"The message was apparently written by Confido's founder, one Joost van Doorn, who seems to have no internet presence besides a now-removed LinkedIn profile."
Founder of internet-based currency, has no internet presence to speak of. Yeah, "Joost van Doorn" doesn't exist.
When people do so little due diligence or research, we can't really call it investing. People gave their money away. People can cry foul or whatever all they want. That money is gone.
We're really getting into the territory where it is legitimate to ask, how did people so gullible acquire anything of value in the first place?
OK. I stand corrected. That's pretty good for the folks using the service.
Though I don't know why I care one way or the other. I see a movie in the theater somewhere between 2 and 3 times per year. While you can get a fantastic average price per showing on admission with this program, it does nothing about people talking, light from cells phones, theaters that feel watching a movie should be like attending a sporting event where you have wait staff walking about during the action delivering food, etc.
This is as attractive to me as a program which would allow me to have a root canal every day for one low price.
If previous stories on this service are correct, the clock on your next movie starts when the previous movie ended, not when it began. In my mind, advertising the service as allowing you to see a movie per day means you could go at a 1 PM matinee showing every day. That's not how it's been explained to me.
How it does work is, if you go to a 1 PM showing that ends at 3, you can see your next movie starting at 3 the next day. Your next movie starting at 5, and so on, depending on the length of the movies.
So could you use the service to see 7 movies in a week? Perhaps. 14 movies in 2 weeks? Unlikely. A movie a day for a month? If the average movie length was under an hour. Basically, the time off between movies isn't 24 hours, it's 24 hours plus the length of the movie.
Also, your experiment to start a sentence in the subject and finish it in the comment isn't working.
On the less snarky side, what Letterman did was about half parody of a talk show host (in the same vein as Steve Martin's stage comedy was a parody of stand-up comedians) and about half homage to/theft of old Ernie Kovacs routines.
If you don't know who Ernie Kovacs is, then it's understandable that you might not get the joke.
Although computer use during class may create the illusion of enhanced engagement with course content, it more often reflects engagement with social media
Other than businesses wanting to sell more laptop computers or students wanting to surf the web during class, who ever claimed computer use during a lecture or seminar would enhance engagement with course content?
What fanatical point? In response to someone saying they weren't aware of Trump saying anything racist, I referred to a racist thing Trump said.
It's not moving the post, and it's not a red herring. I didn't say everyone who voted for Trump is a racist. I will say everyone who voted for Trump should have been aware of the racist things he said. It's not as if there was any lack of media coverage for Trump during the campaign.
So supposedly some survey says Americans support municipal broadband. And then those Americans go out and elect politicians who outlaw municipal broadband.
Surveys say Americans support a higher minimum wage. And then those Americans go out and elect politicians who will fight any minimum wage increase.
Surveys say Americans support the individual aspects of the Affordable Care Act (when asked about the actual policies and not just about "Obamacare"). And then those Americans go out and elect politicians who will repeal the ACA.
Surveys says Americans value clean air and water. And then those Americans go out and elect politicians who will defund and eventually destroy the EPA.
Either these surveys are full of shit, or Americans are.
I'm guess the truth lie somewhere in "all of the above" territory.
Any old 8 or 16-bit software from decades past, if we have any of that software around today, it still works. And all we'd need to run it was the appropriate hardware.
Software you buy today, might not work in 6 months. It almost certainly, like 99.99% certain, won't work in decades. And if it even works today as you buy it, it only works when it can connect to some authorizing server. So we have no idea, literally no idea what is required for current software to run. You have the software, the hardware, an internet connection, and some mysterious something out there on the other end of the wire.
Water will stay clean, air will stay fresh, fewer industries will be crushed by pointless over-regulation
Your view is very short sighted, and quite frankly, contraindicated by reality.
The EPA and regulations like the Clean Water Act didn't just spring forth from some left-wing conspiracy. They were developed in response to real problems. Maybe people forget blankets of smog over major cities, trash lining major roads, rivers catching fire. The things we're talking about here are not luxuries, are not options. Air to breathe and water to drink are basic necessities.
Sometimes solutions outlive the problems they are intended to address and should be removed, but there's no reason to expect that to be true here. We continue to see people make short-sided decisions. I'd say "over-regulation" is a statement of opinion, I'm not going to argue your opinion, but "pointless" is a statement of fact, and you have your facts wrong.
As an analogy, it's easy to think vaccines are unnecessary or not worth their risk because, hey, when's the last time you saw someone with polio or small pox? But it's precisely that vaccines are so effective that you don't see those things.
So sure, we have for the most part air we can breath and water we can drink, but it's because of the EPA. And when the EPA goes away, so will those things.
Slashdot Mirror
"The message was apparently written by Confido's founder, one Joost van Doorn, who seems to have no internet presence besides a now-removed LinkedIn profile."
Founder of internet-based currency, has no internet presence to speak of. Yeah, "Joost van Doorn" doesn't exist.
When people do so little due diligence or research, we can't really call it investing. People gave their money away. People can cry foul or whatever all they want. That money is gone.
We're really getting into the territory where it is legitimate to ask, how did people so gullible acquire anything of value in the first place?
OK. I stand corrected. That's pretty good for the folks using the service.
Though I don't know why I care one way or the other. I see a movie in the theater somewhere between 2 and 3 times per year. While you can get a fantastic average price per showing on admission with this program, it does nothing about people talking, light from cells phones, theaters that feel watching a movie should be like attending a sporting event where you have wait staff walking about during the action delivering food, etc.
This is as attractive to me as a program which would allow me to have a root canal every day for one low price.
If previous stories on this service are correct, the clock on your next movie starts when the previous movie ended, not when it began. In my mind, advertising the service as allowing you to see a movie per day means you could go at a 1 PM matinee showing every day. That's not how it's been explained to me.
How it does work is, if you go to a 1 PM showing that ends at 3, you can see your next movie starting at 3 the next day. Your next movie starting at 5, and so on, depending on the length of the movies.
So could you use the service to see 7 movies in a week? Perhaps. 14 movies in 2 weeks? Unlikely. A movie a day for a month? If the average movie length was under an hour. Basically, the time off between movies isn't 24 hours, it's 24 hours plus the length of the movie.
The service also doesn't allow you to see a movie a day. But why get caught up on facts now?
SSIA.
Because your "smart tv" was never connected to the network.
What's that? You gave your TV network access?
OK, then you get ads. Sucker.
I'd mod you up, but I already posted in this thread. :(
Only users with 4 digit IDs should be allowed to post in this thread.
There are many large private companies that could in no way be considered start-ups.
Is Mars (the candy people) considered a start-up? Bechtel? LEGO?
PitchBook doesn't seem to state their criteria for a "startup" (and I looked), but it seems whatever measure they use is off.
They cut her internet access. Than sent her an email about it.
These are the folks developing cars that drive themselves.
Who never found Letterman funny?
Yes.
Also, your experiment to start a sentence in the subject and finish it in the comment isn't working.
On the less snarky side, what Letterman did was about half parody of a talk show host (in the same vein as Steve Martin's stage comedy was a parody of stand-up comedians) and about half homage to/theft of old Ernie Kovacs routines.
If you don't know who Ernie Kovacs is, then it's understandable that you might not get the joke.
Drove from New York to Texas (1500 miles) without GPS.
I died.
Bright side is I didn't have to live to see the day Popular Mechanics would print crap like TFA.
Although computer use during class may create the illusion of enhanced engagement with course content, it more often reflects engagement with social media
Other than businesses wanting to sell more laptop computers or students wanting to surf the web during class, who ever claimed computer use during a lecture or seminar would enhance engagement with course content?
hindsight is 20/20
Well, yeah. We know that now.
With hookers and black jack.
Actually, forget the cryptocurrency.
I hated all of you before social media.
If pressed, RRA, you'd have a very hard time supporting those statements.
Now if you had said gushing torrent instead of drip-drip-drip, played back at double speed, you'd be on to something.
What fanatical point? In response to someone saying they weren't aware of Trump saying anything racist, I referred to a racist thing Trump said.
It's not moving the post, and it's not a red herring. I didn't say everyone who voted for Trump is a racist. I will say everyone who voted for Trump should have been aware of the racist things he said. It's not as if there was any lack of media coverage for Trump during the campaign.
But I don't consider myself racist, and I'm not quite sure the major racist things Trump has said or promotes.
That you don't consider it racist when Trump questions a judge's qualifications and ability based on that judge's ancestry says a lot about you.
So supposedly some survey says Americans support municipal broadband. And then those Americans go out and elect politicians who outlaw municipal broadband.
Surveys say Americans support a higher minimum wage. And then those Americans go out and elect politicians who will fight any minimum wage increase.
Surveys say Americans support the individual aspects of the Affordable Care Act (when asked about the actual policies and not just about "Obamacare"). And then those Americans go out and elect politicians who will repeal the ACA.
Surveys says Americans value clean air and water. And then those Americans go out and elect politicians who will defund and eventually destroy the EPA.
Either these surveys are full of shit, or Americans are.
I'm guess the truth lie somewhere in "all of the above" territory.
Company accused of bias claims there is no bias. No one got "schooled."
Any old 8 or 16-bit software from decades past, if we have any of that software around today, it still works. And all we'd need to run it was the appropriate hardware.
Software you buy today, might not work in 6 months. It almost certainly, like 99.99% certain, won't work in decades. And if it even works today as you buy it, it only works when it can connect to some authorizing server. So we have no idea, literally no idea what is required for current software to run. You have the software, the hardware, an internet connection, and some mysterious something out there on the other end of the wire.
So what do I miss? I miss software that works.
You get all my mod points.
Which unfortunately today is zero.
No one was arrested because they sent a picture someone didn't like.
If the facts as reported are true, there was real intent and possibility of injury.
Water will stay clean, air will stay fresh, fewer industries will be crushed by pointless over-regulation
Your view is very short sighted, and quite frankly, contraindicated by reality.
The EPA and regulations like the Clean Water Act didn't just spring forth from some left-wing conspiracy. They were developed in response to real problems. Maybe people forget blankets of smog over major cities, trash lining major roads, rivers catching fire. The things we're talking about here are not luxuries, are not options. Air to breathe and water to drink are basic necessities.
Sometimes solutions outlive the problems they are intended to address and should be removed, but there's no reason to expect that to be true here. We continue to see people make short-sided decisions. I'd say "over-regulation" is a statement of opinion, I'm not going to argue your opinion, but "pointless" is a statement of fact, and you have your facts wrong.
As an analogy, it's easy to think vaccines are unnecessary or not worth their risk because, hey, when's the last time you saw someone with polio or small pox? But it's precisely that vaccines are so effective that you don't see those things.
So sure, we have for the most part air we can breath and water we can drink, but it's because of the EPA. And when the EPA goes away, so will those things.