"to other viruses" should have read "to other generations"
It's an immune system response that viruses leverage to spread. If you could create a similar virus that didn't cause an immune system response, its transmition rates would probably be lower. I would argue that just as the pathogen in the article has evolved to evoke a certain response in the article, cold/flu have probably evolved to maximize the immune system response(short of killing the host) as such variations of the virus would transmit more readily and pass that evolutionary trait to other viruses.
Regardless, how is any of that a counter argument to the application of zombie terminology? Is it dead? No, then not a zombie. It's a vogue term and it's silly for a study to use the term. Modified behavior != zombie.
The cold/flu causes us to produce additional muccus/sneeze/cough, altering our behavior which increases transmission rates. This doesn't mean we are zombies. I think it's a very interesting find, but a little ridiculous to involve the term zombie.
I agree with the essence of the statement, but it's written in terms of childish absolutes such as "nobody" that obviously isn't true. Maybe if he had said "The majority of
Cloud is good for reliability, scalability, and if your particular scenario meets certain criteria, sometimes cost. Overall the cloud would be usually be more expensive, but can be cheaper to use cloud and only pay for what you need if you have short periods of high load combined with long periods of little load. Thus cloud might be cheaper because rather than paying for, cooling, powering, and maintaining alot of high end servers waiting to handle a large load only occasionally, you pay for what you need with the cloud. I would speculate you wouldn't see such savings on a single server.
If you could find a development/CI hosting platform that meets your needs, that would probably be a better bet. Such a service might be using cloud behind the scenes, but they benefit from the efficiencies of scale.
Another option is a semi-dedicate VPS. There are some VPS services that give you root access and terms would allow you to use the box as you do now.
I think someone went into this with the assumption that costs would go down using cloud, but your management time is going to be the same or more. You don't have a physical box, but now you will spend more time figuring out the nuances of your cloud host.
The key is to seperate the goal from the premature jump to cloud:
-If the goal is to get rid of the physical box, then VPS is an option.
-If the goal is to get rid of the physical box and lower management time/costs, then a hosted development/build/integration service is a good option. That way you don't even have to manage the OS, updates to the software/services, or perform backups.
Right-ism that "attracts low-information voters with buzzwords and sounds bites like" socialism and "destroying America".
Still have my same insurance BTW.
What version of Minecraft does it support? The answer to that question does change something.
Man, and I was so excited they the developer iteration was 1080 resolution and only $350. If that reflects potential commercial pricing, and you look at other existing HMDs at that resolution, then that's actually pretty awesome.
He did ask if it was a joke, which is a valid question because plenty of people on the internet make rediculously stupid statements. I don't blame him for wondering if you were serious or a joke. He clearly reallized that there was a remote possibility that you were joking, so I don't see that a "woosh" was appropriate. You could have just said you were indeed joking
Thanks for the excellent explanation.
My understanding of bitcoin is limited, but I thought that there were distributed public ledgers that track transactions on the bitcoin network. How would they transfer these without anyone knowing?
Was this unlimited spending a flaw of the system and procedure, an intended procedure, or did Walmart simply not follow appropriate procedure? If Walmart took it upon themselves to allow unauthorized spending during the outage, why did they not at least impose a reasonable limit that would allow a family to get through the next day?
This news has already incited a lot of inflammatory and childish debate across the web from both those who are pro and anti-foodstamps, drowning out any intelligent analysis of the system/procedures that caused this event."
That's nice. I'll have to pay more attention on my next camera. Think my Nikon D60 only goes up to 1200. How is the graininess on that camera? Mine gets really grainy on long exposures if I have ISO above 800. I know that's kind of the holy grail pipe dream of getting high ISO without graininess.
Not to mention having to keep a notebook on settings you used for each photo so that you could learn what is working.
One thing is for certain, there's alot of things that are alot easier and cheaper to do in digital. I did alot of long exposures and night photography. Trying to get a balance between grainyness and being too dark is challenging when the feedback you get on your settings is a couple weeks later. You can go through a whole roll trying different settings. One time I went to pick up prints and the lab gave me the negatives and said they didn't turn out. I had to point out to them a couple shots on the negatives that were of a little bio-luminescent grub. They were skeptical but went and printed them for me and they turned out fine. That was an entire roll of film just for two pictures.
I also got alot better because I was getting immediate feedback when using manual settings.
It also makes doing timelapse photography feasible on an amateur budget.
What's really odd to me is the digital cameras are not any better at capturing light. I saw a documentary on a large telescope that talked about how much light is not captured by film, and what a huge amount more is captured by a CCD, which is important for imaging faint objects. Maybe they have a better CCD than what you get in cameras.