Regular finance account reporting of how the money is being used should be required. If you can't handle it, don't ask for money.
Or, the opposite: If you cannot handle the risk of losing the money without getting anything for it, don't pledge the money.
Kickstarter is meant to be risky. If there were no risks, the innovators would have gone to a bank instead.
For example, I have blind faith that God exists, and the mere existence of *something* spawning from absolutely nothing (however many layers deep in a multi-dimentional abstract) came into being. Why did it happen? It's a philosophical question that science can't touch.
God is not an answer. It just adds the same questions we have about the universe to god. Why does god exist? How did god come into existence?
The only difference is that we have a chance of answering the "how" for the universe, but not for a god. So by adding a god hypothesis, we are left with more unanswerable questions, not fewer.
So why does the universe exist? Science tells us why (read an astrophysics text book) and it has very good reasoning and experimentation to back it up.
No, astrophysics text book don't tell us why the universe exists. They tell us the theories of how it developed, but not why.
The why is for now firmly in the realms of philosophy and religion.
If you have an example of an astrophysics text book that states why the universe exists, please give us the reference.
Almost. Science is the way by which we find things which are false.
Almost. Science is the way by which we find out things that may be true and things that cannot be true.
News for ya, in America, everyone's opinion is worth something and is ultimately expressed through the ballot box. Science doesn't get to say "Do this, for I have obtained a 95% confidence level!"
Contrary to what you may think, you don't get to decide on what's facts.
The laws of nature are not decided by vote or fiat, but we learn about them from experimentation.
Even when a state introduces a bill that pi is exactly 3.2, nature stubbornly refuses to cooperate.
You know who among the population has low resting heartbeats? Athletes. People who accelerate their heartbeat on a regular basis.
Also keep in mind that athletes have a lower life expectancy than average. And quite a large part of that shortened life span is done exercising instead of doing something productive.
My resting pulse is 1.08 Hz!
1.80 here.
Mein Herz brennt.
Because if you're sitting sedentary writing code and your heart rate is 90+ you're going to have a rather short life of writing code. That's why you should care.
Getting closer to retirement here. I've done my share of coding, and the heart rate hasn't killed me.
On the other hand, I don't spend large parts of my life exercising and worrying about my health. Why spend 30% of your off-time to perhaps live 20% longer? Especially if most of that time is going to be in a retirement home, worrying about bowel movements and whether there will be pudding.
I honestly prefer to live my life in the fast lane.
Caffeine, nicotine and endorphines keep me living when I'm alive, and still young enough to enjoy it.
If I die earlier, so be it - being dead isn't anything to fear. It's just non-existence. I was in that state for billions of years before I got born.
And now it's time for another pot of coffee and a fresh tin of snuff. Got another book chapter to write.
I think the answer is to fork Redhat EL6, and not accept the choice in RH7 of moving from Upstart to SystemD. Upstart and Udev in RH6 is just great....
Indeed. Iffen ain't broke, don't "fix" it. Or, in this case, don't outright break it.
The best hope I see for a viable long-term supported Enterprise Linux now is a ScientificLinux spin, with eudev and continued hal support. CentOS has become a Red Hat subsidiary, and will toe the party line.
I was saddened to see CERN leave SL for CentOS, and wonder what lubed that decision. I hope Fermilab keeps up the dedication and support, also for spins, and don't get tempted by tall sandwiches.
On my PC with an Asus mainboard the Sleep and Hibernate simply don't work (and never worked with multiple distros and kernels). I need to reboot each day therefore boot time is important for *me*.
Then the solution seems to fix sleep and hibernate, not to break servers.
unfortunately there seem to be a load of self-important old school admins who know it all who hate change and disparage other peoples efforts by making dubious "complaints"
The first ones making complaints are the users, if you kill their processes in a reboot. Even if it is was announced weeks in advance, with follow-ups.
The sane thing to do is to make sure you don't have to reboot. Not going the systemd route helps with that.
The compatibility is a main reason. Being able to run and configure all startup/shutdown processes independently of the overseer is nice. As a sysadmin, I get to do easy manual corrections, additions and deletions without giving init a thought.
i don't have to use the "service" command, and I spend far less time when seting up a new server or adding a service.
i don't give a crap whether the system boots twice as fast - reboots are years between, and in scheduled windows. I want something that lets me admin my systems without relying on anything more than a dumb terminal - and if need be, not even that.
Which is why I don't see a systemd fork as a viable alternative. The whole idea is broken, as it breaks with the Unix toolbox approach, where tools work independently, and not as a clusterfuck of apps that engage in social networking under the dictatorship of an object-oriented leviathan.
I have turned down Red Hat EL 7 for my business systems, and install RHEL 6 with vaious 3rd party repos to get new packages, precisely because of systemd.
A leaner fork of systemd just won't do it.
Give me an init that only does init and does it well with a KISS philosophy. And give me hal back - systemd-udev cannot do what it does, which makes RHEL 7 unusable. I don't want a 90% system, when the 10% is used by my business to earn money.
First, advertisers only pay if you click the on the ad.,/quote>
This is not true. Web advertising has three models, which are often used in combination:
1: Referral fee. When an ad leads to a sale, the ad hoster gets a cut.
2: Click-throughs. When an ad is clicked, the ad hoster gets a fee.
3: Impressions. When an ad is displayed, the ad hoster gets a smaller fee.
Paying for impressions is an important part of ad business - it's similar to billboard and magazine ads, in that the user don't click them, but hopefully remembers - if nothing else subconsciously, so the next time they're at the store they pick the goods with the logo and color combinations that's been impressed on them.
I am very happy that they make a comeback. If they recover to a point that they become harvestable resorce, I may get to eat blue whale again.
"Whale meat again, don't know where, don't know when...."
All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to Gaussian noise. -- James Martin
