marksman
Apr 1, 12:03 PM
I'm always amazed at how much work studios go to to keep people from watching their shows.
This is the weird reality. TV Networks spend millions and even billions of dollars trying to get as many people to watch their shows for free, and then they also spend a great deal of time and money trying to stop people from watching their tv shows for free.
Imagine if they spend that energy just trying to properly record viewers for those outlets instead of weirdly begging people to watch their shows for free and then on the other hand demand they don't watch their shows for free.
This is the weird reality. TV Networks spend millions and even billions of dollars trying to get as many people to watch their shows for free, and then they also spend a great deal of time and money trying to stop people from watching their tv shows for free.
Imagine if they spend that energy just trying to properly record viewers for those outlets instead of weirdly begging people to watch their shows for free and then on the other hand demand they don't watch their shows for free.
Juan007
Apr 5, 10:28 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
CR is not qualified to review tech products. They need to stick to reviewing toasters. Any CR review of iPhone, iPad, etc is guaranteed to have 10% of the depth of a real review. Why even bother? Why give CR the page hits from being on the front page? Just let them fade into obscurity.
CR is obsolete.
CR is not qualified to review tech products. They need to stick to reviewing toasters. Any CR review of iPhone, iPad, etc is guaranteed to have 10% of the depth of a real review. Why even bother? Why give CR the page hits from being on the front page? Just let them fade into obscurity.
CR is obsolete.
rasmasyean
May 4, 12:00 AM
Yeah Somalia has been at war for years and their technology has utterly skyrocketed.
Fun fact: LED TV's were invented during wartime because our soldiers in Afghanistan were tired of hauling their 50 inch tube tv's through the desert.
Those are all blanket statements that could be wrong depending on what example you use. IE the best Medical sensor out there is the MRI and it wasn't invented to detect bombs. Actually if you try to use an MRI to detect a bomb, there's a good chance you'll blow yourself up.
Doesn't cancer immediately threaten lives?
If you're going to present an argument, try not to reach to the bottom of the barrel and take it out of context.
First of all, obviously the war we are talking about when large nations take part in it, not gang skirmishes.
And besides all the historic military budget devoted to the "timeline of LED emergence", here's a recent DARPA accomplisment over the period of 10 years. That's right...since 2001! Afghanistan invasion!
Universal Display Delivers Wrist-Mounted Flexible Phosphorescent OLED Display Prototypes to U.S. Army for Field Testing
http://www.defenseprocurementnews.com/2010/10/06/universal-display-delivers-wrist-mounted-flexible-phosphorescent-oled-display-prototypes-to-u-s-army-for-field-testing/
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2001_June_28/ai_75993990/
Obviously I'm just making a generalized argument and not talking about all "medical sensors" that exist.
And I don't know what world you live in, but most ppl I've ever met never thought they would get cancer. Or at least not until they are very old when many ppl get it anyway b4 they die. Certainly not young ppl and in a couple of years.
Fun fact: LED TV's were invented during wartime because our soldiers in Afghanistan were tired of hauling their 50 inch tube tv's through the desert.
Those are all blanket statements that could be wrong depending on what example you use. IE the best Medical sensor out there is the MRI and it wasn't invented to detect bombs. Actually if you try to use an MRI to detect a bomb, there's a good chance you'll blow yourself up.
Doesn't cancer immediately threaten lives?
If you're going to present an argument, try not to reach to the bottom of the barrel and take it out of context.
First of all, obviously the war we are talking about when large nations take part in it, not gang skirmishes.
And besides all the historic military budget devoted to the "timeline of LED emergence", here's a recent DARPA accomplisment over the period of 10 years. That's right...since 2001! Afghanistan invasion!
Universal Display Delivers Wrist-Mounted Flexible Phosphorescent OLED Display Prototypes to U.S. Army for Field Testing
http://www.defenseprocurementnews.com/2010/10/06/universal-display-delivers-wrist-mounted-flexible-phosphorescent-oled-display-prototypes-to-u-s-army-for-field-testing/
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2001_June_28/ai_75993990/
Obviously I'm just making a generalized argument and not talking about all "medical sensors" that exist.
And I don't know what world you live in, but most ppl I've ever met never thought they would get cancer. Or at least not until they are very old when many ppl get it anyway b4 they die. Certainly not young ppl and in a couple of years.
Takuta-Nui
Mar 20, 03:48 PM
This gave me the idea of a combined AppleCare plan. Since Apple is pitching their mobile computing products in three major categories: iPhone, iPad, and MacBook - it would be really cool to offer a combined AC plan for two or all three categories.
Like I have a iPhone and a MacBook - wouldn't it be neat to be able to buy a hybrid plan that would be about $20 to $30 cheaper than buying them individually?
Like I have a iPhone and a MacBook - wouldn't it be neat to be able to buy a hybrid plan that would be about $20 to $30 cheaper than buying them individually?
more...
dethmaShine
Apr 21, 01:05 PM
When I said "that's about it," it wasn't a negative thing. When it comes to an iPhone, if they made those enhancements, that's plenty to guarantee another year of success. Especially alongside iOS 5.
Sorry, may have misunderstood. Fair enough.
Sorry, may have misunderstood. Fair enough.
gkarris
Mar 25, 10:47 AM
I was thinking about this, but if they're doing it with the iPad 1.... :eek:
Will wait until next year - I've seem some Apps already choke on the iPad 1, and the assumption is that some of these Apps will require an iPad 2 for their latest versions...
Will wait until next year - I've seem some Apps already choke on the iPad 1, and the assumption is that some of these Apps will require an iPad 2 for their latest versions...
more...
mofunk
Nov 24, 08:31 PM
This week XtremeMac posted their iPod Touch 4G online. I was ready to pull out my credit card and make a purchase but I decided to swing by Staples one more time to see if they were in stock. The previous weeks Staples had marked down all their 2G XtremeMac cases. So I was hoping it would be in stock. Well I picked one up tonight and was extremely excited to see that the case feels just as good as the previous line.
The fit of the Tuffwrap is nice and snug. I remember the 1st two cases I bought for my 1st Gen iTouch was between $20-30. The second one I thought of not skimping and got an Incase for my iPod then the one after I purchased another Incase from a discount store. Both times they split.
3quot; x 6quot; Glass Subway tile
more...
3quot; x 6quot; Glass subway tile
3quot; x 6quot; glass subway tile
more...
3quot; x 6quot; Glass Subway Tile
3quot; x 6quot; glass subway tile
more...
2quot; x 4quot; Glass Subway Grey
green glass subway tiles
more...
Bella Glass Tiles 1quot; x 3quot;
kitchens - green glass subway
more...
LOVE the blue subway tiles and
color Bamboo Subway tiles
The glass subway tiles are
The fit of the Tuffwrap is nice and snug. I remember the 1st two cases I bought for my 1st Gen iTouch was between $20-30. The second one I thought of not skimping and got an Incase for my iPod then the one after I purchased another Incase from a discount store. Both times they split.
Tourist
Sep 25, 11:33 PM
Those bots are too dang quick!
You beat me to it!
This is a beat up over podcast which apple admit is generic to downloaded audio , but I can see what Apple are concerned about. This company is attempting to register marks in areas that Apple already cover with POD and iPOD,
Claiming that mypodder sounds like iPOD is probably stretching it a little bit, but hey gotta keep those lawyers in Business, where is Denny Crane when you need him.
You beat me to it!
This is a beat up over podcast which apple admit is generic to downloaded audio , but I can see what Apple are concerned about. This company is attempting to register marks in areas that Apple already cover with POD and iPOD,
Claiming that mypodder sounds like iPOD is probably stretching it a little bit, but hey gotta keep those lawyers in Business, where is Denny Crane when you need him.
more...
Karpfish
Sep 29, 02:28 PM
i downloaded 10.4.8 and it wouldnt boot! i got a dark grey screen instead of the blue appple screen. Then i did it again but reset pram. then it just sat at the apple screen loading for a few minutes, so i restarted. Same thing, but it reset by itself, o then the 3rd time i let it stay and it worked. i hope it ends up being ok. I only downloaded it because i was hoping for apertre 1.5, but of course its nto out yet
glennp
Sep 25, 11:00 AM
According to the sidebar, my 1.6GHz G5 with NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra now makes the cut to run Aperture. Didn't think either of those met the minimum requirements with 1.1.
more...
roadbloc
May 3, 03:13 AM
Anyone who chooses the simplest operating system (like OS X and iOS, obviously) to accomplish the same tasks *is* savvy.
Whereas I agree that some everyday tasks are "easier" (and by easier I mean accessible via fewer clicks) in OS X; some tasks in OS X, such as networking, is insanely hard than the simplicity of the Network and Sharing Centre provided in Windows.
Both OS's I find have their +'s and -'s in the terms of 'ease of use'. Neither are superior over one another for this. (Although I do think Aero Peek kick's Expose's ass at the moment.)
Whereas I agree that some everyday tasks are "easier" (and by easier I mean accessible via fewer clicks) in OS X; some tasks in OS X, such as networking, is insanely hard than the simplicity of the Network and Sharing Centre provided in Windows.
Both OS's I find have their +'s and -'s in the terms of 'ease of use'. Neither are superior over one another for this. (Although I do think Aero Peek kick's Expose's ass at the moment.)
Blue Velvet
Feb 12, 06:56 PM
Import the CD, then click on the Browse button (top-right, look like an eye).
Scroll down the album menu to the album. Select it and key Apple-I, it will ask you if you want to edit multiple items, you say yes, and then enter the name you want in the artists field...
Scroll down the album menu to the album. Select it and key Apple-I, it will ask you if you want to edit multiple items, you say yes, and then enter the name you want in the artists field...
more...
firestarter
May 4, 12:55 AM
How do you know that that Sony prototype didn't come about as a result from work at UDC (funded by DARPA)?
I don't know. Does the US military usually sell its tech to the Japanese?
Seems to me that it's a technology lots of people are working on in parallel.
Consumer forces made flight widespread. Military forces make flight feasible. Hitler's minions didn't invent the jet engine and solid booster to deliver packages and orbit weather sensors.
Nice example. Frank Whittle (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljetengine.htm) received the first jet engine patent in 1930. He had been in the Air Force, but they wouldn't sponsor his research - so the development was privately funded and finally demonstrated in 1937.
Intercontental flight was made widespread after we decided to work on carring warheads across the ocean vs ppl. In 1940's who woulda funded a massive manhatten project to see if we can make it heat up some water...theoretically.
I think you're confusing fission and fusion.
The need for computer networks to survive a nuclear war now enable's us to read eachother's posts and take advantage of the consumerism on top of this web page.
Darpanet, indeed. But the web itself was developed in peacetime by a man researching at a (non military) Swiss research establishment (http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/about/web-en.html).
Many technological advancements are so costly and far-fetched that no reasonable "business" would risk investing a lot of money in it. That's when paranoid governments pick up the tab. I don't think you understand that it's real easy to spend $499 on an iPod with tons of "Apps" on it and say...oh yah, this is like real easy to make because Chinese ppl take 50 cents worth of material and put it together. But before all this was possible, some of the smallest components in that iPhone and the most basic of all "Apps" took a "visionary" with a massivly risky budget to make one blink on some $5 million vaccuum box for the first time in history!
The first commercial transistors were developed for telecoms by AT&T / Texas instruments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor).
The integrated circuit was invented in peace time, and it's mass production was spurred as much by the Apollo program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit) as for defence.
Interestingly, defence and space are very conservative in their use of technology and CPUs. The increase in CPU power over time has clearly been motivated by commercial market forces (non military).
Yes, I don't deny that defence money does finance innovation. But that's not the same as implying that innovation wouldn't take place if it wasn't for War. That's clearly nonsense - there's plenty of civil and commercial market forces that also spur development, and the examples you've cited demonstrate a few. War is not an essential for human or technological development, although it may speed it along a little from time to time.
I don't know. Does the US military usually sell its tech to the Japanese?
Seems to me that it's a technology lots of people are working on in parallel.
Consumer forces made flight widespread. Military forces make flight feasible. Hitler's minions didn't invent the jet engine and solid booster to deliver packages and orbit weather sensors.
Nice example. Frank Whittle (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bljetengine.htm) received the first jet engine patent in 1930. He had been in the Air Force, but they wouldn't sponsor his research - so the development was privately funded and finally demonstrated in 1937.
Intercontental flight was made widespread after we decided to work on carring warheads across the ocean vs ppl. In 1940's who woulda funded a massive manhatten project to see if we can make it heat up some water...theoretically.
I think you're confusing fission and fusion.
The need for computer networks to survive a nuclear war now enable's us to read eachother's posts and take advantage of the consumerism on top of this web page.
Darpanet, indeed. But the web itself was developed in peacetime by a man researching at a (non military) Swiss research establishment (http://public.web.cern.ch/public/en/about/web-en.html).
Many technological advancements are so costly and far-fetched that no reasonable "business" would risk investing a lot of money in it. That's when paranoid governments pick up the tab. I don't think you understand that it's real easy to spend $499 on an iPod with tons of "Apps" on it and say...oh yah, this is like real easy to make because Chinese ppl take 50 cents worth of material and put it together. But before all this was possible, some of the smallest components in that iPhone and the most basic of all "Apps" took a "visionary" with a massivly risky budget to make one blink on some $5 million vaccuum box for the first time in history!
The first commercial transistors were developed for telecoms by AT&T / Texas instruments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor).
The integrated circuit was invented in peace time, and it's mass production was spurred as much by the Apollo program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit) as for defence.
Interestingly, defence and space are very conservative in their use of technology and CPUs. The increase in CPU power over time has clearly been motivated by commercial market forces (non military).
Yes, I don't deny that defence money does finance innovation. But that's not the same as implying that innovation wouldn't take place if it wasn't for War. That's clearly nonsense - there's plenty of civil and commercial market forces that also spur development, and the examples you've cited demonstrate a few. War is not an essential for human or technological development, although it may speed it along a little from time to time.
sundayx
Apr 5, 11:34 AM
Like a touchpad wouldn't it be possible for it to recognize what is a tap and what is just touching to the surface? i.e. it would only initiate a command based on a quick touch and release.
more...
mac*jedi*g
Mar 23, 07:42 PM
The title of this article should be:
Mac goes to WAR:mad:
Mac goes to WAR:mad:
63dot
Mar 12, 04:41 PM
Good point. There is a little article in the April Car and Driver that lists all of the cars assembled in North America and their actual domestic parts content. Some of it is pretty shocking. Sorry, I don't think they have it online, but if somebody really wants it, I can scan it.
As an example, the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are both 80% U.S./Canadian parts content. The Chevrolet Silverado pickup? ...61%. :eek:
Wow, I came into this thread late. I wonder where the other 39% percent of the Silverado is from? I would guess more than one country. I know about the US Toyota plant, but Honda, too?
Anyway, I kind of like the Honda Fit and if that's helping American workers, then all the more power to them.
As an example, the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry are both 80% U.S./Canadian parts content. The Chevrolet Silverado pickup? ...61%. :eek:
Wow, I came into this thread late. I wonder where the other 39% percent of the Silverado is from? I would guess more than one country. I know about the US Toyota plant, but Honda, too?
Anyway, I kind of like the Honda Fit and if that's helping American workers, then all the more power to them.
more...
Stridder44
May 2, 04:02 AM
Has anybody ran it on an early 2008 MBP with 8600m gt? (look at my sig) What graphic levels did u guys set the game on?
I'd be interested to know this as well (have the same machine with the 512MB of VRAM option).
I'd be interested to know this as well (have the same machine with the 512MB of VRAM option).
Ugg
Apr 29, 11:58 AM
The Economist, that stalwart of conservatism has this to say (http://www.economist.com/node/18620944?story_id=18620944) about the state of US transportation.
America is known for its huge highways, but ..... American traffic congestion is worse than western Europe�s. ....More time on lower quality roads also makes for a deadlier transport network. With some 15 deaths a year for every 100,000 people, the road fatality rate in America is 60% above the OECD average; 33,000 Americans were killed on roads in 2010.
America�s economy remains the world�s largest; its citizens are among the world�s richest. The government is not constitutionally opposed to grand public works. The country stitched its continental expanse together through two centuries of ambitious earthmoving. Almost from the beginning of the republic the federal government encouraged the building of critical canals and roadways. In the 19th century Congress provided funding for a transcontinental railway linking the east and west coasts. And between 1956 and 1992 America constructed the interstate system, among the largest public-works projects in history, which criss-crossed the continent with nearly 50,000 miles of motorways.
But modern America is stingier. Total public spending on transport and water infrastructure has fallen steadily since the 1960s and now stands at 2.4% of GDP. Europe, by contrast, invests 5% of GDP in its infrastructure, while China is racing into the future at 9%. America�s spending as a share of GDP has not come close to European levels for over 50 years. Over that time funds for both capital investments and operations and maintenance have steadily dropped (see chart 2).
Although America still builds roads with enthusiasm, according to the OECD�s International Transport Forum, it spends considerably less than Europe on maintaining them. In 2006 America spent more than twice as much per person as Britain on new construction; but Britain spent 23% more per person maintaining its roads.
America�s petrol tax is low by international standards, and has not gone up since 1993 (see chart 3). While the real value of the tax has eroded, the cost of building and maintaining infrastructure has gone up. As a result, the highway trust fund no longer supports even current spending. Congress has repeatedly been forced to top up the trust fund, with $30 billion since 2008.
Other rich nations avoid these problems. The cost of car ownership in Germany is 50% higher than it is in America, thanks to higher taxes on cars and petrol and higher fees on drivers� licences. The result is a more sustainably funded transport system. In 2006 German road fees brought in 2.6 times the money spent building and maintaining roads. American road taxes collected at the federal, state and local level covered just 72% of the money spent on highways that year, according to the Brookings Institution, a think-tank.
Supporters of a National Infrastructure Bank�Mr Obama among them�believe it offers America just such a shortcut. A bank would use strict cost-benefit analyses as a matter of course, and could make interstate investments easier. A European analogue, the European Investment Bank, has turned out to work well. Co-owned by the member states of the European Union, the EIB holds some $300 billion in capital which it uses to provide loans to deserving projects across the continent. EIB funding may provide up to half the cost for projects that satisfy EU objectives and are judged cost-effective by a panel of experts.
American leaders hungrily eye the private money the EIB attracts, spying a potential solution to their own fiscal dilemma.
The upshot is that we built too much, too fast and are unwilling to pay to maintain it although we continue to build bridges and highways (http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/04/28/third-houston-outerbelt-would-turn-prairies-into-texas-toast/) to nowhere.
America is known for its huge highways, but ..... American traffic congestion is worse than western Europe�s. ....More time on lower quality roads also makes for a deadlier transport network. With some 15 deaths a year for every 100,000 people, the road fatality rate in America is 60% above the OECD average; 33,000 Americans were killed on roads in 2010.
America�s economy remains the world�s largest; its citizens are among the world�s richest. The government is not constitutionally opposed to grand public works. The country stitched its continental expanse together through two centuries of ambitious earthmoving. Almost from the beginning of the republic the federal government encouraged the building of critical canals and roadways. In the 19th century Congress provided funding for a transcontinental railway linking the east and west coasts. And between 1956 and 1992 America constructed the interstate system, among the largest public-works projects in history, which criss-crossed the continent with nearly 50,000 miles of motorways.
But modern America is stingier. Total public spending on transport and water infrastructure has fallen steadily since the 1960s and now stands at 2.4% of GDP. Europe, by contrast, invests 5% of GDP in its infrastructure, while China is racing into the future at 9%. America�s spending as a share of GDP has not come close to European levels for over 50 years. Over that time funds for both capital investments and operations and maintenance have steadily dropped (see chart 2).
Although America still builds roads with enthusiasm, according to the OECD�s International Transport Forum, it spends considerably less than Europe on maintaining them. In 2006 America spent more than twice as much per person as Britain on new construction; but Britain spent 23% more per person maintaining its roads.
America�s petrol tax is low by international standards, and has not gone up since 1993 (see chart 3). While the real value of the tax has eroded, the cost of building and maintaining infrastructure has gone up. As a result, the highway trust fund no longer supports even current spending. Congress has repeatedly been forced to top up the trust fund, with $30 billion since 2008.
Other rich nations avoid these problems. The cost of car ownership in Germany is 50% higher than it is in America, thanks to higher taxes on cars and petrol and higher fees on drivers� licences. The result is a more sustainably funded transport system. In 2006 German road fees brought in 2.6 times the money spent building and maintaining roads. American road taxes collected at the federal, state and local level covered just 72% of the money spent on highways that year, according to the Brookings Institution, a think-tank.
Supporters of a National Infrastructure Bank�Mr Obama among them�believe it offers America just such a shortcut. A bank would use strict cost-benefit analyses as a matter of course, and could make interstate investments easier. A European analogue, the European Investment Bank, has turned out to work well. Co-owned by the member states of the European Union, the EIB holds some $300 billion in capital which it uses to provide loans to deserving projects across the continent. EIB funding may provide up to half the cost for projects that satisfy EU objectives and are judged cost-effective by a panel of experts.
American leaders hungrily eye the private money the EIB attracts, spying a potential solution to their own fiscal dilemma.
The upshot is that we built too much, too fast and are unwilling to pay to maintain it although we continue to build bridges and highways (http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/04/28/third-houston-outerbelt-would-turn-prairies-into-texas-toast/) to nowhere.
barkmonster
Apr 23, 03:48 AM
This is the primary design flaw with the iPad. This tablet can't be the normal person's computer unless every normal person has a tech friend/relative to keep the tablet working/updated. So while Woz is correct that the tablet will be the normal person's computer, Apple's iPad is not yet that tablet.
Same for all the iGadgets with an iTunes account attached. Why apple doesn't make the default behaviour "charge" not "sync" and then simply verify that it's not the same iTunes account and "do nothing" instead of the hassle of it hiding all your music if you plug an iDevice into a PC and you're mate decides to click eject for you if your charging off it.
I can understand the need to only offer syncing on a device that isn't internet and wifi enabled because the only way of adding stuff to it is to sync to a computer but for all the other devices, it would be good if it was 100% self-contained.
I'd have no issues getting a used Mac Mini then turning it into a media centre through an LCD TV at a later date because I eventually know a Mac Pro would be my best choice for running Pro Tools 9. Someone who just wants to listen to and buy music or video, send emails, view youTube clips and keep in touch on social networking sites doesn't necessarily need a computer when the iPad does it all. Apple could even offer a way of interfacing their external DVD from the Macbook Air with the iDevices so you can rip your own music to the device itself without even needing a computer.
Same for all the iGadgets with an iTunes account attached. Why apple doesn't make the default behaviour "charge" not "sync" and then simply verify that it's not the same iTunes account and "do nothing" instead of the hassle of it hiding all your music if you plug an iDevice into a PC and you're mate decides to click eject for you if your charging off it.
I can understand the need to only offer syncing on a device that isn't internet and wifi enabled because the only way of adding stuff to it is to sync to a computer but for all the other devices, it would be good if it was 100% self-contained.
I'd have no issues getting a used Mac Mini then turning it into a media centre through an LCD TV at a later date because I eventually know a Mac Pro would be my best choice for running Pro Tools 9. Someone who just wants to listen to and buy music or video, send emails, view youTube clips and keep in touch on social networking sites doesn't necessarily need a computer when the iPad does it all. Apple could even offer a way of interfacing their external DVD from the Macbook Air with the iDevices so you can rip your own music to the device itself without even needing a computer.
adroit
May 3, 12:15 AM
Hope they don't try to take away your universal health care!
It's likely on their secret agenda.
Bull's in the china shop, get ready to clean up the mess . . .
It's likely on their secret agenda.
Bull's in the china shop, get ready to clean up the mess . . .
CorvusCamenarum
Apr 13, 02:30 AM
1. You mean Ashkenazi Jews are 1SD above NON-JEWISH whites? Because last time i checked Ashkenazi's were white.
source - wiki
In an ethnic sense, an Ashkenazi Jew is one whose ancestry can be traced to the Jews of Central and Eastern Europe.
...
A 2006 study found Ashkenazi Jews to be a clear, relatively homogenous genetic subgroup
2. It actually has nothing to do with race. Jews have a higher chance of being college educated than non-jews, and blacks have less of a chance of being college educated than whites altogether. It's not genetic, its the result of a combination of social factors.
So in short, race has no effect on intelligence. Upbringing does.
I didn't say it was wholly genetic, nor do the authors of the book to which I linked. However, to accept without question that we inherit a myriad of traits from our parents (hair color, eye color, height, predisposition to certain diseases, the list goes on) but discount intelligence from that group is foolish in the extreme.
source - wiki
In an ethnic sense, an Ashkenazi Jew is one whose ancestry can be traced to the Jews of Central and Eastern Europe.
...
A 2006 study found Ashkenazi Jews to be a clear, relatively homogenous genetic subgroup
2. It actually has nothing to do with race. Jews have a higher chance of being college educated than non-jews, and blacks have less of a chance of being college educated than whites altogether. It's not genetic, its the result of a combination of social factors.
So in short, race has no effect on intelligence. Upbringing does.
I didn't say it was wholly genetic, nor do the authors of the book to which I linked. However, to accept without question that we inherit a myriad of traits from our parents (hair color, eye color, height, predisposition to certain diseases, the list goes on) but discount intelligence from that group is foolish in the extreme.
diehldun
Apr 12, 04:16 PM
Have you actually used it or are you just talking crap? The new version is actually really good and in my opinion BETTER than Apples product.
Agreed. A lot of people gave the previous Office crap (and rightfully so), but I've been very impressed with Office '11 and haven't looked back.
Dropped Apple Mail for Outlook, gave up on Pages a long long time ago, and Keynote's a nice toy to play with time to time. Office '11 for Mac is a very impressive showing on Microsoft's part.
Agreed. A lot of people gave the previous Office crap (and rightfully so), but I've been very impressed with Office '11 and haven't looked back.
Dropped Apple Mail for Outlook, gave up on Pages a long long time ago, and Keynote's a nice toy to play with time to time. Office '11 for Mac is a very impressive showing on Microsoft's part.
Rdclark
Apr 15, 11:55 AM
In January Consumer Reports surveyed over 58,000 of its subscribers on the quality of their cell phone service, with categories for voice, data, customer service, and coverage.
Both overall and localized for 26 different US cities, Verizon far outperformed AT&T in this survey.
It's customary for the tech community to scoff at Consumer Reports' findings, and often with very good reason. But if you ask 58k people, mostly the sort of middle-class folks that are typical CR subscribers, how satisfied they are with their cell phone service, the results IMO can't be easily dismissed. In this large sample, far more people were very unhappy with AT&T than with Verizon.
I found this -- as a person buying an iPad 2 as
1. a netbook/iPad/GPS/e-reader replacement, who
2. neither owns nor wants a smartphone, and who
3. spends nearly 100% of his time in large American cities
--to be a compelling argument in favor of Verizon. Far more compelling than any anecdotal evidence, which is all I see in this thread.
After a month with my 64GB white 3g iPad, I've had no reason to regret my choice. Verizon has never failed to connect, never dropped a connection, never seemed particularly sluggish (although I wait for wifi to download large files), and their pricing seems to fit my usage patterns more economically than AT&T's would have.
My point: it's possible for a rational person to research and analyze this question and come up with Verizon as an answer, and then be happy with that choice. Contrary to some assertions otherwise.
Both overall and localized for 26 different US cities, Verizon far outperformed AT&T in this survey.
It's customary for the tech community to scoff at Consumer Reports' findings, and often with very good reason. But if you ask 58k people, mostly the sort of middle-class folks that are typical CR subscribers, how satisfied they are with their cell phone service, the results IMO can't be easily dismissed. In this large sample, far more people were very unhappy with AT&T than with Verizon.
I found this -- as a person buying an iPad 2 as
1. a netbook/iPad/GPS/e-reader replacement, who
2. neither owns nor wants a smartphone, and who
3. spends nearly 100% of his time in large American cities
--to be a compelling argument in favor of Verizon. Far more compelling than any anecdotal evidence, which is all I see in this thread.
After a month with my 64GB white 3g iPad, I've had no reason to regret my choice. Verizon has never failed to connect, never dropped a connection, never seemed particularly sluggish (although I wait for wifi to download large files), and their pricing seems to fit my usage patterns more economically than AT&T's would have.
My point: it's possible for a rational person to research and analyze this question and come up with Verizon as an answer, and then be happy with that choice. Contrary to some assertions otherwise.
DavePurz
Apr 17, 01:52 AM
But seriously, if I were him, I'd just say "Screw off Apple, you didn't care about me until I was famous!"
I could not agree with you more!
My current iPhone is my last! I disgusted with Apple's monopolist stranglehold on the product and apps. They have become total control freaks.
When this phone dies, it will NOT be replaced with another Apple product.
I could not agree with you more!
My current iPhone is my last! I disgusted with Apple's monopolist stranglehold on the product and apps. They have become total control freaks.
When this phone dies, it will NOT be replaced with another Apple product.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar