While on a much smaller scale, look at what the Israeli's do. A very well trained security person looks deeply into your eyes and questions you.
But the question is, do we even need to do that? What exactly are we afraid of? We don't do that for buses, for trains, for boats. We don't do it for the mall, for schools, and the only reason there is any security at sporting events is to make sure people don't bring in illicit food.
Really WHY do we need security on the planes?
Why do we need to split the airspace in two? The odds of a plane falling out of the sky due to some sort of malfunction is the going to the same in both groups.
Probably what is much more likely, is someone is sick will sneeze into their hand. Then grab the bill and hand it to the teller. The teller will grab the bill and hand it to the investigator. The investigator will run it through a machine, to verify the QR code or whatever is on the bill. Meanwhile the teller will talk to other tellers, and before you know it the whole bank is infected with the latest strain of the flu. Meanwhile the computers will still be humming along wondering why easily counterfeited QR codes are being used to prevent counterfeiting,
. And who gives a shit what connector it is as long as the device comes with a cable and I can get a replacement if necessary?
You'll give a shit, when you go spend $50 for your replacement proprietary connector. While everyone else is only spending $6.
Or maybe you'll give a shit when you are on vacation, lose your cord, and can't power it, or do whatever. While your friend has a perfectly good cable you can't use.
This is probably the coolest thing to come out of everyone else standardizing on miniusb for power.
What is there to "line up"? It goes in one way, and one way only (without a hammer)
IF it only goes in one way... you have to line it up!
An rca plug you don't have to line up. A mini usb adapter? It has to be lined up. It is much easier than some other plugs, but it isn't as simple as an rca plug.
Plugging it in is no bigger a deal than laying it on a charging pad.
That may be true, but do you know how many times I've forgotten to plug my phone in to charge it? Lots. How many times have I forgot to set the phone down? Not very many.
Could we have the equivalent of "a desktop" and "one-and-a-half football fields" in a more scientific unit? I'm not American enough to remember how big a "football field" is.
What does a "football field" have to do with America? Yes an American Football field size isn't the same as the rest of the world Football field... But it is close enough for this article.
How does one preemptively swindle something?
Amazon doesn't have to sell every book that is tossed its way. And yet people can still release their books, and others can still read them on the kindle.
Who is being swindled here?
Yet they allow sales of works in the public domain such as Frankenstein, Alice in Wonderland, etc.,
Of course, because the works are in public domain. You can sale them.
Amazon is questioning the content of the book, and claiming the author doesn't have the proper documentation to prove he has a right to republish the content, or that the content is in public domain.
How hard is that to understand?
I believe that Amazon selling eBooks for less than they pay publishers to drive out competition is more monopolistic bullshit behavior than not providing discounts.
Where do you get that Amazon is selling eBooks for less than they pay publishers?
You mean the fat middlemen publishers who live off the writers and provide little value to the consumer?
As long as the publishers are still editing the manuscripts, fact checking, and formatting them correctly, and advertising for the authors, then I say they are adding a lot of value for the consumer.
I'm not following your argument. Are you suggesting that the only way book retailers and publishers are staying in business today, because of artificially high prices?
How will the publishers lose money? If anything they should gain money. The publishers should still be selling the book to Amazon at the same price as before. BUT now Amazon can sell it at whatever price they want. If Amazon sells it for less, they might sell more and the publishers make more,
Yes book retailers might be hurt. But they were going to get hurt anyways, as ebook readers garner a larger and larger share of the market.
That's an example of the FBI doing their job and following up on possible leads.
Huh? Following up possible leads on what? Of course I don't know what was reported, perhaps the apartment manager claimed the person was building a bomb or something. But if the apartment manager told the truth, then the FBI should have been "like whatever" and hung up.
If the apartment manager lied, then that is another issue. Of course he probably lied due to all the media fear mongering.
No? Then the system of checks and balances still works.
Sure, except in this case, the checks and balances shouldn't have been needed to work. Why is it that ordering something from Aircraft Spruce & Specialty is suspicious? Why should the FBI even bother to check investigate?
at least 180 out of 202 "fiberhoods" have already qualified for its service
In just six weeks, nearly 90 percent of eligible neighborhoods around Kansas City have signed up for Google Fiber.
How is "qualified" == "signed up?"
The article goes on to say that it is still processing verification requests. So, how does this mean the neighborhoods have signed up? Looks to me like 202 signed up, and so far only 180 have been verified. The article goes on to say, some won't qualify, and they'll have to qualify again next year.
Could they have been a bit more clear?
I don't know if you and she know this but Google isn't hosting the content.
I don't know if you know this, but Google IS hosting the content.
Google keeps track of what other people are searching. When someone else starts typing into the search box, Google will automatch it to other popular search terms that Google is hosting.
Try blaming google less and consider it a cheap reminder to not let the tablet babysit your children.
Wow... how is this letting the tablet "babsit" your children?
Perhaps I am sitting there watching my child play a game? The game pops up and says "Do you want to build the next floor for 10 bucks?" My child asks me, I look at the screen, and notice it is 10 pretend bucks. So I tell my child, yes. Then a few minutes later it says "Do you want to build the next floor for $100?" Again he asks, I say yes. It says "You don't have enough bucks, do you want to put $1000 for $10?" And he says yes...
Is it my fault for not understanding the difference between pretend money and real money? Is it my fault for not watching every little button he pushes?
Letting a kid sit there and play with a tablet, is not letting the tablet babysit your child.
It is difficult enough for me to understand when I am using pretend money in the game, versus real money to buy stuff in the game. And you expect kids to know, or parents to watch their kids to know?
I'm glad I'm not your child.
It's something that only the very young, very poor, or very bored will do, and as such, it's a) not going to get a representative segment of the market, and b) going to turn away a lot of your visitors. People tried this back in the 90s and nobody was interested.
Depends on your definition of "very young." Id argue that in this case "very young" is pretty much anyone who grew up with the internet, probably 25 or less. While this is not a representative segment of "the" market (which market?) It does represent one of the marketers wet dreams (12 - 24 year olds) and a good chunk of the discretionary income. Not to mention that this "very young" will grow older with time. That is, most of the people who will freely give this information today, will also freely give it 10 or 20 years from now.
In the past surveys and focus groups were done in the malls and people were actually paid to answer the questions. Personally I'd trust those answers a lot more. But if you get to the point where it is easy to answer the questions, and answering the question gets you something you are trying to get... Well I think the answers will be less accurate.
A person is not a source by Wikipedia standards nor should they be. How do you link to a person? Where's the more or less permanent reference to that person's claims? The problem was solved by the author writing something down in a reliable place and hence, creating a source.
Ok, but where was the source for the original article?
is why aren't there antitrust proceedings against Amazon? They have a monopoly on ebooks, although I will admit that they earned legitimately. But you can only read those ebooks on a Kindle.
Amazon does NOT have a monopoly on ebooks (Barnes and Noble, and Apple, will disagree with you.)
But you can read those kindle books on any kindle device, or other device that has a free kindle app. I can read them on my windows machine, my iPad and my Samsung Android phone. So how are they leveraging a nonexistent monopoly?
Slashdot Mirror
While on a much smaller scale, look at what the Israeli's do. A very well trained security person looks deeply into your eyes and questions you.
But the question is, do we even need to do that? What exactly are we afraid of? We don't do that for buses, for trains, for boats. We don't do it for the mall, for schools, and the only reason there is any security at sporting events is to make sure people don't bring in illicit food.
Really WHY do we need security on the planes?
Why do we need to split the airspace in two? The odds of a plane falling out of the sky due to some sort of malfunction is the going to the same in both groups.
Probably what is much more likely, is someone is sick will sneeze into their hand. Then grab the bill and hand it to the teller. The teller will grab the bill and hand it to the investigator. The investigator will run it through a machine, to verify the QR code or whatever is on the bill. Meanwhile the teller will talk to other tellers, and before you know it the whole bank is infected with the latest strain of the flu. Meanwhile the computers will still be humming along wondering why easily counterfeited QR codes are being used to prevent counterfeiting,
. And who gives a shit what connector it is as long as the device comes with a cable and I can get a replacement if necessary?
You'll give a shit, when you go spend $50 for your replacement proprietary connector. While everyone else is only spending $6.
Or maybe you'll give a shit when you are on vacation, lose your cord, and can't power it, or do whatever. While your friend has a perfectly good cable you can't use.
This is probably the coolest thing to come out of everyone else standardizing on miniusb for power.
What is there to "line up"? It goes in one way, and one way only (without a hammer)
IF it only goes in one way... you have to line it up! An rca plug you don't have to line up. A mini usb adapter? It has to be lined up. It is much easier than some other plugs, but it isn't as simple as an rca plug.
Plugging it in is no bigger a deal than laying it on a charging pad.
That may be true, but do you know how many times I've forgotten to plug my phone in to charge it? Lots. How many times have I forgot to set the phone down? Not very many.
Could we have the equivalent of "a desktop" and "one-and-a-half football fields" in a more scientific unit? I'm not American enough to remember how big a "football field" is.
What does a "football field" have to do with America? Yes an American Football field size isn't the same as the rest of the world Football field... But it is close enough for this article.
How does one preemptively swindle something?
Amazon doesn't have to sell every book that is tossed its way. And yet people can still release their books, and others can still read them on the kindle.
Who is being swindled here?
Yet they allow sales of works in the public domain such as Frankenstein, Alice in Wonderland, etc.,
Of course, because the works are in public domain. You can sale them.
Amazon is questioning the content of the book, and claiming the author doesn't have the proper documentation to prove he has a right to republish the content, or that the content is in public domain.
How hard is that to understand?
I believe that Amazon selling eBooks for less than they pay publishers to drive out competition is more monopolistic bullshit behavior than not providing discounts.
Where do you get that Amazon is selling eBooks for less than they pay publishers?
Second Update: A reader pointed me at the iBookstore, where Harpercollins titles are now being discounted.
And goes on to say that Apple is usually the cheapest
You mean the fat middlemen publishers who live off the writers and provide little value to the consumer?
As long as the publishers are still editing the manuscripts, fact checking, and formatting them correctly, and advertising for the authors, then I say they are adding a lot of value for the consumer.
What do you think is going to happen when Amazon gets its monopoly status back?
Not much, because if they do anything significant they'll be abusing their monopoly.
I'm not following your argument. Are you suggesting that the only way book retailers and publishers are staying in business today, because of artificially high prices? How will the publishers lose money? If anything they should gain money. The publishers should still be selling the book to Amazon at the same price as before. BUT now Amazon can sell it at whatever price they want. If Amazon sells it for less, they might sell more and the publishers make more,
Yes book retailers might be hurt. But they were going to get hurt anyways, as ebook readers garner a larger and larger share of the market.
That's an example of the FBI doing their job and following up on possible leads.
Huh? Following up possible leads on what? Of course I don't know what was reported, perhaps the apartment manager claimed the person was building a bomb or something. But if the apartment manager told the truth, then the FBI should have been "like whatever" and hung up.
If the apartment manager lied, then that is another issue. Of course he probably lied due to all the media fear mongering.
No? Then the system of checks and balances still works.
Sure, except in this case, the checks and balances shouldn't have been needed to work. Why is it that ordering something from Aircraft Spruce & Specialty is suspicious? Why should the FBI even bother to check investigate?
at least 180 out of 202 "fiberhoods" have already qualified for its service
In just six weeks, nearly 90 percent of eligible neighborhoods around Kansas City have signed up for Google Fiber.
How is "qualified" == "signed up?"
The article goes on to say that it is still processing verification requests. So, how does this mean the neighborhoods have signed up? Looks to me like 202 signed up, and so far only 180 have been verified. The article goes on to say, some won't qualify, and they'll have to qualify again next year.
Could they have been a bit more clear?
I don't know if you and she know this but Google isn't hosting the content.
I don't know if you know this, but Google IS hosting the content.
Google keeps track of what other people are searching. When someone else starts typing into the search box, Google will automatch it to other popular search terms that Google is hosting.
Try blaming google less and consider it a cheap reminder to not let the tablet babysit your children.
Wow... how is this letting the tablet "babsit" your children?
Perhaps I am sitting there watching my child play a game? The game pops up and says "Do you want to build the next floor for 10 bucks?" My child asks me, I look at the screen, and notice it is 10 pretend bucks. So I tell my child, yes. Then a few minutes later it says "Do you want to build the next floor for $100?" Again he asks, I say yes. It says "You don't have enough bucks, do you want to put $1000 for $10?" And he says yes... Is it my fault for not understanding the difference between pretend money and real money? Is it my fault for not watching every little button he pushes?
Letting a kid sit there and play with a tablet, is not letting the tablet babysit your child.
It is difficult enough for me to understand when I am using pretend money in the game, versus real money to buy stuff in the game. And you expect kids to know, or parents to watch their kids to know?
I'm glad I'm not your child.
It's something that only the very young, very poor, or very bored will do, and as such, it's a) not going to get a representative segment of the market, and b) going to turn away a lot of your visitors. People tried this back in the 90s and nobody was interested.
Depends on your definition of "very young." Id argue that in this case "very young" is pretty much anyone who grew up with the internet, probably 25 or less. While this is not a representative segment of "the" market (which market?) It does represent one of the marketers wet dreams (12 - 24 year olds) and a good chunk of the discretionary income. Not to mention that this "very young" will grow older with time. That is, most of the people who will freely give this information today, will also freely give it 10 or 20 years from now.
In the past surveys and focus groups were done in the malls and people were actually paid to answer the questions. Personally I'd trust those answers a lot more. But if you get to the point where it is easy to answer the questions, and answering the question gets you something you are trying to get... Well I think the answers will be less accurate.
But what's in it for users?
Content
No actual people are physically harmed.
In the US it is illegal to have simulated child porn... You know, where no actual people are physically harmed.
The courts have already ruled DVR makers may not do auto-ad-skip, because it's the same as stealing copyrighted TV broadcast.
Citation Needed
A person is not a source by Wikipedia standards nor should they be. How do you link to a person? Where's the more or less permanent reference to that person's claims? The problem was solved by the author writing something down in a reliable place and hence, creating a source.
Ok, but where was the source for the original article?
is why aren't there antitrust proceedings against Amazon? They have a monopoly on ebooks, although I will admit that they earned legitimately. But you can only read those ebooks on a Kindle.
Amazon does NOT have a monopoly on ebooks (Barnes and Noble, and Apple, will disagree with you.)
But you can read those kindle books on any kindle device, or other device that has a free kindle app. I can read them on my windows machine, my iPad and my Samsung Android phone. So how are they leveraging a nonexistent monopoly?