Ad based revenue
Worked fine for Yahoo!
619 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2009
Not aimed at you guys. It's aimed at the chimps in sales and the orangutangs in marketing who might feel better about their company not having outlook like the cool crowd if they have some sprinkles of useless social on their email client.
Same people who got iPhones because all the plebs in IT had a blackberry.
He isn't an activist, he has no socio political agenda. If he was buying shares to pass a motion to get production on shored to the US or improve conditions in the Chinese factories he would be an activist investor. This guy is just a tool trying to squeeze as much juice out of a successful company to line his own pockets. Let's call him what he is: an investment troll.
By the very inflationary nature of it this is just currency rather than money. Money is something with intrinsic value whereas currency is just a number. If we took away the need to mine for bitcoin currency then anyone could do what governments do and print more money, this just puts in a process to slow that down and control the inevitable inflation.
A 999 call should roam on any provider, I have a feeling it already does. Emergency services should have their calls prioritised and be able to roam on any network.
Joe Sixpack shouldn't, there should just be regulatory and customer penalties for service providers who fail to provide a service.
As anyone in IT will understand, if everything is a P1 you don't understand priorities.
Tech's forever blowing bubbles. Nerds come up with stuff then sales chimps tell the world it is a revolution and people who know nothing about tech buy in to it. Eventually the accountants point out there is no real money to be made and lots of people realise they were fleeced.
We have seen it before from infrastructure to software to Web 1.0 - the whole Web 2.0 thing was just clever sales speak for 'this time you won't get boned I promise'
Notable exceptions are those services that fill a need or create a need while making actual money cf Google, Facebook.
The photo is not the problem, it is the fact he is so flagrantly denying it despite the evidence. As a politician he has lost the trust of the public. Had he said "yeah, bit embarrassing eh, I made a mistake" then he would have done nothing wrong but lying in the face of the evidence is ridiculous.
Blackberry is the classic self fulfilling prophecy. It has taken years of pundits saying they are going down the tube to discourage people from buying them and ultimately lead to their downfall. Expect the same from iOS now as Steve's death will of course lead to the downfall of Apple in the creative mind of hacks everywhere.
If you don't want free stuff don't use it, simple as. Ten TB is a lot of space for all that junk data that you don't want to delete but also don't want clogging up your own spindles, just make sure you run it through some fairly hefty encryption. If the PRC want to brute force your 2048 bit encryption keys just to see your archive of holiday snaps then let them. Meanwhile if the data has any commercial value you will have it stored locally somewhere that has good information security and physical security principles applied.
So it looks like all you need to do is be very contentious in your comments. The people who disagree with you will seed you with down votes and that will cause the people who agree with you to up vote you and that will lead to a feedback loop of aproval.
Sent from my Blackberry, still the best smartphone on the market.
If there is a market for something it will probably exist. Given that Ebooks are just text files with a lot of DRM it is up to the likes of Amazon to produce a device that renders the same content via audio or Braille, can't imagine e-Braille would be that hard to achieve.
If they did that then there would be no need to make their device good for everyone.
Expect a statement from the lady bothering Ecuadorean couch surfer every time Manning or Snowdon so much as fart. The soap dodging sofa slumberer is looking for any excuse to raise his own profile now that he has realised we don't care about him and don't pity him for running from a rape allegation.
OK, so assuming that we can tell the difference between a random and a broadcast signal here's the problems:
1) Power
Given the distances involved the power of the transmission would have to be huge. Remember that radio disperses like any wave and in this case in three dimensions. Unless it is very directional the further out it gets the more the signal decreases.
2) Time
This signal will have had to be broadcast quite a while ago. As we only listen to a small part of the sky for a relatively short period of time the broadcast would have to be pretty much constant for thousands if not millions of years way back in prehistory to stand a chance of arriving during the brief window when we were listening.
3) Frequency
Doppler shift is likely to be a problem as well. As the universe is expanding we can assume that the source is moving away from us so the wavelength of the transmission will be far longer than during the original broadcast. This brings us back to if we can actually detect it.
As for the challenges of actually detecting it one commenttard said he could tell that a radio broadcast in another language was not random. This is because it was audible in a recognisable language. Imagine it's a base 3 encoded digital transmission of direct brain waves, that is likely to look a lot like pure entropy.