The problem there is, Facebook's privacy settings were fine until they introduced new features. Since Ping hasn't introduced any new features yet, there's no real way to tell how they'll appear.
Right, and as soon as this happens how many other companies then Google will queue up to get their website content delivered faster to consumers?
Of course Verizon won't increase the bandwidth to get this content delivered faster. They'll prioritize the paid content over the unpaid content, meaning that the small guys will be stuck on the "lower tier" of the Internet.
And of course, once Verizon are doing this, the other network providers won't want to miss out on the potential double profit of getting content providers and consumers to pay for the faster service
To someone who's got enough money to pay a contractor to install a pool in their backyard, a $300 fine is probably the right amount to not be prohibitively expensive but still make them think about their choice of contractor the next time they hire one.
Well, Freebase is just an application of the Metaweb technologies. However, the storage and organisation of data (which is what the core of Metaweb is geared around) is useless without any means of retrieval
Maybe you are correct in a world where every statement is a lateral thinking problem.
But in a regular statement about "the number of bananas in a set of fruit" or "the number of people in a family who are boys born on a Tuesday", the fact that the given answer is "One" indicates that the answer is not "Two" or in fact "an unknown number greater than or equal to one". If you lived your life thinking like that then you'd very rarely be sure about anything.
The base problem here was introduced as a mathematical problem, not a lateral thinking problem.
Also, so we're clear where I was coming from:
2. I have two pieces of fruit. [This] one is a banana.
In the second case, it's clear that we're now talking specifically about [one of the fruit], with the other item being irrelevant.
[...] I must also p[o]int out that you sidestepped the issue of whether the other piece of fruit was a banana in your argument, but that is the question originally asked! Of course it's not irrelevant if the other piece of fruit is a banana.
Yes, I left that unanswered here because (as I followed on to explain) this interpretation isn't one we can realistically apply. If we did ever reach interpretation number 2 then all of the lateral thinking answers supplied elsewhere would apply, and I don't have any argument with that.
I also posted this above, sorry if you read it already:
To take an example from an above poster:
I have two pieces of fruit. One is a banana.
How many bananas do I have? The distinction comes in working out what the "One" means - it could be either of the following:
I have two pieces of fruit. One [of the set] is a banana.
I have two pieces of fruit. [This] one is a banana.
In the first case, it's clear that the subject of the sentence is [the set of fruit], and that the implication is that not both of the set are bananas.
In the second case, it's clear that we're now talking specifically about [one of the fruit], with the other item being irrelevant.
Now, since the subject of the first statement is [the set of fruit], and there is no reframing clause in the second statement, the subject of the second statement is still [the set of fruit] and the conclusion is that only one member of [the set of fruit] is a banana
Please point, click or otherwise indicate the word "at least" in that quote.
To take an example from an above poster:
I have two pieces of fruit. One is a banana.
How many bananas do I have? The distinction comes in working out what the "One" means - it could be either of the following:
I have two pieces of fruit. One [of the set] is a banana.
I have two pieces of fruit. [This] one is a banana.
In the first case, it's clear that the subject of the sentence is [the set of fruit], and that the implication is that not both of the set are bananas.
In the second case, it's clear that we're now talking specifically about [one of the fruit], with the other item being irrelevant.
Now, since the subject of the first statement is [the set of fruit], and there is no reframing clause in the second statement, the subject of the second statement is still [the set of fruit] and the conclusion is that only one member of [the set of fruit] is a banana
Slashdot Mirror
Really? Facebook chat is Jabber-based so I find it much easier to use it in Adium (Gaim) than through the shocking web interface
The problem there is, Facebook's privacy settings were fine until they introduced new features. Since Ping hasn't introduced any new features yet, there's no real way to tell how they'll appear.
Wait a second, if I don't have a Facebook account I have to opt-out of it?
Best make the iPad absorbent too, so that when your kid is doing something messy, and the iPad is in your hand, you can wipe it up...
Kind of like the iPad dock? Maybe that connector is too "plugged in" for you though.
or maybe they also have a computer...
Except to call emergency services
So how can you voice call the emergency services from your iPad/iTouch?
Why are you running sudo at a root prompt?
Luckily, they often get caught red-handed.
Right, and as soon as this happens how many other companies then Google will queue up to get their website content delivered faster to consumers?
Of course Verizon won't increase the bandwidth to get this content delivered faster. They'll prioritize the paid content over the unpaid content, meaning that the small guys will be stuck on the "lower tier" of the Internet.
And of course, once Verizon are doing this, the other network providers won't want to miss out on the potential double profit of getting content providers and consumers to pay for the faster service
That sounds a lot like "No one has any data, but I was first with my Excel graph so I win"
Yes, but will she blend?
If I don't believe the badge number on a police officer ID, why would I trust the phone number on it?
To someone who's got enough money to pay a contractor to install a pool in their backyard, a $300 fine is probably the right amount to not be prohibitively expensive but still make them think about their choice of contractor the next time they hire one.
Right, which is why he followed up with:
and then compared it to the time the same enforcement would cost if Google Earth wasn't being used.
No. And no.
Well, Freebase is just an application of the Metaweb technologies. However, the storage and organisation of data (which is what the core of Metaweb is geared around) is useless without any means of retrieval
Well, that might work if indexes were stored as full text representations of a string
I've been using Freebase integrations on a couple of sites, and the possibilities Freebase already offers for rich metadata integration is HUGE.
For example, a couple of their simple API samples are a list of Police songs from the Synchronicity album, ordered by track length, or Graduates of Stanford born since 1960 who are board members of companies
Just replying to give this game more of a mention than the parent poster gave it.
It's the first HTML5 example I've tried which *feels* like a game rather than a proof-of-concept.
Being able to call myself an "Aikidoka" is probably the best reason I've seen so far to study Aikido
Maybe you are correct in a world where every statement is a lateral thinking problem.
But in a regular statement about "the number of bananas in a set of fruit" or "the number of people in a family who are boys born on a Tuesday", the fact that the given answer is "One" indicates that the answer is not "Two" or in fact "an unknown number greater than or equal to one". If you lived your life thinking like that then you'd very rarely be sure about anything.
The base problem here was introduced as a mathematical problem, not a lateral thinking problem.
Also, so we're clear where I was coming from:
Yes, I left that unanswered here because (as I followed on to explain) this interpretation isn't one we can realistically apply. If we did ever reach interpretation number 2 then all of the lateral thinking answers supplied elsewhere would apply, and I don't have any argument with that.
How many bananas do I have? The distinction comes in working out what the "One" means - it could be either of the following:
In the first case, it's clear that the subject of the sentence is [the set of fruit], and that the implication is that not both of the set are bananas. In the second case, it's clear that we're now talking specifically about [one of the fruit], with the other item being irrelevant. Now, since the subject of the first statement is [the set of fruit], and there is no reframing clause in the second statement, the subject of the second statement is still [the set of fruit] and the conclusion is that only one member of [the set of fruit] is a banana
Please point, click or otherwise indicate the word "at least" in that quote.
To take an example from an above poster:
How many bananas do I have? The distinction comes in working out what the "One" means - it could be either of the following:
In the first case, it's clear that the subject of the sentence is [the set of fruit], and that the implication is that not both of the set are bananas.
In the second case, it's clear that we're now talking specifically about [one of the fruit], with the other item being irrelevant.
Now, since the subject of the first statement is [the set of fruit], and there is no reframing clause in the second statement, the subject of the second statement is still [the set of fruit] and the conclusion is that only one member of [the set of fruit] is a banana