Do those people call the time "the thirty-seventh of three p.m."? I think not.
We say "twenty-three minutes to four".
so you don't have to DO anything anymore to get arrested? He was arrested for "al-Qaeda ties"?
Nobody likes novelty ties. It is about time some legislation was put in place to deal with them.
There's a very simple, mutually beneficial solution to this - Google should do Mr. Murdoch a favor and stop indexing his content. It's really a win-win scenario for everyone (including readers).
That's ironic.
Both as a search engine and news aggregator Google must be objective. When Google starts letting their business, political or whatever agenda influence their output, that output is nothing more than biased and untrustworthy. It is no longer information, it is worthless. Just because a bias suits your (and my) own views does not change that.
Google should not stop indexing his sites and so on until formally asked, whether by letter or by Robots.txt.
Meanwhile, though, S3's storage is pretty expensive for that sort of data on a consumer level, at $150 per month for 1TB of storage. For those prices, on any sort of lengthy term, I can easily justify the time and expense of putting together my own network backup solution (parking a cheap NAS box over at a friend's house, for instance), and still have enough cash left over to build a second one so that the same friend can back his stuff up to a NAS box at my house.
So don't buy storage space on S3. Simple. End of story.
Of course, if you're making use of more of S3's functionality (e.g., the data's online and so accessible from anywhere) then the price starts to look a lot better, and the fact that its a replicated geographically-distributed data store so you don't have a huge worry about the data becoming inaccessible when Bad Things Happen... that's when it goes from looking expensive to cheap and easy. But not everyone needs that, and it is up to you to make your own mind up; we can't do it for you.
Competition in the marketplace is required to have a true, capitalist economy. Healthcare does not have this due to government regulation.
Not government regulation, insurance companies' regulations. Take my insurance, for example: my co-pay is the same no matter where I buy a prescription drug, even though the price per pharmacy can vary by 50%. I have no incentive to find a cheap drug store, my incentive is to get the best price by saving gasoline and buying it at the closest pharmacy -- which happens to be the most expensive.
Can you give me an example of any government regulation that makes health care more expensive?
As a final note, I have a pre-existing condition, and I am extremely pleased with my insurance provider.
It's a good thing you're pleased with your current provider, because if you wanted to switch, your pre-existing condition wouldn't let you.
By the same logic, the term "detective fiction" gives the author license to totally ignore standard procedures and techniques used by detectives, the term "military fiction" allows the author to totally ignore military tactics and strategy
Yes. Do you think all detectives are like Poirot, The Continental Operative or Sherlock Holmes? Do you think the Tiger Generals depicted in the Three Kingdoms actually used military tactics such as I'll-hold-back-this-entire-army-single-handedly-with-my-super-human-fighting-ability? Most of the best works of historical/science/detective fiction take plenty of liberties because the details of what did/would actually happen make for dull reading.
The test of intelligent tinkering is to save all the parts. -- Aldo Leopold
