is stolen. But, then again, they would also have to steal the file itself and the 2nd factor to it.
Well, keep in mind that everybody demands a log in these days and often times just to view something that you might not want to ever use again. That's probably 15 or so years worth of accounts that I've created and many of them are probably no longer usable, but it's not really worth going back through all of them on a regular basis.
And under this scenario, who precisely pays to create these textbooks?
This kind of attitude is why people don't take geeks seriously. Somebody has to pay for the cost of writing these books. And yes, you could probably use a book from 80 or so odd years ago, but the way that it's presented is archaic and is going to lack the progress that we've made in terms of teaching math. It's unlikely to represent the practical applications that have become much more important in recent years.
But, ultimately, somebody at some point had to write those books, just because it's public domain now, doesn't mean that it's consequence free. If we only use public domain works, then that's all we're likely to ever have. Which means that no new work being created and placed into the public domain. For something like math which is relatively settled, that's not the worst thing ever, but for many other subjects things aren't as cut and dry.
Or just use something like keepass and give them all strong passwords. It's not like you're going to be remembering hundreds of passwords anyways. Last count I had over 400 log ins and little or no clue as to how many of them I actually will ever need to use again. For most people, even a dozen passwords is more than they can reliably remember.
Which is completely missing the point. Do you have any idea how expensive it would be for them to give away books with no time limits attached to them? I'm as opposed to DRM as anybody else, but this is one of the few instances where it makes any sense.
I'm not really sure where coursera would get the money to buy all those books or why the publishers should have to give them out for free.
These are free books during the class. You have the option of buying them for the class, but I'm curious where you're going to be able to buy them for less than $0.
Targeting a specific browser version in such a way that it can't be replaced easily, is badly broken code. At some point you're going to have to replace it and the only times I can think of it being worthwhile to not do it right are if you're going to just toss the code away.
If it's this important to the enterprise, then it is in fact badly broken code that can't be run on the next version of the browser without having to be rewritten from scratch. Employees don't care why the application is down, they care that it's down and at some point they're going to have to replace all these computers with ones that aren't supported by XP.
That's only true if the replacement is ready before the system fails and can't be fixed. Downtime can be extremely expensive, which is why I'm always so shocked that things like this are the way that they are. Perhaps they can extend it to 15 years, but by that time it's likely that the programmers that worked on it are going to be retired, and if you didn't pay them sufficiently to properly document the system and engineer the code, then you're in for some trouble.
The interest you can make by putting it off can easily be outweighed by the cost of a crash program to replace the software when you realize that you can't get the necessary hardware if any of it breaks.
The problem there is reliability and repairability. Yes, it might be working just fine right now. But, what happens if the RAM starts to go bad and nobody makes replacement RAM? Or processors, the 386sx was discontinued in 2005, and at some point those are going to be hard to find.
Bottom line here is that if you've got code that only runs on ancient hardware, you're asking to get bit, and hard, at an unpredictable moment. If the code is so important that you can't risk what happens with imperfect reimplementation, then that's a compelling reason to start doing that now, rather than waiting to discover that you can't buy a new HDD to replace that 20 year old piece of junk that's in the current computer.
If the software is that badly broken, you've got other very serious problems to deal with. At some point the upgrade is going to have to be made. Either MS stops releasing patches for it next year or the hardware that's available doesn't have drivers for XP.
The point is that IE 6 is ancient. It's 12 years old with the most recent stable release being about 5 years ago. This isn't something that just happened, there has been years for them to deal with that.
But,OTOH, let's put it off until next quarter and let them worry about it.
I've heard that before. And I'm going to have to go and see that for myself.
Even around here where the problem with drivers is primarily the opposite, it's no fun to drive. You get the occasional driver that's extremely aggressive, but for the most part folks are so passive that nothing moves. Driverless cars would go a long way towards solving that problem.
I imagine that it would also greatly improve traffic as you'd reduce the time it takes for the cars to get moving again at stop lights.