I'm gonna pay a whole lot of attention to that, for sure.
... but the number of TV subscribers keeps going down. If they're claiming victory, I'd say it's a Phyrric one - but really, I'm not seeing it.
On the other hand, if they're doubling capacity, then you only need half the number of cycles
I'm pretty sure I saw an episode of Red Dwarf where they made a similar trade off... It ended up with Lister playing pool with planets.
Don't be like Lister.
It's good news for Google and their advertisers - fewer unwanted clicks means lower payouts.
I'm not sure whether it's anything but neutral for end users. I don't think Google's ads are the ones with the tiny little close buttons that induce false clicks - THOSE are rather irritating. But if Google really wanted to benefit end users, they'd start screening their ad content more rigorously.
It seems like we hear this every time a new version of Windows is out (or about to come out): "Yes, $PREV_VERSION had this problem, and you are ignorant and silly for running it! $CURRENT_VERSION solves all these problems!"
And I'm sure a few years, when it turns out Windows 10 has the same issues, we'll be hearing it again.
Yes, they should just accept their neighborhoods being trashed by naked, drunken idiots. Where do they think they live, some prudish town in the U.S.?
If you can't quantify something that should be readily quantifiable, then it's probably not there - no matter how much some PHB might wish it to be true.
With five people all interrupting each other and all trying to get their ideas heard, it likely means none of them are putting anything past a cursory amount of thought into the work. I can easily believe a group like this would actually be less productive than a single person coding alone.
Was THIS the way you finally managed to get off ssh1, Cisco?
I'm getting tired of not being able to read the entire heading for these stories, Slashdot. I know 8 year olds that would be better at web design than whatever "team" is handling it for you guys.
So is the average duration of a job search 35 years? 35 minutes? 35 seconds? 35 months?
No, they're having the box checked by default - you have to absolutely ask them to not shit on your floor.
And they're a lot like my dog - you might ask them not to, but they'll probably do it anyway.
Okay Larry, you can stop with the anonymous Slashdot postings - we know it's you.
Except there are no girls on Slashdot.
I'm not Catholic, so I can't say I paid particular attention to the Pope's Encyclical. But I am also not particularly interested in what some atomic scientist has to say about the encyclical, or Catholicism, or climate change for that matter.
Seriously, was putting the share button where the "read more..." link used to be designed to make people accidentally click on it?
I am reasonably certain you are exactly correct.
Someone who actually is known to have purchased the item, yea, their review should be worth more than random Internet person #4827341
It will depend how it's implemented. Amazon's current system is better than nothing, but some of their recent policy changes make it harder to find unbiased information - and this latest change could take it further down the rabbit hole, depending on the details.
I always look at the reviews before purchasing, and lately I've seen a LOT of reviews flagged as "Verified Purchase" - always at the very top of the list - which state, more or less, "I received this product at a discount in exchange for agreeing to write a review, but I'm not letting that discount bias my opinion". I make it a point to flag those as "unhelpful" and then go hunting for the reviews from people who actually purchased the product the same way I will be, should I purchase the product - at full price.