Posts by Turtle

@Rampant Spaniel

"they all seem to do the same thing when the going gets tough, rather than find a way to add more value to a transaction, they take away the one of the main strengths they have, staff on hand with knowledge and replace them with salesplebs who only know % commissions."

I would expect that most internet users will use the internet not only to comparison shop but also to do their product research. I have had salespeople tell me barefaced lies, and make up "information" on the spot; relying on a salesman, whether working on commission or not, is not exactly a wise course of action. So the it's rarely a question of the staff being knowledgeable or otherwise, or what commission they're getting on which items.

As for "adding value to a transaction": most people shop for price. I can't really imagine what kind of "added value" a shop could offer to offset a price that is higher than elsewhere; the one and only exception which comes to mind is that you get your item instantaneously, as opposed to waiting a few days for it to be delivered. But I would expect that for most people, it does not take enormous savings to make a few days' wait seem like a price worth paying in order to save a significant sum of money.

@vonRat: Re: What OS?

"Every version of Windows should have a 'Classic' UI option emulating Win 95. This would remove 99% of the complaints... "

Well that, and a decent file manager. As a li'l sidenote, I'll add that the WinXP Windows Explorer qualifies as a "decent file manager" only in comparison to all succeeding versions of Windows Explorer in subsequent Windows releases.

Re: Aaand we have the obligatory idiot

"I've even seen Nissan use a portable petrol generator at press events to recharge the LEAF."

A paid endorsement?

@bailey86: Re: This is very good news for Ubuntu

"if fact - I would say that China adopting an open source OS is a huge move forward in terms of freedom. "

Yeah, who needs bullshit like the right to vote for the who leads the government if they have an open source OS, right? And of course if memory serves, North Korea is also just racing towards democracy too; isn't that right?

Well I have always said that the "freedom" that Open Source software claims to promote is a very trivial sort of freedom. And this of course is a good illustration of that.

@LarsG

"The disproportionate punishment is reflected in the fact that the Supreme Court refuses to get involved and actually put right a wrong."

Could you perhaps explain the logic underlying this statement, because I far as I can tell, there isn't any.

Evidently you do not know that there have been extremely harsh penalties for copyright infringement for well over a century. Also you will have to explain exactly *how* politicians "pressure" the courts, considering that it is almost impossible to remove federal judges once appointed.

"America land of the free where nothing is free" - and you feel that music, films, software, photographs, and anything else that can be digitized *should* be free. Let me know when you are willing to work for "free".

And as for Jammie's situation, it's all Jammie's fault. She knew that file-sharing was illegal, she lied about it, she destroyed evidence, and, as a matter of fact, although she was only found guilty of sharing 24 songs, she was actually sharing 1700.

Corrected.

"I think it's more like google Xcrement."

I believe you're right; I stand corrected.

@DavCrav: Re: Wow!

"Maybe read some facts before engaging brain. Or is obvious troll obvious? Not so sure."

Now, if I understand you correctly, you are taking these accusations from Swartz's legal team as being true. Somehow that strikes me as being maybe just a wee bit naive. Defense lawyers are by definition highly impartial advocates and ultimately have no responsibility to prove what they say. (Prosecutors, if you don't know, have to prove their charges to a variety of judges, a grand jury, a trial jury, and it all has to survive the subsequent scrutiny of appellate courts.) If there is any class of people less deserving of belief than defense lawyers, then you'll have to tell me who it is.

These accusations from Swartz's lawyers need to be treated with a tremendous amount of skepticism. Which you evidently do not want to do.

@Psyx: Re: @Nissemus & MdB: : ((

"Why, as a matter of interest?"

That's a very fair question but I can't really give you a short synopsis or overview.

But I will point you to a book, "Where Is Everybody?" by Stephen Webb. (The full title of which is actually "If The Universe Is Teeming With Aliens, Where Is Everybody: Fifty Solutions To The Fermi Paradox And The Problem Of Extraterrestrial Life".) I would consider this to be required reading for anyone interested in the subject. (As you can easily imagine, Google will find you reviews; Amazon will be happy to sell you a copy.)

Not only are the astrophysical reasons for skepticism powerful, but once having found out about the biological reasons for skepticism, the effect is only reinforced. Abiogenesis is at this point, and maybe forever, an insoluble problem, but certain occurrences necessary for the emergence of life on earth can be reasonably (but not, of course, definitively) shown to have probabilities that are "indistinguishable from zero".

Here are a few of the influences, some hypothetical, on the genesis of life on earth: the sun and its specific characteristics, the earth and its specific characteristics (what if there was even less molybdenum?), the moon and its specific characteristics, the location of the earth in the Continuously Habitable Zone, tides, plate tectonics, Snowball Earth, Jupiter, being effected (or not!) by gamma ray bursters or supernovae or supervolcanoes, and more! Note that these factors only concern the physical and environmental conditions that were necessary for the origin of life on earth. Some of these conditions are quite common: stars like the sun abound, obviously. Some of these conditions might in fact have no bearing on the matter at all. But as the you look for planetary systems that satisfy the conditions, probabilities diminish precipitously. And that is even before we look at the biological considerations:

The biological considerations: the genesis of prokaryotes (eubacteria and archaea) and especially eukaryotes, the origin of proteins, polypeptides and amino acids, enzymes, nucleic acids (RNA and DNA)... Again, the probabilities against some of these things having arisen have been estimated by some to involve "probabilities indistinguishable from zero". (And when two necessary conditions have "probabilities indistinguishable from zero" - well, it's possible to end up dealing with numbers that exceed the number of atoms in the universe, let alone stars or planets.)

Think about panspermia for a moment. It's a respectable theory even if not accepted by all knowledgeable parties. I consider panspermia to be a theory meant to show that there can be life elsewhere in the universe while evading the incredibly long odds of life arising from non-life in the first place. I.e Life is so hard to get from non-life, that even if it only happened *once* we can still be not alone - we have cousins... somewhere!

( I certainly do not want this post to convey the impression that I have any great knowledge of the matters under discussion - especially the biology of it. My knowledge is at best that of a layman. But some of the numbers involved really do make skeptical conclusions inescapable.)

Re: Re:cavemen?

As they say, if you want to live to be 100, you have to give up all things that would make you *want* to live to be 100.

@Alfred: Re: @Ole Juul: N. Korea?

"Quick, duck! *WHOOSH*"

No, I "got it". I just didn't "like it", if you know what I mean - and you may not. There is nothing funny about North Korea at all.

But if the Pirate Bay would move to North Korea it would be altogether appropriate: in the same way that North Korea's ruling clique considers that everything produced by North Korea is their property to do with as they please, so does the Pirate Bay consider all music, movies, games, and software produced by the labor of others, to be their property to do with as they see fit. North Korea and The Pirate Bay share a modus operandi: maximally exploit the labor of others and return nothing.

And considering that this "fun" is being generate on behalf of the Pirate Bay and the neo-Nazi who owns it, perhaps you don't see the irony (and hypocrisy) in it. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Lundstr%C3%B6m - Lundstrom was a very wealthy man even before The Pirate Bay. Showing once again that not only has the internet degenerated into a tool for the rich to get richer but that freetards are also "tools".)

@Andrew Moore: Re: Obvious

"Liewise"

Couldn't agree more.

American Wind Energy Association

Oh, an industry lobby. That's exactly where I'll go to get objective information and opinions.

@graeme leggett Re: The theory

"Shareholders provide the capital that a company works with to return a profit. Some of this profit is then expected to be returned to shareholders as a return on their investment - either as a dividend, or as higher value for the share if the owner decides to sell it on."

Well not quite. The mere cachet of owning Apple stock is not what drives their shareprice. The reason the shares go up in price is for the dividend it yields. The dividend or more accurately the expected dividend is what drives the stock price in the first place.

@LarsG: A good idea

"Many glasses wearers have been trying to get away from wearing them, look at the popularity of laser eye surgery and even contact lenses."

You've stumbled on to a good idea here but have failed to recognize it. The "tech" part of these google glasses should just be implanted in the skull of anyone who would want to wear them; it's a pretty sure bet that there's plenty of room in there...

@Winkypop Re: No peeping, OK?

"That's Google's domain."

Fixed!

: ))