I just won a game of Tic-Tac-Toe for the first time ever.
I just won a game of Tic-Tac-Toe for the first time ever.
Normally companies use "earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization" to make it look like they are profitable when they really aren't. It's not recognized as a proper measurement of profitability by generally accepted accounting principles. In the words of Warren Buffett, "Does management think the tooth fairy pays for capital expenditures?"
This is exactly right. I used to think that I would write faster using a keyboard rather than using a pencil and paper, or using my phone, because I can type faster on a keyboard. But the vast majority of the time spent writing is in thinking about what to write, not actually writing it down. The time savings from typing is negligible. The older I get, the more I love clipboards. Writing on a phone keyboard really does suck because you have to spend most of your cognitive effort fixing the autocorrect.
Windows has really cleaned up its act over the past ten years. I switched to Linux back in 2005 when Windows XP was basically unusable. When I started working at my current job several years later, my desktop was Windows-based. I was surprised at how stable Windows had become, and I eventually just switched over completely. I can't remember a single BSOD in the last 5 years, whereas they used to happen 5 times a day. These days, Windows just does its job and stays out of my way. I still run Debian on my office server for the more robust backups/rsync capability.
But you know, I haven't tried Linux in a while, maybe it will surprise me, just as Windows surprised me when I came back to it after a few years.
Washington DC has a relatively high murder rate. Not close to St. Louis or Detroit, but 4 times higher than New York City, and slightly higher than Chicago. There are also a lot of government employees living in Washington DC since it is the capital of the USA. So chances are that some government employees will be murdered every year.
Snopes has declared all of this False. http://www.snopes.com/politics...
"Clinton was acquainted with some people who died — that's about all one can make of this list."
I run an XP desktop at my office. It's used exclusively for our high-speed document scanner. It's not allowed on the internet, meaning that it only accepts connections to and from our file server, which is running Debian. I don't see any reason to upgrade to Windows 10 for this use. There are five computers in my office, four of them desktops, so this means that 25% of the desktops at my firm are running Windows XP.
I own one of these, so I'm sad to see that the service is being stopped. I initially got it just for sleep tracking, since it was the best in that category at the time. But after I got it, I also started wearing it during the day because it was just a damn decent watch; that is, it was good at telling the time. The LCD display was large and clear, and the band was very comfortable. It's actually one of the best and watches I've ever owned, just as a watch. I would charge it for a few minutes each day when I took a shower, and this was enough to top up the battery.
I also had a minor knee surgery in December, and I found that it was very useful for tracking my steps during my recovery. Finally, when they updated it to receive notifications, I was surprised at how convenient it was to get text messages on my watch.
So all in all, it was a great piece of hardware and I'm sad to see it go.
respective - adjective - belonging or relating separately to each of two or more people or things.
The summary asks "do you think the company will soon become just another name in its respective category?" In this context, the word "respective" is meaningless because it has only a single referent. I'm not sure what the editor was trying to signify by adding it to the sentence.
That works out to about $800,000 per year. It's a lot for one person, but there are likely many people working on this. They're not even sitting back and watching the money roll in; they've been constantly working to keep up with the white hats. If there are more than 10 people working on this, they could probably get normal jobs that would pay nearly as well. So it actually looks like we're doing a pretty good job of making this unprofitable. I suppose the determining factor is local salaries, so it will be profitable in very poor countries but not in richer ones.
This is the same as the Trolley Problem, a famous philosophical dilemma, first proposed in 1967: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Basically, a runaway trolley is going to kill five people. You can either do nothing and let the trolley kill them, or pull a lever to switch it to another track on which it will kill only one person. There are many variations, including one in which you push a fat man onto the tracks to stop the trolley. Philosophers have written a LOT about it. Here are some humorous variations:
Technically I do have an account, because Facebook doesn't let you delete your account. Mine has been "deactivated" for years. I voted "no," but "none of the above" would have been more technically accurate. I don't have an active account that I use, and I haven't for many years, so it would be misleading to choose "yes." But I do technically have an account, so it's also misleading to choose "no." I voted "no" anyhow because I really wish I didn't have an account, and if I were up to me, I wouldn't have one.
Even if these allegations are politically motivated, it doesn't mean that they are false. There is an embarrassingly large amount of sexual assault, rape, and sexism in the world, and especially in the IT industry. There is a ready-made avenue to prosecute men in the tech sector because a whole lot of them engage in criminal sexual behavior. If we could stop the culture of sexism, the ready-made discrediting and prosecution would disappear. All men can help out simply by not behaving like creepy assholes, and by calling out those who do. And if you're going to challenge government surveillance, for fuck's sake don't go around raping people all the time!
Here is one of several articles: http://www.economist.com/blogs...
Stupid question: I'm using a TV as a monitor for the past eight years now, it works very well and is sharp enough (but I don't watch any TV on it). When I bought it, there were no monitors of that size available.
What's the advantage of having a dedicated monitor instead of using a TV as monitor?
I used to only have one display: I would unplug my desktop monitor and carry it across the living room when I wanted to watch a movie on the couch. It took about one minute to switch. Since I upgraded my monitor I have an extra that I use just for watching TV/movies. I prefer using a monitor as a TV -- rather than using a TV as a monitor -- because I like a smaller display. I don't watch TV very often, so I want something that I can move out of the way when I'm not using it. If I preferred a larger display, I might use a TV as a monitor like you suggest. For small sizes at least, a monitor will be cheaper and have a better display at a given price point.
Actually, now that you mention it, I should probably just get rid of my second monitor and go back to having a single display in my house. It will save space and look nicer. I'll donate it or something.
Reference the NULL within NULL, it is the gateway to all wizardry.