Slashdot Mirror

Citation? Date range?

Politifact claims it's the 6th, 11th, then 9th.
Findlaw also says it's the 6th.
In 2015 it looks like it was the 11th, and in 2014 it looks like the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th and 11th came ahead of the 9th in reversals.

But Fox news agrees with you, even though the year they select, 2012, it was not the most overturned, with the 1st, 6th, 8th, and 11th having more (the 9th was tied with the 5th).

I'm not sure how this counts as tap dancing...

Well, you could read the manifesto. See if it actually agrees with what the article says without some pretty crazy interpretation. Specifically, where in the manifesto does it say "We will create a government controlled internet"?

I can't for the life of me work out why people are reading this article and agree that the interpretation of the statements are anything but batshit crazy.

so how serious is this?

These things is why I hate the market, its a bunch of itchy crackheads reacting on hearsay and rumor

Speaking of itchy crackheads reacting on hearsay and rumor: http://s3.amazonaws.com/armstr...

Here is an example of non-Russian experts who question the idea that Assad was guilty in 2013.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.do...

If you read the actual report (figure 2.3, Changes in happiness from 2005-2007 to 2014-2016), you see that pretty much every first world nation except Germany and South Korea, and Norway and Switzerland (barely - within the confidence interval) have gone down in happiness, not just the U.S. The U.S. isn't even the first world nation with the biggest drop (Italy is, with Spain close behind).

A more fitting headline would've been "Happiness is on the wane in developed nations. Which might actually help explain the rise of nationalism in recent elections.

Ahem...

http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-pro...

"It's the tax cuts, stupid."

Everything in space is taken from "a long way away" relative to what we're used to in our everyday lives, as spacecraft move at speeds generally best measured in kilometers per second.

Hmm, I think I see the problem. You're expecting images that look like when they take photos of much larger bodies - for example, this also recent image, of Mimas. But Mimas is about 400 kilometers in diameter, while Pan is 35x23km. Pan is also in Saturn's A-ring, which makes it a dangerous place to approach (although I assume this was captured during a pass through the Encke Gap?). Let's see... these were taken from ~25000km away... so yeah, that'd have to be within the Encke gap.

I love MIPS assembly. I actually have a page of MIPS assembly open at this very moment. In terms of programming, it's beautifully designed. The extension from 32-bit to 64-bit is pretty seamless. The only real gotchas are the branch delay slots, but I actually find it to be a nice challenge to fill those slots. (I always have .set noreorder set).

MIPS assembly is extremely clean, far cleaner than ARM, for example, and the online documentation is superb. I like the MIPS Architecture for Programmers Volume II. Volumes 1 and 3 are also useful. I have yet to find as clean of a document covering ARMv8.

Even the MIPS instruction encoding is quite clean and the CPU design makes it easy for vendors to add their own interesting instructions to coprocessor 2. For example, my employer has a bunch of encryption and hashing related instructions added there. ARM does not allow you to add your own custom instructions to ARMv8, for example.

MIPS is still used in many Internet appliances and home routers, though things are quickly moving to ARM. One advantage of the MIPS instruction is it very cleanly moved from 32-bits to 64 bits. With ARM that is not the case. AARCH64 is very different than 32-bit ARM. The differences are bigger IMO than the switch from X86 to X86_64. Another advantage of MIPS is that the licensing costs are quite a bit lower than for ARM.

When the president himself is running around repeating pro-nazi slogans, maybe we ought to take it seriously.

When the president himself is running around repeating pro-nazi slogans, maybe we ought to take it seriously.

When the president himself is running around repeating pro-nazi slogans, maybe we ought to take it seriously.

I downloaded the entire dataset folder and compressed into a two-part ZIP for easy download and/or archiving to DVD.

Files are available on Amazon S3 here:

GPS+Energetic+Charged+Particle+2016-12-08+63GBs.zip.001

GPS+Energetic+Charged+Particle+2016-12-08+63GBs.zip.002

Keep in mind that the total folder is over 63 GBs and 8000 files.

I downloaded the entire dataset folder and compressed into a two-part ZIP for easy download and/or archiving to DVD.

Files are available on Amazon S3 here:

GPS+Energetic+Charged+Particle+2016-12-08+63GBs.zip.001

GPS+Energetic+Charged+Particle+2016-12-08+63GBs.zip.002

Keep in mind that the total folder is over 63 GBs and 8000 files.

Finally done and posted links above, but here they are for your convenience.

GPS+Energetic+Charged+Particle+2016-12-08+63GBs.zip.001

GPS+Energetic+Charged+Particle+2016-12-08+63GBs.zip.002

Finally done and posted links above, but here they are for your convenience.

GPS+Energetic+Charged+Particle+2016-12-08+63GBs.zip.001

GPS+Energetic+Charged+Particle+2016-12-08+63GBs.zip.002

>> Re:10 cloud might have a place

That's right. it's place is here :
http://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws....

Finds a smart guy (Giuliani) who understands geopolitics and security in general, as well as how to lead a team and get shit done.

And don't forget, he looks great in a dress (these are NOT photoshopped):

http://media.vanityfair.com/ph...

http://www.wardoggie.com/uploa...

https://s3.amazonaws.com/wp-ag...

but it's highly unlikely that all calibration errors were in the same direction and skewed over time into the opposite direction

And yet... well, take a look for yourself at the adjustments made to the temperature data. Clearly someone thinks "that all of the calibration errors were in the same direction and then skewed over time into the opposite direction".

If you're asking about the file domains.txt , that's not the "bad" domains, that's the "legitimate" advertisers who were victimized by the scheme. The whitepaper doesn't have full technical detail, but it sounds like the bot-farms used hosts files or private DNS to serve pages that seemed to be within those domains, without ever hitting the origin servers or even a public CDN. The list of "bad" actors, by IP address range, is the file IPs-CIDR.txt .

If you're asking about the file domains.txt , that's not the "bad" domains, that's the "legitimate" advertisers who were victimized by the scheme. The whitepaper doesn't have full technical detail, but it sounds like the bot-farms used hosts files or private DNS to serve pages that seemed to be within those domains, without ever hitting the origin servers or even a public CDN. The list of "bad" actors, by IP address range, is the file IPs-CIDR.txt .

Will he try to build a wall around robots?

See subject & http://methbot.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/domains.txt/ & for the best hosts file creator APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22APK+Hosts+File+Engine%22+and+%22start64%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/

* 8th botnet hosts stop in 1 week with this one, here's the rest https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=10010777&cid=53510613/ listed...

APK

P.S.=> It's NOT easy being "world-class" (like me, lol)... apk

A small list of 438 proven, fraudulent votes backed up by convictions, overwhelmingly by the Democrats. Now, can you share a similar list for the Republicans?

GOP politicians go on massive hunts looking for voter fraud after every election, and never comes up with anything but a small handful of people who were just confused.

Here's a list of ~400 people who were not just charged, but convicted of voter fraud: http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws....

400 people over at least 8 elections.

About half are registering ineligible voters (no reason to think they actually voted, more likely someone trying to scam a turnout organization like happened to ACORN), or voting when ineligible (non-citizen? felon?).

There were only 7 cases of impersonation at a poll, and it's unclear how many voter ID laws (the major push for the GOP) would have stopped.

And I did see 32 cases of absentee ballot fraud.

Are there more than listed there? Of course.

But nothing that would sway an election, and certainly not "millions".

GOP politicians go on massive hunts looking for voter fraud after every election, and never comes up with anything but a small handful of people who were just confused.

Here's a list of ~400 people who were not just charged, but convicted of voter fraud: http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws....

The dead certainly vote. Here's a list of 438 voter fraud convictions that is just a small list of the total number of voter fraud cases over the last few elections. It's a real issue. Why don't we do what Canada and Mexico do - require photo ID to vote?

The polls were NOT off if you looked at socioeconomic factors; Nate Silver is no friend of the GOP, and he's completely eviscerated the concept that the results in WI were wrong. Why WI, MI and PA and not NH, NV, and CO which were all much closer AND ended up going for Hillary? Even those "experts" who brought up the concept completely admit there is ZERO evidence pointing to any issues, it's just a "feeling" they have...

This is Stein and the Green Party trying to cash out, bump up their own coffers before the next round of elections, and maybe get a Bernie-esque cottage out of it.

Oh, and voter suppression efforts? Care to list those? I know we have documented proof of excessive voter fraud on the left, typically via absentee ballots (for example, 83 ballots showing up in a Los Angeles community that went over 85% for Hillary). So we have proof - actual convictions - of voter fraud, but voter intimidation? Any proof of that? Why not voter ID? Canada and Mexico both require it - why can't the US?

And again, you're spewing lies that have been proven to be lies over and over again. Many studies have shown that there's very little to no election fraud that could be "fixed" by voter ID laws. There's real, actual election manipulation by people (Republicans) trying to prevent people from voting legally.

Rubbish. Election fraud is an ongoing problem.

A SAMPLING OF ELECTION FRAUD CASES FROM ACROSS THE COUNTRY (pdf - open in new window)

Americans had Obamacare inflicted on them as due to election fraud resulting in the "election" of Senator Al Franken:

Rampant Voter Fraud Alleged In Minnesota

This fact is particularly explosive:

MVA found 941 ineligible felons who were allowed to vote in 2008 alone, exceeding the 312 vote margin separating DFL candidate Al Franken and GOP Sen. Norm Coleman after a grueling recount.

This is stunning. It was Franken’s razor-thin “victory” over incumbent Senator Norm Coleman that allowed the Democrats to ram Obamacare down the throats of the American people. If we assume that 80% of the 941 ineligible felons voted for Al Franken–a conservative assumption, as nearly all convicted felons are Democrats–then Franken’s victory is attributable to voter fraud. And the 941 ineligible votes are just a fraction of those that could have been identified if the Democratic Secretary of State had not stonewalled, refusing to turn over the full list of ineligible voters.

Poor and Disadvantaged are Most Likely to Have Their Vote Stolen

Someone ought to write a book. Oh, hey! Look at that! -- Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy

Amid Voter ID Battles, Here Are 7 Things the Government Requires IDs For

As federal courts wrestle with voter ID laws in several states just months before a national election, there is considerably less attention being brought to other constitutional rights that require ID.

Do you not care about citizens being able to exercise their rights other than voting?

Most companies (Apple and Microsoft being notable exceptions) have narrow or unstable margins (and even Microsoft has a cycle of loss years and profit years). The average profit margin in U.S. in total is 10%; 90% of income goes to wages.

All wages are paid from revenues; revenues are paid from sales; and sales are paid from income. Making a product requires labor from many people, fractioned together. If you have 100 people at $10/hr making 1,000 widgets per hour, that widget costs $1, and can have a price no lower than $1. Each of those people, in that 1 hour, makes enough money to buy 10 such widgets.

In one sense, those people are trading widgets for other widgets (or food). In another sense, they're trading labor for labor (time). When you make $20/hr, you're essentially trading 1 hour of your time for 2 hours of theirs.

That means money is kind of a closed system. There's a limited amount of income in any time frame, which determines what can be bought and what jobs can exist at that technology level. When you add in trade, you're moving income between isolated trading partners, which works the same way. Central banks can issue more money, allowing banks to give loans, allowing consumers to spend more, which adds money to the system; however, this counters technical progress (which causes deflation) and enables inflation (which makes your loan payments shrink in purchasing power over time). In the end, you're still dealing with trading hours for hours; mucking about with money just creates (and modifies) a representation of that time.

It gets more complex than that.

We can modify time.

Over a 100-year span of time, you can safely increase the level of technology such that productivity goes up by 10 times. If, overnight, you double productivity, then you have a need for half as many workers, and get instant 50% unemployment (this is the fear with automation); that collapses your economy. If you do this slowly over years, you create some unemployed, and then create a need for more jobs as prices fail to keep with inflation: your costs drop because the same wages are paying for less time, so the wage cost lowers, and market pressures still set you at the same general profit margin.

So you get enough technical progress to make 10 times the stuff in the same labor. The same proportion of dollars doesn't reflect the same buying power; or, to put it simply, 1 hour of labor buys 10 times as much stuff. That means even a 10% profit margin is 10 times bigger, because it's 10% of money representing the labor costs of making a thing, and that's kind of huge.

So the answer to your question is complex. The short answer is the profit margins stay the same, in the long-run; and the prices go up to adjust for rising costs (or down to adjust for falling costs--though "down" can be slower if the market isn't experiencing a flurry of change and competition). Those margins would actually have less purchasing power if industries have higher costs.

In the long-run, technical progress as I described drives the entire progression of economies. In the short-term, wage inequality and other opportunistic behaviors create fluctuations. It looks something like this. Trade tends to lower prices; Malthusian growth tends to adjust out any jobs you gain or lose through trade deals etc., so both the job creation argument and the job loss argument (we'll lose jobs if we pay American workers over a certain wage to replace Chinese manufacture--it's $18/hr for men's cotton pants, for example) are meaningless.

Rising costs mean more poverty and poorer people--not poorer rich people, but poorer consumers who have to barter their time against the time of other working-class workers. It is mathematically-impossible to disconnect wealth from the total wage cost of making products.

There has been way more than a few dozen cases of election fraud.

There were as more than 1,000 cases in just Minnesota in 2008. It is practically certain that fraud tipped the election and provided the path to Obamacare.

Can we care about troubling issues regarding abortions even if they aren't 9th month abortions?

More Black Babies Aborted than Born in New York City

The people of the United States made the best choice for president of the choices available.

Or maybe the authorities are sometimes honest, and you end up with a list of 438 convictions for voter fraud, as just a sampling of what's gone on. Never mind nearly 100 ballots for ficticious people being delivered to a single address this last week, no just an administrative mistake, pay no attention! And of course we cannot disenfranchise the dead, right?

Maybe you could get someone going on this then: Voter fraud cases (open in new window)

Thirty one cases you say? I guess this non-exhaustive list of 430+ confirmed convictions of voter fraud must be wrong. I guess all those court decisions were faked...

Not to mention we find report after report where dozens of ballots are sent to fictional people, where hundreds of ballots are "discovered" in an unsecured warehouse a month after the election and end up changing the results of the election, or where the dead continue to vote (and you know, it's hard to charge and convict a dead person for fraud).

I'm sure you'll come back and say "438 is irrelevant, still a small number!" Great - so how many cases are actually needed for you to be concerned about it?

Voter fraud is extremely rare, and the courts are enforcing federal law that makes sure people like you can't use it for cover to disenfranchise minorities.

Election fraud is a continuing problem across the US.

And you seem to have the issue of disenfranchisement backwards:

Victims of Voter Fraud: Poor and Disadvantaged are Most Likely to Have Their Vote Stolen

The Virginia scandal comes close on the heels of the voter fraud trials in upstate New York, where Democratic county elections officers and city councilmen from the town of Troy stand trial for absentee-ballot fraud. Four Democrats have already pleaded guilty in a case that highlights who the real victims of election fraud usually are: the poor, minorities, the sick, the old, and other vulnerable members of society.

Democratic Committeeman Anthony DeFiglio pleaded guilty to falsifying business records in the case, and he told investigators that "The people who are targeted [in voter fraud cases] live in low-income housing and there is a sense that they are a lot less likely to ask any questions." Even more disturbing was his admission that "What appears as a huge conspiracy to nonpolitical persons is really a normal political tactic."4

Another Troy Committeeman, Anthony Renna, admitted to forging absentee ballot applications and explained that handing in forged ballots and fake votes ensures that "ballots are voted correctly."

"I knew that the actual voters had not voted the ballots or signed the envelopes, but that did not concern me. I am not the ballot police," Renna told police. "I have been present when 'ballots were voted correctly' by party operatives."5 "Voted correctly" is fraud-speak for a forged application or ballot and it has nothing to do with the intentions of the lawful voter and everything to do with the interests of criminals who flagrantly violate election laws.

And who were the victims of this crime against the public? According to the Times Union, those disenfranchised Troy voters who had their ballots voted for them "correctly" included "public housing residents, college students, the semi-literate, a deaf man, the chronically ill and non-English speakers."6

Lest we think that this sort of thing only happens on the east coast, we should remember the illegal ballots cast by an estimated 5,000 non-citizens in Colorado's elections in 2010. Colorado's Secretary of State reported that a state study found nearly 12,000 people registered to vote in Colorado who were not citizens and were therefore not legally eligible to vote. Of those, the state believes that perhaps as many as 5,000 voted in the 2010 general election.7

People in the US have a constitutional right to travel, but you can't board an aircraft and even buses without an ID. You can't enter many government buildings without and ID. You can't open a bank account or cash a check of any real size without an ID. You may not be able to buy alcohol without an ID. What are the activists doing there? Nothing. Why do you think they only care about voting? Here's a hint:

Project Veritas, part two: Dem activists discuss best practices in committing voter fraud without getting caught
"Rigging Elections For 50 Years" - Massive Voter Fraud Exposed By Project Veritas Part 2

The US has had the twin ravages of Obamacare and Senator Al Franken inflicted upon it due to election fraud.

Rampant Voter Fraud A

I used to assemble industrial sized) printers and I got pretty good at it after a couple of years. Even still, I could barely finish 8 in a day if I really (and I mean REALLY) hustled and all of the parts were in spec and ready to go.

4 hours seems kind of optimistic to me for a car. I would think that just the wiring alone would take at least that long.

still to find out who and or what was put in the tank

This is the think tank, which also illustrates what was put it in to come up with the conclusion.

And where is this long history of voter fraud pray tell? I found 436 cases going back to 2000 and none of them mention party affiliation with few even giving hints. According to the Heritage Foundation none the less: (pdf) http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws....

Here's a good quick reference for you:
https://ballotpedia.org/Voter_...

And google is your friend:
https://www.google.com/search?...

I personally thing we have more of a problem with political fraud:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

ID's don't prevent voter fraud anyway.

Neither do re-inforced cockpit doors prevent hijacking... however both make either goal much more difficult.

In person voter fraud is a manufactured myth created by the GOP

Just keep telling yourself that: http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws....

In person voter fraud is the most difficult way to commit fraud and carries the least reward.

Which is why no one ever admits to knowing about such schemes: http://projectveritas.com/2016...

and they don't have a problem with fraud.

That you or they know of... or care about.

The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

There's not a whole lot of evidence there. It would be interesting to know what sort of things Russia has done in Europe and Asia.

People say "profits" a lot. They try to ignore that prices don't follow inflation, and that costs are real.

The long and short of it is, somewhere behind the opaque shroud, Apple goes from selling the last-model iPhone at a 10% profit to selling it at a 10% loss. What's probably actually happening is people just aren't interested in spending on a new phone now, and will take a low-cost phone at a bargain. Apple can't cut the current-model back to that cost, and can't even get the old-model down that low, and so is trying to hit prices that the consumer will pay by cutting costs back.

In other words: the "cutting into profits" is more like "losing business, and facing extinction." Apple isn't going to die out today; they know that if they can't keep their phones in the consumer market, they're going to die out in a decade, maybe. Strategic executives actually look way ahead and try to minimize the likelihood of such an outcome.

You're talking about a 20% mark-up, and you've managed to ignore that Apple will take a 10% mark-up but the consumer won't pay $600 for a $550 phone. If Apple wants to sell a phone like that in a market of $350 full-featured phones, it needs its Chinese manufacturers to deliver a $350 phone that it can *maybe* mark up to $400 as a premium option.

At the base, this happens when competitors are offering top-of-the-line technology at the break-out price point. 10% more for 10% more feature, until you're suddenly paying 50% more for 10% more feature; you stop just at that point, and now your next competitor can only offer a better product at 1.5 times the price. Yours might cost $400, but their barely-any-better gadget now costs $600. Even if most of your market is in mid-tier $250-$300 phones, your major competitor can't distinguish themselves as a better product without a distinguished price point: to stand apart in features, you must stand apart in price.

This is a common strategy for other reasons. You release a low, mid-tier, and high-end flagship product; then the customer sees that the mid-tier product is much cheaper than the top-tier product but almost as good, and buys the mid-tier product due to its excellent value. Without the top-tier product, they make a more price-conscious decision, determining their need rather than bare purchasing efficiency. What I've described is an extension: you ensure that the high-end flagship product of distinction is someone else's, and that it's *very* expensive by way of making the most-expensive *reasonable* product on the market yourself. Maybe nobody buys your Galaxy S7; but they're sure as hell not going to spend twice as much on a fucking iPhone.

Apple has the extra disadvantage of not selling a mid-tier product; they sell the iPhone 5 currently, which broadcasts loudly that it's an out-of-date product because it was the premier product four years ago. If it was called the iPhone 7n (new budget offering), people would perceive it as a modern, budget-friendly phone without all the bells and whistles.

AWS sucks because it's impossible to know what you need to buy and how much you're going to get billed.

I take it you haven't seen their cost calculator?

https://calculator.s3.amazonaw...

Plug in the services you are using, # of instances, storage, etc and it spits out a fairly detailed estimate of your monthly costs.

In this case there are no suitable waters, why couldn't they just move the event?

A great question. I think the answer is that the IOC doesn't actually give a shit (pun intended) about the well being of the athletes as long as they get paid. They let the Russians into the games despite CLEAR evidence of state sponsored doping. The IOC could easily have set benchmarks for water quality and time tables and made arrangements for a backup venue if the cleanup couldn't happen in time. But they couldn't be bothered. Why? I think the answer will be found if you follow the money.

So do you think it is right that some companies manage to dodge taxation while some other can not afford the legal fees to enter a tax privileged status ?

I think this: the focus on this above question is leading to over a million deaths every year (in 2000, it was estimated at 875,000); a focus on *other* *problems* eliminates nearly 100% of those deaths.

To me, this circle-jerk is akin to standing around stroking your meat while you watch a teenager get raped, then claiming absolution because you didn't *do* anything. The problem is exactly that: you *should* have done something.

It does not matter how you organize taxation or society in general. If there is a rule, you want it to be followed and not avoided by some technicality that enable ones to dodge the taxation.

The current tax-dodging behavior is a stable system: businesses, rich people, poor people, and the middle-class are all trying to minimize their tax burdens. As the system stands now, appreciable increases in tax avoidance among the rich and big businesses are NOT CAPABLE OF BREAKING A SYSTEM WHICH 100% TOTALLY ELIMINATES POVERTY.

Not. Capable.

That means I can implement this system, end homelessness, end hunger, get 29% more money into the hands of single mothers, get 27% more money into the hands of families, get 48% more money into the hands of single-adult minimum-wage households, REDUCE BUSINESS TAXES TO 35% (currently 40%), eliminate 6.2% of payroll taxes, and IT STILL WORKS (just barely) if businesses find a way to avoid paying 100% of the income taxes they're paying now. If they offshore 100% of their taxes, it's a little rougher, but it still actually works.

The other upshot is wealth increases with technical progress, meaning 17% of the income represents (a lot) more buying power 10 years from now than it does today; and population can't outgrow that increase, and doesn't (we've recovered from the most recent dip). The purchasing-power parity or GDP-per-capita here shows that, per population, there is more money. In other words: taking any fixed percentage of all the income and dividing it among all the people gives each of those people enough money to buy more stuff year after year.

In practice, it took about 35% (or more?) taxes to implement the system I describe in 1950--which would have collapsed the economy if you'd attempted it. In 2013, the systems this obsoletes cost 17.2% of the income, and the new system costs 17%, so it's actually cheaper, thus viable (you don't disrupt the economy by switching over, if you transition carefully).

All of that means the "it would be rough" part quickly becomes "it would not matter at all." By 2028, it's possible to not tax the businesses for the Dividend at all and have the system behave as it would if implemented today; by 2039, the United States revenue position would be identical to today's if the businesses paid 0 tax.

By contrast, the upper 10% of PERSONAL INCOMES makes up 48% of ALL INCOME in the United States. I want to use a progressive tax system to hold high-income earners's taxes stable while steadily lowering the taxes on the lower- and middle-classes as the income gap widens; however, at some point, we are going to want to start pulling those top-tier taxes down a little. You want to attract rich people with big personal incomes to stay here in the U.S. and pay U.S. income taxes, not offshore their personal wealth by becoming citizens of another country.

France charges around 40% to high-income earners; the United States has a 30% overall income tax rate, and shouldn't charge more than 4/3 that to the upper-income earners (i.e. 40%), *and* will have trouble dialing that down unless we get our Federal spending down to lower levels. As a long-

In white neighborhoods there aren't random shootings.

Meet Christy Sheats - white, Baptist, Republican Trump supporter and Second Amendment activist:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/everi...

This is what she did yesterday:

http://www.nydailynews.com/new...

This is the second-in-command of the United States and he believes, incorrectly, that the AR-15 is an assault weapon.

One of the more amusing memes put forth by the gun lobby and random white men on the internet is the very serious explanation that "the AR-15 is not an assault weapon".

Here is an AR-15:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/mgm-c...

and here:

http://crooksandliars.com/file...

Clearly, this is a gun that is marketed for personal defense. Because nothing says "personal defense" like a tripod, drum magazine and high-powered scope.

Who wouldn't want an assistant to pop up and offer help?

You might want to adopt early to immediately assess the risk, to understand the nature of operations.

We call those pilots, and they're done on a small scale and considered a sub-optimal cost paid to gain organizational knowledge so as to improve the strategic decisions made later.

You might to add the additional cost of an early transition because the transition can give you an edge (in terms of quality or quantity) against competitors.

Adopting a young technology early in its viability lifetime tends to put you in a position where you have to absorb a lot of cost and hold out for a long-term ROI; and then, when your competitor invests in the same technology 2-3 years later, their absolute minimum prices to break even are lower than yours, and you can't drop you prices to meet theirs without filing Chapter 11 (you don't have to Chapter 7 if you can continue business operations if you can restructure your debt well enough to keep operating). You are now behind, and you are doomed to be behind for the next decade or so.

A not-so-perfect analogy of swallowing upfront costs as a strategic move is Amazon selling its Kindle Fire line of products at a lost.

That's a *FALSE* analogy. Razor-and-blade or loss-leader model sells two separate goods as a combined good: the razor is sold at a loss, and the consumer will *necessarily* buy the blades continuously as a consumable, thus the amortized profit on the blades makes up for the loss on the razor. That's different from making an up-front investment which should provide lower operating costs: loss-leaders are a revenue strategy, while business process management focuses on production cost strategies.

It is at this point that we need to stop looking at this purely from a private business or economics point of view, and look at this as a matter of social/national policy.

I'm actually functioning on my own economic theories because I needed a theory specifically designed for policy development. It's what I do.

the possibility of adopting some form of basic income

Citizen's Dividend is the most optimum model. We can represent public-aid welfare costs as 55% of the total Federal income taxes collected; merge OASDI with the tax brackets, cut each tax bracket by that proportion, lay down a 17% flat tax along side, and then adjust them to smooth the total curve. That essentially locks the Dividend to a proportion of the GDP per capita, which necessarily grows continuously and doesn't fluctuate down too badly even in the worst recessions. That means as we get wealthier, the poorest of poor become wealthier in exactly the same proportion; and so long as the fluctuation doesn't take that Dividend payment down below the viability point (which becomes less likely over time), it can't fail as a safety net. At a point, a recession which breaks the Dividend would necessarily break the economy as a whole--no welfare system survives that.

have a national policy for the continuing education of our workforce - including moving focus away from 4-year college education and into vocational/adult training.

I do not agree with the state-supported workforce development model. It is a handout to businesses at the expense of individuals; it removes small risks from businesses and converts them to *enormous* risks on individuals; and it wastes a lot of labor time providing worthless job training (because we over-supply job markets and wind up with unemployed people who instead could have been trained in something else, thus the

Only ten items? I'm blocking these items on the current page: (and that's not to mention what Ghostery blocks)

##.adwrap, ##.comment_share, ##.nav-social, https://a.fsdn.com/sd/js/scrip..., https://ads.pro-market.net/ads..., https://s.ntv.io/serve/load.js, https://www.gstatic.com/images..., https://a.fsdn.com/sd/all-mini..., https://a.fsdn.com/sd/classic....
https://a.fsdn.com/sd/classic/...
https://a.fsdn.com/sd/css/app....
https://a.fsdn.com/sd/font/sdi...
https://a.fsdn.com/sd/font/sdi...
https://a.fsdn.com/sd/sdlogo.s...
https://analytics.slashdotmedi...
https://cdn-social.janrain.com...
https://cdn.taboola.com/libtrc...
https://consent-st.truste.com/...
https://d3ezl4ajpp2zy8.cloudfr...
https://images.slashdot.org/hc...
https://images.slashdot.org/hc...
https://news.slashdot.org/favi...
https://rpxnow.com/js/lib/logi...
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws...
https://slashdot.org/images/js...
https://tag.crsspxl.com/s1.js?...
https://www.googletagservices....

This is precisely what a digital photo frame should be.

Now they just need to get the colors right.

Real:
http://www.vdweerd.nl/wp-conte...

E Ink:
https://blueprint-api-producti...

If they really want to test their self-driving cars, they should hire unemployed "software engineers" to lay down in the road in front of a fleet of self-driving cars. That's the test that matters.

That test has already been passed.

Hundreds of little 2-seater Google self-driving cars can already be seen driving everywhere in Santa Clara and Mountain View.

Those cars look like little Disney rides with hats.

And so far, they haven't run over any of the pedestrian software engineers crossing the streets, nor any of the numerous children who run in front of them for hugs because they think they're Disney characters.