softyeti

On one hand, yes, I think you can say that to be a winner, you had to dope. But if you took all of the dopers out, we would still have a winner.

Consider Cadel Evans. In my opinion, I don't think he doped. He was always in the conversation with Vinokourav, Ullrich, and the other top guys. For years.

He eventually won, but the sport was much cleaner by then.

I was a huge Armstrong fan. When I heard that Hincapie admitted to doping, I knew it was over. Over because Hincapie was always Lance's right-hand man, and also over because Armstrong wouldn't go after Hincapie.

I think Armstrong was one of the best cyclists ever, but he is tarnished now just like the others. It's a cruel sport.

"It was at this meeting that L.& H. proposed shifting the $580 million deal from half stock and half cash to all stock. The Bakers, with their high-priced investment bankers M.I.A., agreed."

Case closed.

100 years ago, calories and yield were more important than nutrition. In some areas, just getting enough calories is obviously more important.

General nutrition information is getting better every year, and I think in the next 5-10 years, there will be a mainstream discussion over this issue.

That is the right way to handle the situation. These engineers work in such a specialized environment, I wonder how that would work out for them.

I believe their point was that they want to track their traffic, but when they use a third party like Google, Google provides tracking services for SpiderOak, Google also tracks you as well, which SpiderOak has no control over.

The article seems to be confused over content viewed by way of advertisement and content delivered by users actively seeking content.

When I want to read up on some news, I go to the publisher's site directly or to a preferred aggregator, which is not going to be facebook/twitter/etc.

Advertised content is typically very poor, and really not worth defending.

I wonder if we are going to discover similar emissions skirting in over manufacturer's vehicles soon.

I believe you may not have addressed what your tech lead is worried about. He/She has to make sure that everyone can do what you are trying to do from an architectural standpoint if you are all going to build upon it.

You are outlining the benefits, but JavaScript is very different from other languages and can be hard to understand, let alone master all of the libraries based on it.

If you can address those issues, then you may be able to convince your lead.

I've been on both sides of the coin here. When deciding on a platform or language, I usually choose what is going to be the easiest to use, or what has a high adoption rate which will provide the documentation and Q&A information online.

$10 poses an interesting decision in comparison to Spotify.

Spotify is a dedicated music app in comparison, and is designed that way. The catalog isn't as big as YouTube's, but YouTube isn't designed for the user to catalog their personal music.

Youtube provides ad-free video, but I don't think the ad's are very intrusive for videos compared to listening to music, where it can definitely be annoying.

I would also look at the open dates for those businesses as well if available for better trending.