Category: duke of count

waste of time: news

duke of count economy internet media

I found this today on a web site of a pewspaper:


Countless publications show the same AP story.

What is the problem with this?

According to the latest numbers China grew by 8.9%.
Since this is China one could also say: grew only by 8.9%

The US GDP grew 1.7% in the same time.

The headline of the AP story says something else.
So does the first sentence. And 8.9% growth are being called ‘anemic’

This is a very simple thing: growth did decline by 0.3%. Growth did. NOT the actual output.

I wonder what happens to the 99% of topics in the news that are more complex and faceted than this China statistic.

After I wrote this I went back to google news. On CNN one can read that the economy slowed:

I think following this kind of ‘news’ is a complete waste of time.

epic porn for the duke of count

duke of count history media

If you ever should grow tired of movies as a concept then this might bring you back within a couple of minutes:

eleven seconds

communication duke of count marketing media


Consumers today encounter from 3,500 to 5,000 marketing messages per day, vs. 500 to 2,000 in the 1970s, says J. Walker Smith, president of consumer and marketing watcher Yankelovich.

from USA today

the duke of count says:
assuming you are awake for 16 hours that means you get a new
marketing message every eleven seconds.
Nice!

the duke of count

duke of count politics

Over the last ten years you had a bigger chance of being struck by lightning in the USA then get killed by a terrorist attack.

Don’t get me wrong: Every live lost is an unmeasurable catastrophy.

Not all people that get struck by lightning will die. Lightning killed more people than terror in the US over the last forty years maybe.
Assuming seventy three deaths a year by lightning.

It would be funny if I would get struck by lightning after writing this.

playstation 3

duke of count technology

the new list of super computers is out

I must admit I can not visualize a ‘teraflop’ or ‘gigaflop’ etc.

The BBC writes that in order get this year into the list of the 500 fastest computers you need to have 1.1 Teraflops. Last year 850 gigaflops were enough.

somewhere else the BBC writes that the Sony playstation 3 will have 218 gigaflops.

In other words: if you would be able to ‘gaffer tape’ four playstations 3 together then you have more power than the 500 fastet computer on the planet last year.

Somehow the top500 list has different numbers than the BBC. Still, the last one looks like a monster: 184 Power4 CPUs.

Somewhere else I read that a “Blue Gene” with 300 Terraflops would cost 100 Million US.

If you would pay the same for your flops in the Playstation 3, then you would need to shell out 72,666 US$ for that console.

72,466 should buy you allot of gaffer tape. Or Sony made those Gigaflop numbers up.