HN user
I shoplifted the 3-volume hardcover set of Feynman Lectures from the Borders bookstore in Cambridge in 2003. I would be happy to make partial amends for this by donating the full retail cost to any efforts to digitize volumes 2 and 3.
It's easier to price a luxury car appropriately if the taxpayer is contributing $7,500.
People who spend a lot of time working with and thinking about the Internet, and not a lot of time working with and thinking about government, often fall victim to the delusion that the Internet somehow "changes everything."
It's not true in the slightest. Governments have consolidated, maintained, and lost power since the dawn of civilization. They have marshaled popular support, quashed dissenters, and brutalized their enemies. They have taken major societal changes (Industrial Revolution, advent of firearms, invention of broadcast media) and harnessed them for the perpetuation of their own power.
Governments will continue to use their central power, the power of violence, to maintain the general framework under which their power endures. The Internet won't change that at all.
Your ad seems to suggest desperation -- "I need cash right now." That's not a bad thing to say, but when you're in that situation you should be playing in your wheelhouse.
If you're not desperate, you should reword your ad to emphasize the fact that you're trying to broaden your search.
There's an incoherence in the message.
The Tesla is a great car but it's absolutely insane that American taxpayers are donating $7500 to allow rich people to buy $75,000 luxury cars.
This is the wrong approach -- why not take a job as an ESL teacher (you won't find many people here hiring for that) by searching in the right channels?
Never. The word "terrorism" is a word used by the incumbent power to describe that which is "other." They get to decide who the word applies to and who it doesn't.
Here's the reason that nobody likes to say: at some point, we're going to have a war with China, and then we'll need air superiority.
Clicked the link expecting a $10-20 price. Saw the screenshot, glanced up to the 4.5 star reviews, and bought it. Probably 15 seconds from landing to purchase.
I have bought $10-30 apps in the past (mostly for music production) and have been happy with all of them except one, which I returned for a refund.
The blog post is at Wolfram Research's web site. Of course it is going to promote Mathematica, which is actually great software, too.
When you look at a photo essay on Canon or Nikon's website, it promotes the features of their (very good) cameras as well as showcasing excellent photography. Don't dismiss the valuable content that these corporate-sponsored posts give you just because they have an agenda.
In the analogous retail situation, with physical coupons, there is no "coupon code" field -- the cashier does not ask you "Do you have any coupons today?" Even worse would be for them to ask "Do you have the $10 off coupon on this dog food?" you'd feel like you lost $10. If you have a coupon, you present it to the cashier, and other customers aren't made aware of the fact that they're not getting the best price.
Predictions of technology from long ago just aren't interesting, since it's trivial to fantasize about technologies without having to think about implementation.
I can predict today of future flying cars, teleporters, mind-controlled interfaces, Turing-test AIs, electrically powered autonomous airplanes, giant tubes that go through the center of the Earth and take me directly to China, a massive spaceship that takes all of Earth's 20 billion people to a new galaxy in the year 2380, etc. etc.
Doesn't mean that I know anything.
I just wanted to see if anyone would agree with it.
I wouldn't use it because I would get claustrophobic. But I don't think it's being engineered for claustrophobes -- we'll take the train or drive, and people who are comfortable with Hyperloop will take that. No solution can meet everyone's needs.
I wouldn't even be 1% surprised if they forced Swartz into committing suicide, by threatening to harm his loved ones if he didn't.
This is why I personally refuse to engage in any discussions about race or gender issues except online. Low reward, with a high risk of a career-ending brand as a sexist or racist asshole.
Sure, but I see people going at each other like this all the time on TV, regardless of gender - we no longer have the mutual respect of the Edward R. Murrow days. I think this is actually how Bill O Reilly speaks to every single one of his (predominantly male) guests.
What is the purpose of the word "mansplaining" in the opening paragraph? It sounds like the author is claiming sexist dismissiveness while offering no evidence of such.
I am someone who has only the vaguest interest in my fellow human beings, and has a great, loving relationship with my girlfriend. Different people want different things. I enjoy my girlfriend's company and enjoy spending time with her and a few other friends but in general I detest the presence of other people in my physical vicinity.
In the United States, most public education is administered at the town level. Because towns are so small compared to counties/states/nations, the variance among towns in parameters is very high -- two towns only 15 minutes apart can easily vary twentyfold along parameters like average income and percentage of adults with graduate degrees.
Thus, what passes for a "standard high school education" in the United States varies wildly -- in some schools, you can graduate without even being able to read and comprehend a magazine article. In others, the top graduates often find Harvard less intellectually rigorous than their high school (because Harvard has to help their students from worse high schools catch up).
This author reaches pretty far. The NSA paid Microsoft to acquire Skype? You can't just materialize multiple billions of dollars on a public company's income statement.
Of course - Snowden was about as "low level" of a guy as they come (contractor for four months) and was able to basically access everything.
Probably around 2%.
I'm using the word "1%" in the recently popularized figurative sense, the people who make enough money to outsource things like hailing a taxi or doing grocery shopping.
All of these new services that enable poor or lower-income people to serve rich people (Uber, TaskRabbit, Instacart) have been enabled by two main things: an economic recession that permanently eliminated a lot of jobs and the recovery which drove economics gains to the 1%, and smartphones, which allow the customers or workers to send or receive requests at any time.
Kindle is the only product where the Amazon review system is guaranteed to be "fair" -- Amazon is delivering the entire experience.
Many other products on Amazon (where people look for reviews, even if they are buying elsewhere) have bad reviews because the "shipping was slow" or the "price went down right after I bought it" -- things that shouldn't fairly be attributed to the product.
ahhh. Idioms at work.
WiFi is a decreasingly relevant weapon as more people have more devices with faster 4G connectivity. They'll need to start outright bans.
A 777 is about $250m. But yes, the total cost to the airline of the accident will be in the billions.
On what basis are you saying that "online dating isn't going anywhere?" One could call Facebook the most successful online dating site, one-third of married couples last year met online, and couples who meet online are less likely to divorce. That sounds pretty impressive to me!