Given subscription rates and general numbers of subscribers compared with the payouts to artists I'd say there's a lot of money to be made in streaming music, just not if you're an artist.
Who is making any money in streaming music? It's certainly not the service providers. Neither Pandora not Spotify are even profitable. Nearly all of their revenue is eaten up by the royalty payments they must pay record labels.
It's used extensively in Australia too, and having recently gone through an university that uses it extensively for assignment submissions, out of class "discussions", and a few other things, and it's a terrible, broken platform.
The primary thing I was forced to use it for was assignment submission, which was primarily collections of source-code, compiled binaries and reports on them,so nothing overly large, though generally larger than the single word document I suspect the uploader was designed for, and it was horrible.
If your connection was somewhat poor the uploads sometimes randomly failed either reporting success or not reporting anything at all, sometimes it took hours to upload small files, and frequently you had to use chrome to upload, as the firefox uploader would simply fail. Even uploading from the university campus, from the same building the servers were hosted in the upload process was frequently so risky that some lecturers asked for the submission of source code in physical copies, as well as the digital submission, to ensure something got submitted they could look at.
I'd love for something better built to take over, but given how dominant moodle is in the market, I can't see it being shifted any time soon.
It is possible that the server admin fucked your particular installation. Moodle is well tested and such a major functionality being broken is not possible. Moodle does eat up substantial amount of resources (CPU/RAM) but usually the sysad has to be smart enough to gauge resources according to expected concurrent users.
Things like this always bring to light a particular side of the internet population that is fascinating to watch but very frustrating to participate in an activity "against".
These people immediately take an incredibly negative approach for their own short term enjoyment without any apparent thought of the longer term effect of their actions, and what people will do to counter that style of behavior generally making things worse for everyone, both grierfers and legitimate players.
I'd be curious to know what kind of "motive" for want of a better word underlies these kinds of actions, and why this destructive "fun" is so popular on these "infinite freedom" style games in particular.
The odd thing with a question like that is how "most dangerous" is determined. Logically the volcano is the most unsafe environment, and people do die on them, but statistically far more dangerous, at least by death count, is the bed.
This is the kind of problem that would still cause issues for some people, especially if you had to scale them to produce identical captcha's relatively rarely (if the same one shows up too many times it can easily be hard-coded, requiring the most basic detection to solve it reliably) in that as you come up with more of these types of questions the expected answer gets rapidly more nuanced.
Dangerous does not necessarily mean fatal. The posed question specifically states environment, and the bed as an environment is typically a flat, soft, blunt, rectangular prism.
Whereas volcanoes, and more specifically, active volcanoes can be unpredicable and spurt out hot lava and ash.
The question is worded fine and your attempt to poke holes into this is invalid.
Even if a question is worded well, it can always be interpreted incorrectly. The question should not be blamed for a person's inability to process information.
Other things on the plane also have similar beacons (the flight recorder, most notably) but have yet to be found, so it's not completely out of the question that they be deployed but not located.
Or better yet, a simple userscript. That way a single script could be run on all modern browsers with a couple of small tweaks required for the big 3, and easily installable out of the box on Opera and Safari.
Not a bad idea in the geekier circles, but the idea of installing something that supports userscripts and then installing userscripts isn't an obvious step for many users, whereas Google pushes Chrome apps and extensions quite heavily as an easy thing to play with.
I strongly disagree. In the Australian system everyone gets a higher education loan from the government(with interest locked to the inflation rate and repayment only required if and when taxable income passes a certain threshold), and yet our tuition rates are much lower than in the US.
For example, I just finished a Bachelors degree in a STEM field at a relatively middle of the road university and my total education debt comes out just short of $30k.
The tech guys at deviantart are constantly working to make the sign-up flow better and then to keep people coming back, and given the relatively large number of younger users they get it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they implemented that after finding a lot of people get their email addresses wrong.
As an aside, they also post fairly detailed blog posts about some of the challenges of working at the kind of scale dA faces (http://dt.deviantart.com/blog/)
The biggest problem for that kind of editor in a web environment is making it work consistently across platforms.
Getting everything nice in up to date desktop browsers is relatively simple (contenteditable div, little bit of javascript, easy). Try to introduce iOS into the mix and things get very messy, very quickly.
