bumblebird

17 ms·

61.
by bumblebird 17y ago
It seems more worried/scared than anything to me. If I was openDNS I would be worried also.
62.
by bumblebird 17y ago
eg most people.
63.
by bumblebird 17y ago
>> "there is no such thing as a computer that's too fast." Right, but my point was that these days it's more likely to be the HDD, or network that's the bottleneck most of the time. My Macbook pro is absolutely never CPU bound. It c
64.
by bumblebird 17y ago
I'd say they were largely unuseful and inaccurate :/
65.
by bumblebird 17y ago
That problem should be solved in the 'reader'. If a url looks long, get your email client to show a small version of it. Get it to show the full URL when you hover over it. Whatever. Just do it in the client. Even on twitter it's a stupid a
66.
by bumblebird 17y ago
The fascination with url shorteners is really worrying and useless. Can we get past this fad?
67.
by bumblebird 17y ago
* compiling unit tests * PC games * transcode video * photoshopping These are exceptions IMHO. I don't think the average user does any of the above. Of course some will still want beefy CPU power, but I think it'll end up as a
68.
by bumblebird 17y ago
Definitely gamers, but aren't they a pretty small minority these days? (PC gamers).
69.
by bumblebird 17y ago
Maybe it's useful for science, but it seems like the moment has past when most consumers were blocked by CPU power. My next upgrade will be to a SSD. Making my CPU go a bit faster is pretty useless when it's usually waiting on disk/network
70.
by bumblebird 17y ago
>> Q. Was Mint profitable at the time of sale? >> A. We do not comment on revenues. Odd, surely a simple yes/no isn't giving too much away.
71.
by bumblebird 17y ago
>> "Do-it-yourself dreidel" It seems quite odd to include this one IMHO. I had to look it up to know what it was. Is it more widely known in USA?
72.
by bumblebird 17y ago
We're splitting hairs now and down to the meaning of "lotteries are stupid" :) I see your distinction though, I was meaning the latter when I said "lotteries are stupid".
73.
by bumblebird 17y ago
I don't think that's a good analysis. Anti gambling laws does indeed push the hardcore gamblers into underground gaming halls. But the important thing it does is stop lots of people getting hooked in the first place. Same with drugs etc. Ha
74.
by bumblebird 17y ago
They share a lot. They are addictive, and the further in you get sucked, the harder it is to stop. Because of this, the further in you get, the easier it is to be exploited and taken advantage of. I don't think it's about being puritan, it'
75.
by bumblebird 17y ago
The issue isn't as clear cut as that. They are offering you an 'easier game' for money. When you're competing against other people, that's an un-level playing field. I'm pretty sure people who run lotteries think they are stupid. They are a
76.
by bumblebird 17y ago
Interesting. Thanks :)
77.
by bumblebird 17y ago
The fact someone sells a service doesn't mean it's right, proper, etc. Gambling is heavily regulated for a reason. I would say that games like these should be regulated just as much. Imagine going to the arcades, playing street fighter II,
78.
by bumblebird 17y ago
Because it's moving the goalposts once you're committed. It's not the same as freemium at all. A game, where you're competing against other people, that operates on a non level playing field, is unfair. Allowing people to pay money to progr
79.
by bumblebird 17y ago
In fact stupid things are often the most lucrative.
80.
by bumblebird 17y ago
It's a gray area, but IMHO that's not what's happening here. It's more of a bait/switch than an honest upfront cost for entertainment.
81.
by bumblebird 17y ago
I don't really see why. We can pretty much all agree that the lottery is also 'stupid', but it works, and it's quite clearly understood why it works. These sort of games work because they get people addicted, and then blackmail them into pa
82.
by bumblebird 17y ago
Because that's an upfront honest price to pay the game. This is blackmail later on. (You want to do better at this game? Sure, we can fix that for you, just pay us some money).
83.
by bumblebird 17y ago
This sort of thing is worse than gambling. I'd say there's a strong case for regulating things like this. It's just preying on the addicted/weak/stupid surely. It's almost a bait and switch: 1. Get user addicted to game 2. After some time,
84.
by bumblebird 17y ago
Definitely. And their weight should be counted towards their baggage allowance.
85.
by bumblebird 17y ago
FWIW Even if true, I'd rather have a large number of consumers spending money, than 2 customers paying millions.
86.
by bumblebird 17y ago
What does the affiliate bit mean? Affiliates generating income for tweetminer by selling it? Or tweetminer acting as an affiliate showing people adverts and generating income?
87.
by bumblebird 17y ago
The regional networks were pretty useless. Putting the whole of the UK in the "London" group? :/
88.
by bumblebird 17y ago
Generally we don't let our cards out of our sight. Indeed most of the time I handle my own card and it's only rarely that a shop assistant will handle it. (So writing down info isn't a big concern). The portable POS devices allow the custom
89.
by bumblebird 17y ago
"This means that adding support for EMV to existing payment applications can be a daunting task! Furthermore, the demands of providing an EMV solution do not even stop once all the necessary processing has been implemented, thanks to the ex
90.
by bumblebird 17y ago
This is really weird for me. In the UK we've been trained to not just allow people to swipe our cards into just any hacked together device. If the device doesn't look 100% 'official' I wouldn't touch it with my card.

More ›