houseabsolute

I'm also wondering why this kind of intervention is necessary at all. The NoSQL solution we use at work has load based automatic splitting, and I'd have thought (though I haven't confirmed) that this would be an obvious feature to include.

> suggesting American's do something inferior to other countries

No, it very clearly is only suggesting that Americans are doing something inferior compared to the ideal.

Roger, but I'm talking about how it was announced months ago at Google IO, not this current announcement.

It was announced many months ago. I'm using this opportunity to talk about how unfortunate it is that we announced it so long ago and are only launching it now. I'm not saying this current announcement itself is a fail. :)

Cool. Unfortunately I can't use it because I have this nervous tic where I click all over the page randomly.

My thing is, whatever happened to Google just launching things without announcing them? They still do it for features, but no longer for products. Maybe it's something you can't do with physical products because consumers might postpone their buying decisions for competitors until after the launch. Still, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth when I see us announcing things that are not even nearly done yet.

> Of course that would 'give away' . . .

Meh, I have trouble believing that spammers cannot experiment to find this number out themselves. The binary search on rate would require only a handful of IPs before you acquire it to a sufficient resolution for working purposes.

That is extraordinarily unlikely. I can't think of more than one or two big products that have ever been totally shut down as a result of patent infringement. It simply is not done.

I guess you are a Motorola shareholder or something? If not, is this likely to harm you in any way?

You might benefit from rereading this article.

http://www.danshapiro.com/blog/2010/09/how-to-read-a-patent-...

I always thought so too, but it was surprisingly much less than this at my local Fry's. I didn't opt to buy, but these services ran in the $200-400 range there, IIRC.

> Why can't we get interfaces right? We have all this processing speed available and yet our computers are slow.

My computer is not slow. I rarely see issues like a cursor that is delayed with respect to my typing. What kind of device do you have? Have you actually tried doing any performance analysis to see why it is slow? Did you buy your computer based on it not being slow, or, to put it another way, give an economic incentive to the outcome you want? (Clearly not, based on your post.) Or was there something else you opted to prioritize over that quickness you say you want so much?

On the contrary, almost all of Facebook's data is stored in SQL systems. Cassandra and such were developed as ephemeral stores for certain types of data, like lists of people who "Like" certain things, but ultimately even that data is backed by SQL. (As far as I understand from my friends who work there.)

Maybe. On the other hand, people do things every day for the love of it that get little traction in the market place. It seems more likely this confluence is just a coincidence.

I agree that it's not about competing to see who can be the biggest victim. I doubt most women wish to be victimized in any way at all. Nonetheless, considering women have been oppressed by men historically and still are in many countries in the world, it seems like a lot of confidence would be required to assert that we have fully eradicated such systemic oppression here. It would require a level of confidence I do not have.

I can think of a few ways they continue to be discriminated against:

- More likely to be the victim of a rape. - Representation in the media. http://bechdeltest.com/

I'm sure there are more that a better feminist than myself could share with you.

Sure, but there are already a number of machines you can do that with. I'm sure there is some reason to do this, but I can't think of many good ones.

A rare moment of clarity, maybe? Let's stick to things we can do for a profit?

Temporary overcorrection seems more equitable than a longer time before reaching true equality. I.e. this[1] is OK. Or, even better, in this image[2] we prefer the light blue line to the green line, because it is more equitable overall.

[1] http://www.newport.com/images/web600w-EN/images/1231942.gif

[2] http://i.cmpnet.com/embedded/gifs/2000/0010/0010feat3fig17.g...

That is too bad. I bought one of their games too, and I thought it was definitely worth the money I spent on it.

That sounds nice, but I'd appreciate some concreteness. Personally I don't think "history" has much to teach you unless you are a general, world leader, or someone who likes learning things for their own sake. There's not much actionable content back there for normal people.

How exactly are you "improving yourself" and "expanding your sphere of influence"? And have any of those had more concrete results than attending city council meetings or telling your friends to vote for legalization?

Why would there be?

The only one I disagree with is: "You care far more about current nearby events than similar distant or past/future events." That just seems rational to me. I spend more time developing opinions about things that are happening near, spatially and temporally, because those are the things I am most likely to be able to affect for the better.

There are already jumplists for other applications. That's what I was asking about.

I would say it belongs more to the people and less to the sheiks; that was the point I was trying to make.

It seems like there is an entire industry that's been built up in this country selling rich oil barons things they don't need, paid for with money that doesn't really belong to them.

Maybe I'm just out of touch, but does anyone actually use the pinned menu? If no, does it matter how Microsoft decides to implement this? It seems like it's a feature roughly on the importance level of their web snippets feature; that is, not very important at all.

Not sure if psychoanalysis (a.k.a. Freudian psychology) has anything to do with the subject at hand. I think you mean to say you don't like comments that delve into a person's suspected motivations. But the comment you're replying to doesn't talk about motives at all. It just talks about the means this man has used to achieve fame and why they worked.

Don't we have to first establish that Silly Valley has lost its stride before talking about how it happened?