How can JL match up to the Avengers?

The match-ups are all wrong?

Iron Man -------------------------- Flash?
Thor ------------------------------- SuperMan/Green Lantern
Hulk ------------------------------- Aquaman?
Captain America ---------------- Wonder Woman
Black Widow -------------------- Bat Girl
Hawkeye ------------------------- BatMan

Maybe for some a common mistake with domain level categorization

A top-level domain is ".com"
A second-level domain is "yahoo"
"www" is a gateway name to the network named yahoo : either a server or network node I presume.

I wonder if many ppl mistaken the top-level as 2nd? > http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060618110148AAXC7dV

So, would you like to buy a top-level domain; ".beer" or a second-level domain; "beer.com"

Disclaimer: I do *not own either of these domains! 
http://archive.icann.org/en/tlds/

What's in a Name? Checking Out in cvs/svn Vs git

In cvs/svn, "checking out" means getting a copy of the code/content with the intention of modifying later. (as opposed to "export"). The source is a version control repository.

In git, "checking out" means orienting a working directory (*not necessarily same as the workspace dir) to a repository branch. I believe either a branch needs to be created first or if master, a pull done 1st.

The key is which rcs best uses the correct verbiage at which point:
Imho, I choose git because it reminds me most of a physical library "checkout". Usually, there's only 1 copy of a book, & checking out means another person can't have it. [no, not private locks!]
  
I'm subjectively partial for the latter. :-}

- the semantic that makes the diff is that cvs/svn calls fabricating a book a "checkout" while git applies "checkout" at a later stage; binding a "book" to a workingDir: assuming u have just 1 workingDir.

I like Canada Dry (the air and the ginger ale)

Desert dry is too dry, it's like dries up all your skin.
Humid air is too wet.
Canadian High is perfect in the middle.

theories on Google Offers lead (as of May 2, 2012)

It appears most of the local deals offers are coming from Google lately. Groupon appears second, while LivingSocial is either a distinct 3rd or non-existent.

1) Google is undercutting Groupon's charges on small merchants. Goog has deep pockets.

2) Google sees Offers in bringing more traffic to Goog in general. Ads make more $. Goog has side products [search, maps, youtube, gmail]. Groupon does *not.

3) Amzn is *not encouraging LS bc there's not as much synergy on that 2 businesses: if customers spend $ on local deals, less on amzn. [for Goog, local deals may take away current $ from wallet, but ads may benefit later phase and it's just ideas - advertisers must ascertain that Offers takes away spending power with the increased traffic]

it's been 7 years since I heard "America needs to make TVs"

oh gosh, the supposed importance of america losing the television industry is so 80's! I hope this has changed.

Of course manufacturing is important to the US, but who cares if toasters are made here?? We just need to make sure that our weapons, sensitive equipment, medical, etc are still internal capable. If China stops selling us toasters, oh well, we can scrounge around enough in eBay. Now if we can't get commercial airliners from China, then we can't take trips to Europe.

The 5 categories still in US. (you may have a different perspective or naming categorization but..)
1) Gov't
2) Natural Resources/Farming
3) Services/Medical/Pop-Culture
4) Information-Based Knowledge
5) Key-Level Manufacturing

Note: each category not equally proportioned.

the Simplicity of noSql

A common stated cause is that noSql is faster than Sql bc it's in memory. From a practical viewpoint, this appears to be the main cause.

But, let's talk theoretical: why can't we put an entire relational db in memory

[It sounds to me that the real cause of the performance of noSql is that it uses a simplified set of instructions/that developers have figured out that's all it's needed for that application, thus allowing it to be placed mainly in volatile memory]


http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5329613/relational-db-in-memory