The point is to be bought by somebody else, not to make profit.
Then... why reject 3 billion from Facebook? How many other companies, with more money to waste, are willing to buy these guys, from where you are looking at it?
"up vote" and high UID. go back to reddit.
Honey, I wrote that comment. Check my actual UID and shut up!
the ISPs will do whatever they want that works out best for their bottom line.
I don't even see why they won't go forward with screwing SSH and other low latency dependent applications, once this crap becomes acceptable: "Oh, you need your packets to arrive in less than 2 seconds? We have this extra-upgrade just for you."
But even the Iron Maiden story suggested no one makes money off of selling CDs. Sure, to make millions like Iron Maiden does, it's hard, no doubt about that. But if even them don't make any serious money out of selling CDs, why do we expect anyone else to do? How much money do Iron Maiden make out of Spotify? Is an indie artist seriously going to expect more?
I wonder if a country could actually orbit a satellite with enough power and a spot beam to stop cars in an entire city... in the name of anti-terrorism, of course.
Sure... and in the process kill all other electronics. Use satellite to prevent a terrorist car from moving to its target in NY city. Leave the entire city to deal with the economic (and social) impacts of shutting it down for 10 minutes.
Two days ago we had a story about how Iron Maiden is making big bucks by touring and not by selling CDs or whatever. Everyone agreed, back then, that this is the way to make money in the music industry.
Are we now surprised that no one gets to be a millionaire just out of Spotify?
I am not sure what she'll do after but I am positive I'll commit suicide after killing her.
So, if you're wife gets in a car accident next week and you face this decision, are you sure you are willing to kill yourself? Or you're just telling us that in the remote future when you're a really old man and she is super-sick, etc., etc... Because you know, life often doesn't turn out how we planned it.
The one (slightly) novel aspect of this, presumably also made possible because the workload parallelized well, is the use of Spot Instances. As the name suggests, these aren't Amazon's standard fixed-price instances; but are rather instances whose price changes according to demand.
Even that isn't novel. Quoting some work done last year "Running a 10,000-node Grid Engine Cluster in Amazon EC2": "Also, we mainly requested for spot instances because
Doesn't make it less interesting for me though.
but slowing down like this at this point in time is normal, (and I assume expected) successful projects and failed projects alike.
I totally agree with you, this slow down is expected. But, whereas some projects that get funded will have this slowdown close to or already after their goal* if at all, the Ubuntu Edge project is stalled at about one third of their stated goal. We can safely assume that everyone wanting a Ubuntu Edge, knowing about it, and with the money for it already donated. There will be no geeks pledging for the phone at the last minute. So, either at the end someone with lots of funds (and possibly connected to Canonical) just orders around 30 thousand of these phones so that the goal is met, or this campaign will fail.
* NOTE: I'm not trying to focus on the issues discussed on the Slashdot thread I linked to. Merely to the money they made relative to their goal.
Bloomberg is the first business to opt for the bundle — but it will get its money back if the project isn't fully funded.
This is no more than free publicity for Bloomberg then. They're pledging to give 80 thousand USD to a project if it gets fully funded. Said project after getting 7 million in the first 24 or 48 hours, has only managed to go up 1 more million in two weeks. And it needs 24 million more in the next two weeks!
Chances of actually having to give the 80 kUSD... close to 0. Free publicity... a lot!
Well, what does that mean? If I have bedbugs, and I leave this out overnight, is there a 23% chance it'll be empty in the morning?
Yes, that's what that means. It is said that these are merely monitors, they are not meant to kill all the bugs. Just like having a mouse trap empty does not mean no mice in your house, having no bedbugs in your trap does not mean no bedbugs. But, keep it there for n days and the 0.23^n chance of it consistently failing at catching something becomes negligible.
I wonder if the same design works for fleas. I understand fleas are also attracted to CO2, so the yeast + sugar water thing would likely improve results with fleas as well.
My guess is it wouldn't work as well (the entire plastic bowl + CO2 source thingy). It says in the article one of the main advantages of this contraption is the high walls that make it hard for the bugs to come out. Fleas would most likely just jump out of the trap once they realized there's CO2 in there but nothing to eat.
good luck with that ask pussy riot what they got for disrespecting the Orthodox church and I suspect that Nashi boot boys might turn up at some meetings.
If you think Pussy Riot had all to do with the Orthodox Church and nothing to do with political activism against Putin, you got your story as wrong as Kremlin wanted you to.
Hell, there exists atleast one specific one that doesn't mate at all and produces only perfect clones of themselves, and still haven't become extinct.
In case you don't know the specific term for this (and how widespread it is): Parthenogenesis.
There are 4 questions in my comment. You decided to answer the sarcastic half. Could you please focus on the second half of the comment, the part of some that actual interest?
Ya'll hear about the geometer who went to the beach to catch some rays and became a tangent ?
