[D]epending on your use of Dropbox there are far better services. If you are simply storing and sharing files with a select few then Google drive gives you 15 GB which is a huge amount of storage in comparison.
Plus with someone like Rice onboard, how long before Dropbox ends up in an incestuous relationship with the NSA?
You claim to be concerned about "incestuous relationship[s] with the NSA," yet you recommend another corporate partner in NSA's PRISM spy-ring in favor of another. Why not find/try a tool or service that hasn't already been implicated in NSA-produced documents in serving as a front-end for one or more of their "collect it all" programs? In my view, that one of these corporate partners allows you to hand over more data to the NSA than a competitor isn't a compelling argument for its use — especially when that corporation makes their billions in part by scrutinizing and monetizing anything you give them in the first place.
15GB may be "huge" in comparison to another service willing to oh-so-charitably take ownership of your data for you, but 15GB represents a mere ~1% of a typical modern HDD, or about a seventh of what I upload daily via BitTorrent. Add in end-to-end encryption and a good-availability residential Internet connection, and you can share data without utilizing surveillance-state honeypots. For tools and services that allow you to do this, the website PRISM Break is a great place to start looking for a solution that has had at least some effort put forth in protecting users' privacy.
The guy's next door from Switzerland are called Australians.
Shouldn't the guy's next door from Switzerland be called "the door from Switzerland that will replace the guy's current door?"
A modern instrument may sound better right away she says, but an old Italian may be able to produce more colors of sound that only become apparent after months of use, she says.
The phrase "confirmation bias" springs immediately to mind. People hear what they want to hear, and the knowledge that they're playing on a three-century-old, million-dollar violin gives them certain expectations.
Given the progression of science and technology — specifically in the fields of material science, metallurgy, computer modelling, rapid prototyping, audio spectral analysis, understanding of sound wave propagation, etc. — I'd bet on the superiority of a modern high-end musical instrument over an antique high-end musical instrument in objective measurements (e.g., frequency accuracy, precision parts manufacturing and assembly) and subjective measurements (e.g., those measured in the study we're discussing). (For clarity and completeness: I'd bet on the modern musical instruments against their antique counterparts at any initial/new sale price; not just high-end.)
If a musician has personally invested a fortune in an antique instrument, I have no doubt that confirmation bias plays a substantial part in that musician's high regard for his or her instrument, particularly considering one of the worse psychological alternatives: buyer's remorse.
OTOH, I've had a bit of success with dowsing, (two out of two, when I was seriously trying...not statistically significant) and a bit of success with gambling (1 out of 1 when I was seriously trying against a slot machine...I wone $7 starting with a quarter). And I can't explain those, except that they aren't statistically significant. But I wonder. So I'm not unbiased.
Can you at least explain how one "seriously tr[ies] against a slot machine?" Pull the handle instead of pressing the button? Exert great force while pulling the handle (or pressing the button)? "Be the ball?"
Please describe to me in concrete terms (facts, not FUD) how google is worse than facebook.
I'm all out of aggregate; are cement terms okay?
Haven't heard of Godwin's Law have you?
Since a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler has occurred, this online discussion apparently has a length. Nice catch.
I'd define certain MS products as crapware, not malware. When they charge you $100 extra with the Ultimate editions of windows for a glitzy interface and a few features you could get for free from other vendors, that's crapware, but the underlying core of Windows (and the win32/RT API) certainly isn't.
I've never heard of "crapware" before, but charging money for something that has no monetary value (as it's offered for free by another entity) sounds to me like fraud.
I think it's certainly malicious when MS informs NSA about various security holes in their products prior to patching them — it's difficult for me to conceive a better way to undermine customers' trust.