OCZ is/was a horribly managed company, but IMO one of their other core problems is/was that they arn't a flash memory (NAND) manufacturer... Difficult to compete on price when their major SSD competitors (Intel, Samsung, Crucial/Micron, SanDisk) all have their own fabs...
Presumably you're assuming a 6 chamber gun with one bullet and "therefore" a 1-in-6 chance of getting shot.
However... due to the weight of the bullet, when you spin the chamber prior to firing, the bullet will tend (due to gravity) to end up in one of the lower vs the highest (firing) positions, so the average chance of getting shot should actually be somewhat less than 1-in-6.
The story is clearly about the competition between Apple and Samsung, and fact is that Samsung now makes more profit ($5B last in most recent quarter - that's earnings, not revenue) from smart phones than Apple does.
Apple has mostly saturated the US market and to save the stcok price from collapsing needs to find other markets for growth... China was one big hope, but it appears it's not happening. That's certainly news.
And now someone like Henry Blodget is trying to say that newspapers need stuff that can't be found elsewhere to survive, which basically means to become the local gossiping outlet?
That's your conclusion, not his.
Investigative journalism is indeed unique content - the product of unique real people with the investigative skills to unearth and develop these stories. Watergate didn't hit the news via a syndicated Whitehouse press release.
You're also going to find more compelling content in media that is published less frequently, or in occasional rather than daily editorials. At web-speed you're just going to get a firehose of daily chatter.
From a NASCOM-1 1MHz Z-80 with 2KB of RAM in 1978 to a 3GHz PC with 8GB of RAM today.
Try Intel's free OpenCV (Computer Vision) library, which includes GPU acceleration.
Old glass windows more likely show variability in width due to the way "plate" glass used to be manufactured... It was spun out into a sheet under centripetal force by swirling a blob of molten glass on a rod (the center swirly piece, broken off the rod, sometimes being seen in old cottage windows, etc).
I don't need no stinking screens!
Adding features doesn't necessarily mean making the user experience/interface more complicated, although that's certainly the norm in the software industry.
For example, Siri has the potential to be the main user interface to new features without the user having to be aware of them at all unless they are using them.
The user interface also doesn't have to be the same for everyone - it could potentially adapt to the user such that a user that routinely invokes advanced functionality could choose to have the corresponding controls promoted to a more prominent place in the UI.
I don't know what the case is with Dao, but optionally typed doesn't necessarily mean no type checking. For example, in Google's Dart, variables are optionally typed in the sense that if you choose not to statically declare their type then the type is determined dynamically by assignment - but they are stll typed.
The vast majority of physical systems exhibit classical behavior at classical scales, and brains function as best we know at a VERY macro scale - on the level of cortical "minicolums" (hundreds of neurons) rather than anything less.
Before wasting time designing impossibly complex experiments to see if the brain is operating deterministically, let's first see is anyone can observe a single neuron not obeying the laws of classical physics...
I also think that the term "deterministic" is being used rather loosely in this thread... it's being used not not a matter of classical (=deterministic) vs quantum or randon, but rather one of physical vs dualistic (spiritual/free will).
Any possible proof of the determinism of the human brain would first require that we come to a complete understanding of the chemical and biological processes that control human thought in addition to how environmental and genetic factors influence those internal processes. I think this particular question will stay in the realm of philosophy rather than science for an extremely long time.
Why would the determinism of the human brain (or of anything subject to the laws of physics) be in question. The fact the the brain is extremely complex and that our subjective experience is that of "free will" is irrelevant... at the end of the day our brain (and the rest of us too) is just a big old chunk of biochemistry, and operates per the laws of physics just like anything else. We don't need to prove it's deterministic since we a priori know that it must be.
Of course, our behavioral responses and thoughts are a highly non-linear (chaotic) function of our sensory inputs and (forever changing as a result of experience) brain wiring (synapses), so our behavior appears non-deterministic (or more accurately, often hard to predict), but so does the bahavior of any chaotic system (e.g the weather).
Robots are no different that humans in that respect - their behavior will always be deterministic, but will be chaotic and difficicult/practically impossible to predict to the extect that we've given them brains with similar levels of complexity and experience-driven plasticity as our own. The robots of the future will surely be a lot more like us than like a roomba vaccum cleaner.