Luckily for them The Bible isn't scientific so they won't have to teach the weaknesses in that.
If only it was that simple. Fact is, SADLY for the students, those who promote these nonsensical laws do so because they believe the Bible is incontrovertable fact, and thus supersedes science, and thus should be taught. "If it's greater than fact and science, we should permit it to be treated as science or better-than-science and teach these myths instead"
This has always been the gist of these proposed laws, regardless of how they are worded. Each new attempt though, seems to try even harder to hide the religious biases and religion-as-science aspects of the proposed laws so they do not get shot down on the basis of those exact same reasons (promoting/teaching religion or religion-as-science).
I don't see anything sleazy or underhanded about using publicly-available information to improve your product.
Besides, it's not as if Google hasn't completely ripped-off Bing's image search... mud slings both ways.
BRAND... to improve Microsoft's BRAND. Not their product. Their product is an innovative, better, search and decision engine (or so they claim) and based on their press releases and statements about it, that's based on their "superior" ranking, rating and decision making engine. That *product* isn't improved by it, even if the results are improved. Thus, the BRAND is improved by having more relevant results by "borrowing" those results from Google, while the *PRODUCT* is showing to be enough of a failure at it that they have to monitor Google's results and what users find relevant there.
Remember, Microsoft never announced a "we'll provide you the most relevant Google results based on Google users searches" product. Their product, the search engine and algorithm behind it is something else entirely and what they have been promoting.
THAT is the big difference. There have been (and still are) a bunch of sites that use other search engines' results and determine relevancy based off those results. BUT, the big difference is they claim that is exactly what they are doing, while Microsoft's statements have been more in line with how great their search engine, and the back end code, algorithms and "decision engine" is. Apparently, the thing it's really good at is deciding to use Google for it's searches. Ironic, huh?
All the stipulations in the Google study show that Bing's not simply "Powered by Google". If they were simply copying directly, that would have been just as simple to check and Google would have released THAT as its story. Given their results and methodology, the Bing Bar's search analysis could just be associating visited pages with recently typed text or something like that, which would be totally Google-agnostic.
Ummm, go and RTFA. That IS a big part of the story... right to Bing copying the exact same web snippets from the Google results - or did you think that Bing only found the page the user was interested in (via BingBar or whatever) and stopped there? Or did you not notice that Bing also copied Google's search result, snippet and all?
Let's take a look at your bad car-analogy-response-via-another-car-analogy.
Ford own's a decent stake in Mazda and they cross develop products and share in research on various projects.*
Microsoft owns... oh, wait, they don't own a big chunk of Google. Nevermind.;-)
*Starting in 1979 with a 7-percent financial stake, Ford began a partnership with Mazda resulting in various joint projects. During the 1980s, Ford gained another 20-percent financial stake. These included large and small efforts in all areas of the automotive landscape. This was most notable in the realm of pickup trucks (like the Mazda B-Series, which spawned a Ford Courier variant in North America) and smaller cars. For instance, Mazda's Familia platform was used for Ford models like the Laser and Escort, while the Capella architecture found its way into Ford's Telstar sedan and Probe sports models. In 2002 Ford gained an extra 5-percent financial stake.
As I have pointed out elsewhere in the thread. Google gamed the Bing toolbar by having their monitored users actually click on the these fake results! This could easily be attributed to Bing Toolbar monitoring user behavior, instead of Bing using ranking information from Google.
I have noticed that whoever brings up 'fanboi' is usually the real 'fanboi'. Perhaps that should be a new internet meme.
You forgot one MAJOR point. The WHOLESALE copying of the result itself, right down to the exact duplicate web page snippets. User behavior does not account for that. So... guess that makes you either lacking in comprehension, or... a fanboi. I will let you pick.;-)
The article says that poorly deployed firewalls and IPS systems create a single point of failure.
So do poorly deployed network cables, or poorly deployed almost anything that hosts rely on to handle all their traffic (power solutions, switches, etc). By the definition of what a firewall is supposed to accomplish, a poorly deployed one obviously creates a lot of problems or provides little protection.
Which is why I just looked into buying stock in the various rental companies that have large presences in California.
Yeah because this is going to affect their bottom line more than a handful of people saying "yes" to the loss damage waiver on the spur of the moment...
Let me rephrase my post for you...
Which is why I just looked into buying stock in the various rental companies that have large presences in California.;-)
Or perhaps I should have ended it with [/endhumorattempt]?:-)
They're going to *mail* bills? Seriously? So, those that haven't got a FasTrac basically get across the bridge for free... A lot of the time anyway.
If by "for free" you mean "your right to drive is suspended until you pay these tolls plus late fees, service charges, etc" then yes, they get to go across the bridge for free. At least that is how it works in this state - even for one toll you're mail-billed for and forget to pay on time.
You need to eliminate the 5-minute backup at the toll booth, and thereby save yourself ~2000 hours over a lifetime. You don't need the human face, just as you don't need an operator asking, "Number please?" on the telephone.
I always call the operator for that personal touch.
Number please?
Operator, please connect me to Bensonhurst 0-7741.
Oh, it's tremendous fun to go through an automated toll with a rental car. First the toll authority sends a bill for $1 to the rental company. Then the rental company charges your card (that's still in their system) for $15 based on the fine print in the rental agreement. A run through a lengthy toll road with five or six toll monitors results in individual bills for each one and can get you a bill from the rental company for a hundred or more.
Which is why I just looked into buying stock in the various rental companies that have large presences in California.
In a lot of places it is also a highly unionized job. They can't be fired and often can't be bothered to do their job. It makes a slow process of driving through a toll booth even more painful when you have to wait for someone to get off their phone call to bother with your fare.
I am pretty sure it's unionized here too (at least in the NYC Metro Area where I live). But, ironically, some of the nicest and friendliest people I have met have been toll collectors. Whether it's because I needed quick directions, or they simply took the time to smile, say hi and wish me a good morning, that has generally been my experience. Combine that with the fact that we are talking the NYC area, where being miserable and treating other people like dirt is every New Yorker's God given right, and their (friendly) attitudes are actually pretty impressive.
waiting on the whooshes directed at some of the responses I am sure I am going to get...;-)
For everyone who loves the toll collectors, I bet there are hundreds who hate them.
Why? What have they done. Or is it because they are the minions of the people who put the rules in place? In that case, is it OK to hate the military people for doing the same?
Because then I am confused, because I admire what they do but hat why they do it.
First, when since does anyone need a rational reason to hate someone else? I am not saying that's right - but it is sadly the way this reality of human existence works. That aside, (and to the irrational), there are people who take out their frustration on those they idiotically think are responsible for such. So, waiting on line for minutes to pay a toll, and the toll collector becomes the target of the person's ire - kinda like shooting the messenger. It does not make sense, but it does happen.
One should never judge how someone else is going to act by attaching rationality to the incident. Not in such an irrational world filled with so many irrational people. Heck, look at the people who loved Microsoft BoB and Windows ME...;-)
Even the threshold slider is broken. The editing AND programming done by this site appears to be done by those with no more than a two-year community college degree. How STUPID can you people be to release something that is broken for most of the users? How is this supposed to be better? Please, enlighten me. Is it better because it looks new? Because you decided to surprise everyone? Come on. Enlighten me.
--TSP
That's funny, the slider works fine for me. AND the site is a LOT faster than the previous nightmare (and more streamlined).
Taken literally, "I could care less" does mean you at least care a little bit right now. See this continuum of caring I found.
Although "I couldn't care less" is the original form, "I could care less" is classic American sarcasm - a positive phrase meant negatively. I wouldn't consider it any more "wrong" than phrases like "Lucky you!" (said to someone suffering misfortune), or "Tell me about it!" (said when you've heard it all before and really don't want to be told all about it.)
Not that different from George Bush, really. Except that Pres. Bush would plow ahead and build bizarre grammatical constructs, while Pres. Obama just stops and continues repeating his word until he decides what to say next. The result is generally a more grammatically-correct sentence, but it doesn't make him sound any smarter while he's doing it.
Except for one point I'd like to make... at least, once Obama is done, whether you agree with what he said or not, he makes sense. Half the time, by the time Bush is finished with his "bizarre grammatical constructs", he's making no sense. One can speculate what he means, but honestly, I usually have no clue, and worse yet, I dont think he does either.
Are YOU thick? That takes you to a page that tells you that you should, then sends you to the Frigidaire STORE to buy one.
Now, go back to the Google results. Click the second (at least for me) link, which will take you to a page where you can view/download the INSTRUCTIONS on how to change one. Wow! Right there!
Remember, the question wasn't "where do I buy..." or "should I change..." - it was "HOW DO YOU CHANGE"...
For some reason, they gave Bing 7 points for that query.
But the first result merely regurgitates the question, then has an ad link for Fixya.com.
The answer is interestingly in the second link on google, which returns the Frididaire product page with a "Guides/Manuals" tab to download/view the ACTUAL manufacturer instructions.
Slashdot Mirror
Dunno why it posted anonymously earlier... and then didn't show up again till I resubmitted it.
Luckily for them The Bible isn't scientific so they won't have to teach the weaknesses in that.
If only it was that simple. Fact is, SADLY for the students, those who promote these nonsensical laws do so because they believe the Bible is incontrovertable fact, and thus supersedes science, and thus should be taught. "If it's greater than fact and science, we should permit it to be treated as science or better-than-science and teach these myths instead"
This has always been the gist of these proposed laws, regardless of how they are worded. Each new attempt though, seems to try even harder to hide the religious biases and religion-as-science aspects of the proposed laws so they do not get shot down on the basis of those exact same reasons (promoting/teaching religion or religion-as-science).
How so?
I don't see anything sleazy or underhanded about using publicly-available information to improve your product.
Besides, it's not as if Google hasn't completely ripped-off Bing's image search... mud slings both ways.
BRAND... to improve Microsoft's BRAND. Not their product. Their product is an innovative, better, search and decision engine (or so they claim) and based on their press releases and statements about it, that's based on their "superior" ranking, rating and decision making engine. That *product* isn't improved by it, even if the results are improved. Thus, the BRAND is improved by having more relevant results by "borrowing" those results from Google, while the *PRODUCT* is showing to be enough of a failure at it that they have to monitor Google's results and what users find relevant there.
Remember, Microsoft never announced a "we'll provide you the most relevant Google results based on Google users searches" product. Their product, the search engine and algorithm behind it is something else entirely and what they have been promoting.
THAT is the big difference. There have been (and still are) a bunch of sites that use other search engines' results and determine relevancy based off those results. BUT, the big difference is they claim that is exactly what they are doing, while Microsoft's statements have been more in line with how great their search engine, and the back end code, algorithms and "decision engine" is. Apparently, the thing it's really good at is deciding to use Google for it's searches. Ironic, huh?
All the stipulations in the Google study show that Bing's not simply "Powered by Google". If they were simply copying directly, that would have been just as simple to check and Google would have released THAT as its story. Given their results and methodology, the Bing Bar's search analysis could just be associating visited pages with recently typed text or something like that, which would be totally Google-agnostic .
Ummm, go and RTFA. That IS a big part of the story... right to Bing copying the exact same web snippets from the Google results - or did you think that Bing only found the page the user was interested in (via BingBar or whatever) and stopped there? Or did you not notice that Bing also copied Google's search result, snippet and all?
Don't they already do this with Mazda parts?
Let's take a look at your bad car-analogy-response-via-another-car-analogy.
Ford own's a decent stake in Mazda and they cross develop products and share in research on various projects.*
Microsoft owns... oh, wait, they don't own a big chunk of Google. Nevermind. ;-)
*Starting in 1979 with a 7-percent financial stake, Ford began a partnership with Mazda resulting in various joint projects. During the 1980s, Ford gained another 20-percent financial stake. These included large and small efforts in all areas of the automotive landscape. This was most notable in the realm of pickup trucks (like the Mazda B-Series, which spawned a Ford Courier variant in North America) and smaller cars. For instance, Mazda's Familia platform was used for Ford models like the Laser and Escort, while the Capella architecture found its way into Ford's Telstar sedan and Probe sports models. In 2002 Ford gained an extra 5-percent financial stake.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda#Partnership_with_Ford_Motor_Company
Hi FANBOI!!!!
As I have pointed out elsewhere in the thread. Google gamed the Bing toolbar by having their monitored users actually click on the these fake results! This could easily be attributed to Bing Toolbar monitoring user behavior, instead of Bing using ranking information from Google.
I have noticed that whoever brings up 'fanboi' is usually the real 'fanboi'. Perhaps that should be a new internet meme.
You forgot one MAJOR point. The WHOLESALE copying of the result itself, right down to the exact duplicate web page snippets. User behavior does not account for that. So... guess that makes you either lacking in comprehension, or... a fanboi. I will let you pick. ;-)
The article says that poorly deployed firewalls and IPS systems create a single point of failure.
So do poorly deployed network cables, or poorly deployed almost anything that hosts rely on to handle all their traffic (power solutions, switches, etc). By the definition of what a firewall is supposed to accomplish, a poorly deployed one obviously creates a lot of problems or provides little protection.
Also, water is wet.
Yeah because this is going to affect their bottom line more than a handful of people saying "yes" to the loss damage waiver on the spur of the moment...
Let me rephrase my post for you...
Which is why I just looked into buying stock in the various rental companies that have large presences in California. ;-)
Or perhaps I should have ended it with [/endhumorattempt]? :-)
They're going to *mail* bills? Seriously? So, those that haven't got a FasTrac basically get across the bridge for free... A lot of the time anyway.
If by "for free" you mean "your right to drive is suspended until you pay these tolls plus late fees, service charges, etc" then yes, they get to go across the bridge for free. At least that is how it works in this state - even for one toll you're mail-billed for and forget to pay on time.
No you don't.
You need to eliminate the 5-minute backup at the toll booth, and thereby save yourself ~2000 hours over a lifetime. You don't need the human face, just as you don't need an operator asking, "Number please?" on the telephone.
I always call the operator for that personal touch.
Number please?
Operator, please connect me to Bensonhurst 0-7741.
Oh, it's tremendous fun to go through an automated toll with a rental car. First the toll authority sends a bill for $1 to the rental company. Then the rental company charges your card (that's still in their system) for $15 based on the fine print in the rental agreement. A run through a lengthy toll road with five or six toll monitors results in individual bills for each one and can get you a bill from the rental company for a hundred or more.
Which is why I just looked into buying stock in the various rental companies that have large presences in California.
In a lot of places it is also a highly unionized job. They can't be fired and often can't be bothered to do their job. It makes a slow process of driving through a toll booth even more painful when you have to wait for someone to get off their phone call to bother with your fare.
I am pretty sure it's unionized here too (at least in the NYC Metro Area where I live). But, ironically, some of the nicest and friendliest people I have met have been toll collectors. Whether it's because I needed quick directions, or they simply took the time to smile, say hi and wish me a good morning, that has generally been my experience. Combine that with the fact that we are talking the NYC area, where being miserable and treating other people like dirt is every New Yorker's God given right, and their (friendly) attitudes are actually pretty impressive.
waiting on the whooshes directed at some of the responses I am sure I am going to get... ;-)
Why? What have they done. Or is it because they are the minions of the people who put the rules in place? In that case, is it OK to hate the military people for doing the same?
Because then I am confused, because I admire what they do but hat why they do it.
First, when since does anyone need a rational reason to hate someone else? I am not saying that's right - but it is sadly the way this reality of human existence works. That aside, (and to the irrational), there are people who take out their frustration on those they idiotically think are responsible for such. So, waiting on line for minutes to pay a toll, and the toll collector becomes the target of the person's ire - kinda like shooting the messenger. It does not make sense, but it does happen.
One should never judge how someone else is going to act by attaching rationality to the incident. Not in such an irrational world filled with so many irrational people. Heck, look at the people who loved Microsoft BoB and Windows ME... ;-)
cant wait until this shit is hacked, then that guy riding my bumper will get whats coming to him.
Why? That's retarded. It's not like the stuff in Ford cars runs Windows....
Hey, I thought it was funny...
Even the threshold slider is broken. The editing AND programming done by this site appears to be done by those with no more than a two-year community college degree. How STUPID can you people be to release something that is broken for most of the users? How is this supposed to be better? Please, enlighten me. Is it better because it looks new? Because you decided to surprise everyone? Come on. Enlighten me. --TSP
That's funny, the slider works fine for me. AND the site is a LOT faster than the previous nightmare (and more streamlined).
What I find more funny is that numerous articles on WP7 all seem to have to have this in it (in some form or another):
Windows Phone 7 was launched in October 2010 to acclaim by manufacturers and users.
It is considered the company's first credible challenge to rival operating systems from Apple, Google, Research in Motion and Nokia.
I wonder how much that costs Microsoft to ensure articles end like that?
Take a look at this.
Apparently the extra columns can be used to the effect of doing "more" than store data. A link in the article...
Not sure what that last word means....
In all seriousness, I'm horrified to see the potential abuses people will come up with for this.
"Still using MySQL? Man, you need to check out Cassandra! MySQL kept clashing with my every-user-gets-their-own-column architecture..."
Wow, that is sloppy. I give each of my users their own table.
How could that possibly be true, MS Access only supports 255 columns.
And now you understand why Cassandra is so important! :-)
My main question here is: why is Microsoft filing for these patents?
WOW! This is the most idiotic question EVER!!!!!
Who in the world has more experience in creating bugs?!?!?!?! Exactly!!!!
Taken literally, "I could care less" does mean you at least care a little bit right now. See this continuum of caring I found.
Although "I couldn't care less" is the original form, "I could care less" is classic American sarcasm - a positive phrase meant negatively. I wouldn't consider it any more "wrong" than phrases like "Lucky you!" (said to someone suffering misfortune), or "Tell me about it!" (said when you've heard it all before and really don't want to be told all about it.)
This page was also interesting.
Yup! Tell me about it!
Not that different from George Bush, really. Except that Pres. Bush would plow ahead and build bizarre grammatical constructs, while Pres. Obama just stops and continues repeating his word until he decides what to say next. The result is generally a more grammatically-correct sentence, but it doesn't make him sound any smarter while he's doing it.
Except for one point I'd like to make... at least, once Obama is done, whether you agree with what he said or not, he makes sense. Half the time, by the time Bush is finished with his "bizarre grammatical constructs", he's making no sense. One can speculate what he means, but honestly, I usually have no clue, and worse yet, I dont think he does either.
I get strange looks when I tell someone I Binged myself.
I think I found that video online the other day... that was pretty impressive!
Are you thick? The first result on Bing for that very query is http://www.frigidaire.com/waterandairfilters
Are YOU thick? That takes you to a page that tells you that you should, then sends you to the Frigidaire STORE to buy one.
Now, go back to the Google results. Click the second (at least for me) link, which will take you to a page where you can view/download the INSTRUCTIONS on how to change one. Wow! Right there!
Remember, the question wasn't "where do I buy..." or "should I change..." - it was "HOW DO YOU CHANGE"...
But I still don't know how to change the water filter on a Frigidaire Professional Series.
For some reason, they gave Bing 7 points for that query.
But the first result merely regurgitates the question, then has an ad link for Fixya.com.
The answer is interestingly in the second link on google, which returns the Frididaire product page with a "Guides/Manuals" tab to download/view the ACTUAL manufacturer instructions.