The total number of military personnel is approximately 300,000. However, 100,000 of these are in the Gendarmerie, and thus a vast majority of these 100,000 are used in everyday law enforcement operation inside France and are not fit for external operations.
I don't think it's advertisers on Google; instead, Google is telling your browser to "preload" the page for the first search result, with the effect of any cookies from that page being set.
Think of this: there are channels out there that built their viewer-base through popularity. (FoodTV, Discovery) How did they get popular? People could tune in and check it out because they already had the channel. How will that work if people only get certain channels? Will there be a preview option?
One thing that Cablevision used to do (I don't know if the idea was theirs, or the network's) was to offer a week- or weekend-long preview of one/some of the premium channels. I don't see why the same thing couldn't be done for new channels.
They'll still charge for static IPs even with IPv6. After all, there's not much reason for cable and DSL providers not to offer them for free right now. Most cable and DSL modems are always on and occupying an IP address anyway, and there's never been any mention of an address crunch at any big ISP (Cablevision, Comcast, etc.), so there's no technical reason to avoid offering static IPs.
Charging for static IP addresses is pure profit for these companies. A small change to the DHCP servers to indicate that a particular modem should always get a particular IP is all it takes (and only needs to be done once), but the money for that keeps rolling in. Opening up more addresses isn't going to change that.
why do you keep on buying Ikea products if they are poor quality?
I don't. I helped a friend put some together, but they had already been purchased and it was my first, and thus far, only, experience with Ikea furniture (but given the variety of products and high incidence of problems, it's exceedingly unlikely this was a "bad batch" or some such thing).
Indeed, I accompanied this friend to Ikea (she wanted to pick up a few other, non-base furniture stuff) and I made a point of refusing to purchase anything, including a hot dog, on the grounds that I wasn't going to give any money to a company that produces products of such poor quality.
There's more to Ikea furniture than just "practical," "inexpensive," and "attractive," though having recently spent a whole weekend putting together Ikea stuff for a friend, I will agree that these qualities do apply.
I would also add "difficult-to-follow instructions" to that. Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words, but when the pictures are instructions, and scale isn't accurately maintained or portrayed, it's a real pain to figure out which pieces and/or screws are meant, sometimes.
Then I would also add "poor quality" to the list. A few of the items look/act good (namely, the couch and the chair, which required minimal assembly; the table also works well), but between three bookcases, two CD shelving units, and a TV stand with cabinets, you can really see the problems of Ikea furniture/self-assembly. The two bookcases that are next to each other have a gap between them that grows larger as you get higher; the glass doors of the third bookcase don't line up (though this is a construction issue, sure, but it's effectively impossible to get them lined up accurately) and one doesn't close all the way; the TV stand has legs of varying lengths, with the middle one being the longest, so it's very easy to spin it around or wobble it.
Not only crappy instructions, but products with minimal evidence of quality control? Database tables that wobble? I wonder what that would look like...
If they're just assertions with no evidence (I haven't really seen anything other than blanket assertions of this fact, personally), then yes, I think they're just as bad. Just because I might like the point doesn't mean it's any less flawed.
Canadians between 12 and 24 years of age are responsible for 78 per cent of illegal music downloading, even though they make up only 21 per cent of the population, it says.
...
Canadians between the ages of 18 and 29 are much more willing than other age groups to make illegal copies of software programs, cheat on exams or even shoplift, an Environics poll suggests.
What it does say is that people in the same age group as typical P2P users are more likely to shoplift or cheat. It does not make any correlation between P2P users and these things!
I think "limited" would be right word in that context. I also think that "certain" would have worked (pi is a certain number, despite being irrational). To say that there are only a finite number of users seems like you have to acknowledge that there couldn't be an infinite number of users, which seems like common sense to me.
Did they really need to say that there was "a finite number of early adopters... and a finite number of Microsoft haters"? Did anyone really think there were an infinite number of either?
It's a great idea; it's just a shame that it's never worked for me. It does "make install," prompts for the package info, and created a.TGZ package--with only the description. It's somewhat useful for just keeping track of what version of something is installed, but since the packages are devoid of actual files, it's less than useful for actual upgrades.
How about this part, that seems to be overlooked: "You may install and use the Software on a single desktop computer..." (emphasis mine). When you combine this with the part in the license header ("THIS SOFTWARE END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT... IS A LEGAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU (EITHER AN INDIVIDUAL OR... AN ENTITY) AND MACROMEDIA."), it seems (IANAL) to mean that you can only install Flash on one computer. Ever. Got a desktop and a laptop? (Assuming that laptops are "legal," as the debate over what constitutes a mobile device in the legal sense could go on for quite a while, and encompass damn near everything.) Better pick which one you want Flash on, because once you've installed it on one, you're in a "legal agreement" prohibiting you from installing it on a second (or third, or fourth, etc.) computer.
I'm not a day-to-day Mac user, but I spent a fair bit of time using a Mac while working on my college paper, and my opinion of it was that Mac OS X got in my way more than Windows did. Maybe it was just due to the fact that I didn't have much experience with Macs, and I'd been using Linux constantly for about two years (with a Windows/Linux dual-boot on an older machine for those rare moments I needed it), but I found the UI less intuitive than Windows/Linux. Things like having the max/min/close buttons on the left side of window bars, minimization that results in an identical appearance to launch buttons, the file Open/Save boxes, etc. all seemed to be designed for the sole purpose of being different instead of being usable.
Or better yet, LOTTERY off coverage of games. So that i dont have to flip through 12 channles of figure skating or gymnastics. I would like to check out some of the other sports--outside of what the news feeds think will get the best coverage.
Assuming it was done this way, what reason would the networks that didn't get the "best coverage" events have to show any of them? If figure skating and gymnastics are the ones that draw the most TV viewers (I can't fathom why, but perhaps it's just me), then any other network that decided to try and compete with that isn't likely to go with an Olympic event they know isn't going to spend the money to pick up that event.
A box of 10 floppies costs, what, $10 still at Best Buy?
I can't speak as to the cost or availability of floppies at BestBuy (I haven't been to one lately), but at Microcenter, they have individual 3.5" floppy disks for ten cents each (they're individual, not packaged).
Having recently graduated from an engineering school myself (technically, an "institute of technology") I can say that attending such a school doesn't mean that the people in it with you are all computer-savvy (though I'm willing to bet it's a much larger percentage than at a liberal arts school). I know people getting/with degrees in Computer Science and Computer Engineering who have no idea what they're doing at a computer (hell, some of the CS majors can't program!).
First, the people who "cannot afford" to upgrade apparently could afford a TV at some point or they wouldn't have one to begin with. So these are people who are either a) not really all that poor (I mean they may be lower class, but let's be realistic - a TV is not a necessity, it's a luxury) or b) their situation has worsened over the years to the point where they can no longer afford to buy a TV or even a cheap set-top digital converter box (and these are available for under $100).
Old TVs that still work and receive OTA broadcasts are very easy to come by at low or no cost. People who can afford to upgrade do, and frequently throw out their old sets (or donate them to something like Goodwill). Another poster already mentioned that some people who are now retired may still have their set from when they could afford one, but can't afford to get a new one now.
It's not just people who were customers of theirs; Lexis-Nexis also maintains records about people, much like ChoicePoint does. So not being a customer doesn't necessarily mean that they don't have information about you.
Solutions like the HOSTS (or/etc/hosts) won't work for anyone who is stuck behind a proxy. The proxy does all the DNS stuff, and so I could blacklist the entire Internet via/etc/hosts, and I would still be able to use my web browser.
I don't think that the problem is that people are checking the weather to see the conditions, it's that people turn to a lot of that stuff to avoid working. I know there have been plenty of times I've fired up the IDE, trying to force myself to get some work done, and instead spend more time (repeatedly) checking for e-mail, reading Slashdot/Fark/MeFi/etc, and before I know it, an hour's gone by and I haven't written any code.
If I couldn't do these things, and all I could do was code for hours and hours on end all the time, I would go nuts. The problem is that there are so many distractions that they pull me away from getting any work done sometimes.
It's nice to check your email every so often, but checking it every single time you're told you have new mail is just wasteful, unless of course, you're waiting for something important (i.e., can't get any work done until you get that e-mail).
But the record companies are still making a profit. File sharing may be costing them 'potential' profits, but it is not causing them to lose money. They aren't operating at a loss, they're still covering their expenses and then some, and file sharing isn't costing them money.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think it's advertisers on Google; instead, Google is telling your browser to "preload" the page for the first search result, with the effect of any cookies from that page being set.
They'll still charge for static IPs even with IPv6. After all, there's not much reason for cable and DSL providers not to offer them for free right now. Most cable and DSL modems are always on and occupying an IP address anyway, and there's never been any mention of an address crunch at any big ISP (Cablevision, Comcast, etc.), so there's no technical reason to avoid offering static IPs.
Charging for static IP addresses is pure profit for these companies. A small change to the DHCP servers to indicate that a particular modem should always get a particular IP is all it takes (and only needs to be done once), but the money for that keeps rolling in. Opening up more addresses isn't going to change that.
I don't. I helped a friend put some together, but they had already been purchased and it was my first, and thus far, only, experience with Ikea furniture (but given the variety of products and high incidence of problems, it's exceedingly unlikely this was a "bad batch" or some such thing).
Indeed, I accompanied this friend to Ikea (she wanted to pick up a few other, non-base furniture stuff) and I made a point of refusing to purchase anything, including a hot dog, on the grounds that I wasn't going to give any money to a company that produces products of such poor quality.
There's more to Ikea furniture than just "practical," "inexpensive," and "attractive," though having recently spent a whole weekend putting together Ikea stuff for a friend, I will agree that these qualities do apply.
I would also add "difficult-to-follow instructions" to that. Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words, but when the pictures are instructions, and scale isn't accurately maintained or portrayed, it's a real pain to figure out which pieces and/or screws are meant, sometimes.
Then I would also add "poor quality" to the list. A few of the items look/act good (namely, the couch and the chair, which required minimal assembly; the table also works well), but between three bookcases, two CD shelving units, and a TV stand with cabinets, you can really see the problems of Ikea furniture/self-assembly. The two bookcases that are next to each other have a gap between them that grows larger as you get higher; the glass doors of the third bookcase don't line up (though this is a construction issue, sure, but it's effectively impossible to get them lined up accurately) and one doesn't close all the way; the TV stand has legs of varying lengths, with the middle one being the longest, so it's very easy to spin it around or wobble it.
And that's my rant about Ikea.
Not only crappy instructions, but products with minimal evidence of quality control? Database tables that wobble? I wonder what that would look like ...
I think he meant the other Steve (Ballmer).
If they're just assertions with no evidence (I haven't really seen anything other than blanket assertions of this fact, personally), then yes, I think they're just as bad. Just because I might like the point doesn't mean it's any less flawed.
I think "limited" would be right word in that context. I also think that "certain" would have worked (pi is a certain number, despite being irrational). To say that there are only a finite number of users seems like you have to acknowledge that there couldn't be an infinite number of users, which seems like common sense to me.
Did they really need to say that there was "a finite number of early adopters ... and a finite number of Microsoft haters"? Did anyone really think there were an infinite number of either?
It's a great idea; it's just a shame that it's never worked for me. It does "make install," prompts for the package info, and created a .TGZ package--with only the description. It's somewhat useful for just keeping track of what version of something is installed, but since the packages are devoid of actual files, it's less than useful for actual upgrades.
How about this part, that seems to be overlooked: "You may install and use the Software on a single desktop computer ..." (emphasis mine). When you combine this with the part in the license header ("THIS SOFTWARE END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT ... IS A LEGAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU (EITHER AN INDIVIDUAL OR ... AN ENTITY) AND MACROMEDIA."), it seems (IANAL) to mean that you can only install Flash on one computer. Ever. Got a desktop and a laptop? (Assuming that laptops are "legal," as the debate over what constitutes a mobile device in the legal sense could go on for quite a while, and encompass damn near everything.) Better pick which one you want Flash on, because once you've installed it on one, you're in a "legal agreement" prohibiting you from installing it on a second (or third, or fourth, etc.) computer.
Assuming it was done this way, what reason would the networks that didn't get the "best coverage" events have to show any of them? If figure skating and gymnastics are the ones that draw the most TV viewers (I can't fathom why, but perhaps it's just me), then any other network that decided to try and compete with that isn't likely to go with an Olympic event they know isn't going to spend the money to pick up that event.
Having recently graduated from an engineering school myself (technically, an "institute of technology") I can say that attending such a school doesn't mean that the people in it with you are all computer-savvy (though I'm willing to bet it's a much larger percentage than at a liberal arts school). I know people getting/with degrees in Computer Science and Computer Engineering who have no idea what they're doing at a computer (hell, some of the CS majors can't program!).
Old TVs that still work and receive OTA broadcasts are very easy to come by at low or no cost. People who can afford to upgrade do, and frequently throw out their old sets (or donate them to something like Goodwill). Another poster already mentioned that some people who are now retired may still have their set from when they could afford one, but can't afford to get a new one now.
It's not just people who were customers of theirs; Lexis-Nexis also maintains records about people, much like ChoicePoint does. So not being a customer doesn't necessarily mean that they don't have information about you.
Solutions like the HOSTS (or /etc/hosts) won't work for anyone who is stuck behind a proxy. The proxy does all the DNS stuff, and so I could blacklist the entire Internet via /etc/hosts, and I would still be able to use my web browser.
I don't think that the problem is that people are checking the weather to see the conditions, it's that people turn to a lot of that stuff to avoid working. I know there have been plenty of times I've fired up the IDE, trying to force myself to get some work done, and instead spend more time (repeatedly) checking for e-mail, reading Slashdot/Fark/MeFi/etc, and before I know it, an hour's gone by and I haven't written any code.
If I couldn't do these things, and all I could do was code for hours and hours on end all the time, I would go nuts. The problem is that there are so many distractions that they pull me away from getting any work done sometimes.
It's nice to check your email every so often, but checking it every single time you're told you have new mail is just wasteful, unless of course, you're waiting for something important (i.e., can't get any work done until you get that e-mail).
But the record companies are still making a profit. File sharing may be costing them 'potential' profits, but it is not causing them to lose money. They aren't operating at a loss, they're still covering their expenses and then some, and file sharing isn't costing them money.