"The history of Groupon’s chairman, Eric Lefkofsky, was also unearthed, showing a lawsuit-prone entrepreneur who flipped a dot-com company in 1999 only to have it lead to bankruptcy a year later for the firm he had sold it to. And Groupon’s filing shows that when the company privately raised $950 million in a pre-I.P.O. round in January, it paid out $810 million of that to its investors and employees, a red flag for any investor. (Mr. Lefkofsky and his wife took home about $319 million of the total.)"
Also, why is "unknown" almost the same colour as "1-5%"? To me it seems that most of the world is unknown, including India, yet they still have statistics for India. Confusing...
It's just a PR trick, telling investors he's taking things seriously and learning some business 101 in a restaurant. Probably the restaurant doesn't even exist.
That was also the first thing that came into my mind. It is quite a smart human interest story, showing some humbleness, back to the basics approach, etc.
Not to mention the fact that professional athletes start their training very young, so this would essentially mean pushing drugs to kids for the entertainment of adults.
A lot of pro athletes use drugs anyway these days but making it legal would present some ethical issues.
I would have to agree with you. When agriculture was invented, so was "work", that is, something that is separate from your real life. There's a reason agriculture didn't properly take off for hundreds of years, even though people knew that planting stuff makes it grow. Tending the earth was a shitty business, hard work that took most of the day without proper tools. Gathering stuff was a lot easier.
Work is in no way "natural". Having to eat is quite natural but for most of humanity's history you could just eat stuff from your immediate surroundings, with little time spent on gathering food. These days we spend 10 hours a day to a acquire the means to eat. I'd say people we're a lot smarter thousands of years ago.
Yep, and that was mostly before some fool introduced agriculture, which led to 1000-fold increase in the human population... not to mention the introduction of diseases because we're not meant to digest agricultural products. Doh!
It's not even about agriculture. In medieval europe peasants had a lot of leisure. Of course harvest season was brutal, but much of the rest of the year was easy.
Asian rice agriculture was endless back breaking work. But that wasn't the case in Europe.
Scene groups provide nfo files with their releases. Those nfo files could contain a cryptographic signature proving the authenticity of the rip.
Essentially, the way it works is that for a given group there are two keys: A private key `P` (that only the group has), and a public key `Q` (that everyone has). For a file `F` the "signature" is the output of some function `sign(P, Q, F)`. The function `sign` is specially chosen so that the output can be validated without access to `P`, but cannot be efficiently forged without it.
As other posters have pointed out, this means that if `P` is kept secret then all signed releases can be authoritatively linked to the people who provided them. Finding `P` on someone's thumb drive is a smoking gun. To be honest, I don't think this would be a big worry, but I'm not in the scene and I don't know how the people in it think.
Classic scene groups are not interested in having their releases spreading on torrent sites, so including any signatures would be helping with what they don't want to happen in the first place.
That said, a third party could add a signature. But in practice a cryptographically secure signature isn't even needed. It boils down to a reputation system, so that you can associate a torrent file with quality and this has already existed since forever on sites like the piratebay in the form of uploader usernames. A lot of torrents are uploaded by the same users, users who have a history of quality torrents. In contrast, a hollywood uploader would never have any actual quality torrents in the account history. So in conclusion, this problem was already solved ages ago.
The warez group CORE sign their releases with CRCs in their NFO files. They distribute a checker program called core10k.exe which ironically often turns up with malware injected into it on p2p sites.
Yeah but that is to check the file integrity, that's something entirely different. Anyone can calculate a CRC checksum for any garbage files they want, upload it and label it as a CORE release. There is no way to verify that the release is genuine. And if you temper with an authentic release, for example introduce some malware, you can simply recalculate the checksum itself. This would be impossible if the release would be cryptographically signed because you would need COREs private key to generate a valid signature.
Why? Why would Nokia want to enter the tablet market, when everyone except Apple is struggling with their tablets? Consumers seem to want ipads, not tablets. What could Nokia possibly bring to the table, with their string of failures in the recent past? This is probably going to be another half-assed effort on Nokia's part.
As far as anecdotal evidence is admitted, I am a very happy user of a Nokia N900 tablet. So are other folks focused around http://maemo.org. Its lineage goes back to 2005 (N770). This isn't question of entering a new market, it's a logical continuation of a long-time trend.
I just bought another N900 because my current one is a bit long in the tooth, and my fear of being N900-less is huge. Right now, all of my hopes are focused on WebOS and Tizen. The HP Touchpad is really pleasant, and would be awesome running on a GPL'd stack.
Because Microsoft NEEDS Win8 on tablets(that people actually want to use) or MS will be dead.
Nokia married Microsoft some time ago, Microsoft had the cash Nokia needed, Nokia made good quality hardware that Microsoft needed to compete with Apple. MS paid Nokia billions for not using Android and abandoning Symbian.
If necessary Microsoft will buy Nokia at a discount, but they can't let Apple and Google to convince people that they don't need Windows in their computers.
Also, funny top 10 lists like: http://www.businessinsider.com/10-things-science-can-teach-u...
Not much credibility there.