Slashdot Mirror

Because he is robbing Peter to pay Paul and without the Windows network effect they be fucked?

Windows revenue is unimportant for Microsoft going forward, services are the future of the company (much like Apple is now pivoting to).

Well if I don't need Windows there goes MS Office, I can just as easily use Google's offerings or Open Office, there goes a chunk of cash.

Well no, because you can use Office365 on the web, natively on the Mac and on Android and iOS. But more to the point you can just as easily use Google's offerings or Open Office if whether you have Windows or not. In fact it's cheaper to do so even if you're running Windows.

If I'm not using windows I'm not gonna be using an MS browser or MS services as they won't be the default on a Google or Apple device so all of that datamining and selling is tits up.

Datamining and selling data is clearly not Microsoft's business, that is why you cannot just buy data from them. Why do you believe the halfwits telling you Microsoft is selling your data? There is absolutely no evidence of that, feel free to try to prove me wrong though and demonstrate how you buy this data from Microsoft?

A huge chunk of MSFT's business benefits in some way from the Windows network effect and Windows 10 is quickly becoming a punch line, with so many having a piss poor experience its actually making Vista look good.

Microsoft doesn't care about Windows as a business model anymore, the revenue of services like those on Azure (which predominantly run on Linux), support for Linux in Windows and the dropping of the monolithic upgrade cycle demonstrate that pretty clearly. From Azure to Exchange to Sharepoint to Office they

So while he may be growing now with his "cloud cloud cloud" don't forget Ballmer monkey and his thinking they could just buy Nokia and force their way into the smartphone game and how that ultimately turned out.

Right, that was Ballmer and his failure of thinking the future was in platforms, now with Nadella they are making money hand-over-fist in services and are more profitable than they have ever been.

The more and more users are gonna find they really don't need MSFT anymore, Google or Apple or Amazon can give them a better experience.

Wrong. Just look at their financials, the bulk of their revenue is coming from things that aren't tied to Windows these days. The days of Windows platform lock-in are long gone, worthless and unprofitable, that's the moronic Ballmer era.

"Having your star go on every talk show bragging about it being a feminist film, insisting on dividing her interviewers up by race and gender, and releasing it on International Women's Day are not suggestive of a studio "not looking to spread division.""

See, here's the problem. There are people out there who hear "feminism" and some how come to the conclusion that something divisive is happening. Since you seem to be of this group here's the definition of feminism just so we can both be on the same page in regards to what you and yours are outraged about. https://www.merriam-webster.co...

What you're illustrating in your post is how elements of our country have spun a concept most Americans are perfectly fine with into their outrage machine in an attempt to diminish it or simply as a way of being outraged about something.

Also, your signature is stupid. Of the top 10 games of 2018 https://www.fool.com/investing... you play as either a character of your choice with "white male" being available or exclusively as a white male.

Bosack and his wife Lerner founded Cisco when both of them were still employed at Stanford. Bosack continued working at Stanford with Cisco co-worker and co-founder Kirk Lougheed, where they developed the company's first router. However, it was an exact replica of Stanford's "Blue Box" router and ran an unlicensed copy of the university's multiple-protocol router software, which was adapted into the foundation of Cisco IOS.

In 1986, Bosack and Lougheed were forced to resign from Stanford over the product's development, and the university considered filing criminal charges against Cisco over the theft of its intellectual property. However, Stanford eventually agreed to license its router software and two computer boards to Cisco in 1987.

Q: So who is paying for their employees' Social Security and SSI disability?

A: We are.

Um ... no.

Here's what has been discovered everywhere a switch to wind and solar has been tried, they are nothing more than a proxy for natural gas. When anyone claims that they will switch from coal to wind and solar what they really mean is that they will switch to wind, solar, and natural gas.

Give it time. Battery prices keep going down. I think that flow batteries are particularly well-suited for grid storage, they just need to become price competitive with lithium ion batteries. But even lithium ion plus renewables are becoming competitive with natural gas.

A Massachusetts Institute of Technology spinoff
hopes to create battery storage technology capable of replacing fossil fuel-based power as the primary source of baseload electricity delivery across the grid. By doing this 50% of present-level carbon emissions generated by U.S. power generating utilities can disappear.
Ted Wiley, Harvard Business School, and a founding member of the company, Baseload Renewables, states, “You can currently put batteries next to solar and wind power and create an output for four hours, but we want to develop a battery to shape renewables into a 24-hour block.”

The initial goal has focused on decreasing the cost of energy storage by a factor of five. To do this the company is looking at sulfur which costs less than any other element when used to store electrons. Abundant and ten times more energy dense than lithium-ion, developing sulfur-based battery technology would be a global game changer.

What Baseload Renewables is out to invent is a flow battery using a polysulfide solution containing chains of sulfur atoms. In the MIT patent application that inspired the spinoff, the technology is described as an air-breathing aqueous sulfur rechargeable system.

When Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) built a 20 megawatt/80 megawatt-hour (MWh) energy storage system in Southern California early last year, it was a critical turning point for the industry. Not only was energy storage going to be the supplier power at peak times for the grid, replacing off-line natural gas facilities, but the project was deployed in a matter of months...
Energy storage is already starting to take some of the value formerly reserved for natural gas peaker plants, and GTM Research senior advisor Shayle Kann said recently that as energy storage systems become even more economical, he "can't see why we should build a gas peaker after 2025."

Portland General Electric (PGE) is planning to develop a first-of-its-kind renewable energy facility that would combine utility-scale wind, solar and energy storage. Once completed, PGE will be able to supply about 50% of its customers' electricity needs with emissions-free generation, the company said on Tuesday.
The project, known as Wheatridge Renewable Energy Facility, will combine 300 MW of wind generation, 50 MW of solar and 30 MW of battery storage. It will come online in stages beginning with wind generation in 2020.

You should try and read up on what a Marginal Tax Rate actually is before blowing off so much hot air.

The proposed 70% tax rate was on earnings above $10 Million., which means that a person would have already earned $10 Million at a lower tax rate before they get taxed on earning BEYOND the $10 Million earning band.

FWIW, it is funny when you attack other people for being misinformed, with statements that are either misinformed or lies, or scold them for using ad hominems, then resort to them yourself.

Almost, hypocritical

It's a hard-hearted lack of sympathy. Working class stiffs from Middle America get told to fuck off and learn to code because tehe coasts are eliminating their jobs with globalism.

Didn't realize that all these States were on the coasts. Meanwhile "in the heartland", automation of factory jobs is being sparked by factories "in the heartland". Funny how you're unwilling to blame the factory owner, operator, or manager. But, yea, it's all "globalism"'s fault. It actually is. There's no sort of solution to that problem except retraining people in new jobs.

When I was young, most people in the upper half were perfectly willing to respect those in the bottom half, and some people (leftists) practically worshipped them. Today, it is vastly different. Remarks calling working class "deplorables" and worse have become quite common today on the left. Leftists say that working class are racist, misogynistic, intolerant, etc. In reality, they are the bigots and not middle America.

Here's a hint. There's no longer an "upper half". There's an "upper 5%". Most of them aren't leftist or rightist. They're centrist assholes who think because they've got money, they did things right. They leave the bottom 80% fighting each other with name calling. They all play up the notion that if only they worked harder, smarter, etc they'd suddenly be part of the top 10%. Of course, the "upper 5%" are piddly poor compared to the actually rich upper 10-15%.

But, please keep spinning it being about racism, intolerance, etc. The truth is it's all about jobs. It's about jobs that don't even exist yet, and yes learning to code might be a way out for a lot of people. It also may be a dead end. We honestly don't know where the future will lead, but we do know that offering money for retraining and trying to get growth industries on-board is about the only path forward. We won't go back to having tons of factory jobs or coal mines. Whatever the future is, it involves retraining a lot of people to do a lot of things you apparently think these many blue collar workers can't do. The truth is, for most the work, they can.

When they have 35% growth in 2017 and 93% growth in 2018, that doesn't seem like it's slowing.
https://www.fool.com/investing...

In the US, we do not tax wealth; we tax income. If you look at the actual data you will see the top 1% make about 20% of all the income, but pay 40% of all income taxes. Wealth isn't taxed; income is. If you want to argue for a wealth tax, then do that - otherwise you're just trying to stir up some class-envy to bolster your incorrect argument.

Capital gains taxes for short-term (less than 1 year) gains are the same as ordinary income. Long term capital gains (more than 1 year held) can be lower, but still is not tax-free. It's there to encourage long-term investments and savings - which I would think would be beneficial to society? Or should we encourage all investors to only see short-term gains, in-and-out, churn the funds and eschew long-term stability?

Social Security is capped in terms of benefits, which is why contributions are also capped. You are really mistaken here, stating there is no cap on social security contributions.

For protection, we already tax property on its assessed value. The person with the $500,000 home pays, on average, twice the property tax as the person with a $250,000 home. The more expensive car has higher tabs/registration rates. And those tax payments are what covers things like police, fire, roads, schools, and so on. Federal taxes you on how much you make, so if you make more you pay more (and it's progressive - your payment rate goes from essentially zero income tax to quite high). If anything, it appears the original GP was correct - the more you make, the more you pay, and disproportionately so. Even taxes on Social Security benefits are also progressive and tax the higher income earner at an even higher rate.

So let's cut to the chase - what should the tax rate be? Should it be on income? Should it be on wealth? Who gets away with paying zero, who gets to pay more?

In the US, we do not tax wealth; we tax income. If you look at the actual data you will see the top 1% make about 20% of all the income, but pay 40% of all income taxes. Wealth isn't taxed; income is. If you want to argue for a wealth tax, then do that - otherwise you're just trying to stir up some class-envy to bolster your incorrect argument.

Capital gains taxes for short-term (less than 1 year) gains are the same as ordinary income. Long term capital gains (more than 1 year held) can be lower, but still is not tax-free. It's there to encourage long-term investments and savings - which I would think would be beneficial to society? Or should we encourage all investors to only see short-term gains, in-and-out, churn the funds and eschew long-term stability?

Social Security is capped in terms of benefits, which is why contributions are also capped. You are really mistaken here, stating there is no cap on social security contributions.

For protection, we already tax property on its assessed value. The person with the $500,000 home pays, on average, twice the property tax as the person with a $250,000 home. The more expensive car has higher tabs/registration rates. And those tax payments are what covers things like police, fire, roads, schools, and so on. Federal taxes you on how much you make, so if you make more you pay more (and it's progressive - your payment rate goes from essentially zero income tax to quite high). If anything, it appears the original GP was correct - the more you make, the more you pay, and disproportionately so. Even taxes on Social Security benefits are also progressive and tax the higher income earner at an even higher rate.

So let's cut to the chase - what should the tax rate be? Should it be on income? Should it be on wealth? Who gets away with paying zero, who gets to pay more?

GoPro has been in trouble for a while now, so there may be a short window for regret and/or telling them how to (better) run their business

https://www.fool.com/investing...

To expand on that, if the median household income in the Southeast is around $50,000, and there are typically 1.4 workers per household, that would be about $18 per hour, on average. Assuming you lose 0.012 hours per week, that would be about 0.6 hours per year of work (assuming 2 weeks vacation).

So if the cost of climate change abatement is more than ($18 * 0.6) about $11 per year per worker, it is actually an economic loser to try to address it. Better to "accept the loss" of 0.012 hours per week, than spend even more money to try to save that amount of economic activity.

Apple's latest top-of-the-line iPhone is not experiencing the sales frenzy that prior models enjoyed. Lackadaisical sales seems to be affecting their stock price. Admittedly, both of these can be short-term events or rationalized by pointing to "market conditions". However, an over-the-top approach like Samsung is suggesting seems like a bad idea.

You may be right, but not by as much as you think, because I said a small ship (meaning manned spacecraft), not just an empty ultra-efficient hypothetical rocket. Here's a more relevant ideal scenario estimate at $300m to send a potentially manned ship on an unmanned test landing mission:

https://futurism.com/nasa-esti...

With more traditional options, the price could reach into the 11-digits for a one-way trip:

https://www.fool.com/investing...

A search found a bunch of articles from November 2017 like this one saying that Waymo had started testing cars with no backup driver. I thought I remembered seeing articles saying they had been running cars with no backup driver and human passengers in their Phoenix area pilot, but with a quick search I'm failing to find any article making that claim.

And note that Social Security runs out of money by 2034 - just before the ratio reaches its lowest level, meaning that SS taxes will have to be significantly increased (fewer workers paying in AND no more "trust funds" available) because it will be political death to cut benefits.

I wish that Congress would lift the limits on IRA contributions - that would go a LONG way to making it easier to slowly reduce SS benefits over the next 20-30 years as people would be encouraged to save more of their own money up-front...

Invest in SpaceX?
https://www.fool.com/investing...

Everybody is better off. Yes, the divide between the rich and poor is growing bigger, but all the US "poor" are pretty much nearing the middle class as far as the global economy is concerned. The poor are rich, they're just comparatively less rich than the very rich.

The "middle class" is not "the middle third of the nation". It's the middle of three classes, and Americans are dropping out of it, not achieving it. The shrinkage has paused momentarily due to our energy costs plummeting as we move to natgas, but that increased natgas production is predicated upon fracking which is ultimately going to harm the lower and middle class.

They also partner with retailers - https://www.fool.com/investing...

Without Qualcomm, Android would not be grinding Apple down towards single digit market share right now.

Well that's not what's happening. Going from 13 to 17% marketshare is the opposite of being ground down towards single digit share.

Odd.

Apple has 17% of the smartwatch market, with Xiaomi looking set to take the lead in the near future. That is, 83% of smartwatch buyers today do not want Apple.

Source?

Apple grew its market share by 4% from 13 to 17%.
Xiaomi grew its market share by 1.8% from 13.3% to 15.1%.

That's called falling behind, not taking the lead.

No, that is untrue.. The F-35 price has been driven down to $89M each, putting it in the same range as MUCH MUCH less capable aircraft such as the F-18, Eurofighter, and F-15s. In combat exercises, the F-35 has suffered 0 losses to 8 F-15 losses.

Similar results are obtained against the venerable F-16, itself a first-rate 4th generation fighter, and the EuroFighter. One F-16 pilot put it like so: "We went to our simulated airfield out in the far part of the airspace. As the two ship from the northern half of the airspace we turned hot, drove for about 30 seconds and we were dead, just like that. We never even saw (the F-35A).”"

That is not a fluke, and it is not because advances are being given to the F-35s: just the opposite in fact. The overall kill ratio of the F-35 in Red Flag exercises against all 4th gen opponents stands at 15 to 1.

This anti-F35 FUD needs to stop. Yes, the F-35 program has had problems. Yes, it was initially overpriced. But if you will recall the early days of the F-16, when it was known as the "Lawn Dart", it too suffered many early technology issues that left pilots dead and aircraft lost, yet the F-16 turned into one of the premier light fighters of the 80's and 90's.

The F-35 is in a similar place. Prices are being driven down to about where a high end 4th generation aircraft cost, and the plane is simply playing a different game than its 4th generation equivalents due to advances in stealth, in sensor integration, in situational awareness for pilots, and more.

So please stop the F-35 FUD. It's flawed, but so is every complex aircraft ever made.

$13,388.

You need shelter, so let's put you in a studio hovel for a fair $500/mo (serious lowball figure); so that's $6,000/yr for housing, leaving you with $7,388. Oh, but wait - you probably need utility service too... well the national average is about $200/mo, so there's another $2,400 for housing, so once that's all paid for you're looking at $4,988 left.

We don't yet live in this fantasy utopia where magical AI robots do everything, so you need a job, and to get a job in Average America, you need a car. Let's say you get lucky and come across a reliable vehicle for $200/mo (haha, right); that's $2400/yr, taking your total down to $2,588. Of course that car isn't going to get far without gas, which costs Americans between $1400 and $2200 a year, depending on fuel prices; let's split the difference and call it $1,800, taking your total income for the year down to $788. /Deity help you if you have any maintenance costs...

Do you see what's going on? We've put you in tenement housing and given you shitty, unreliable transport, and we've got less than a grand for a years worth of everything else. Let's keep going anyway...

According to this chart, the average American couple spends about $7,500/yr, so a single person would be at half that, or $3,750. But you only have $788 left after transport and housing for the year... better not get sick, either.

So no, take it from a guy not only bothered to run the numbers, but who actually lived in that very situation before - the poverty line is not even close to what any rational first-world citizen would consider "livable," it's a shit situation that forces you to rely on government services just to survive.

Besides, who has time to go to three movies a month?

Probably the same people who have time to sit around and watch an average of around five hours of television a day.

Those are also some of the people who complain the loudest about not having any time to do the things they want to do, but that's a rant for another time.

A quick Google search can readily point out why blindly pulling a number from a balance sheet is misleading. Ford's debt is its largely from auto loans in their finance division which is profitable.

Here's what John Carmack had to say about the i740..

Good throughput, good fillrate, good quality, good features.
A very competent chip. I wish intel great success with the 740. I think that it firmly establishes the baseline that other companies (especially the ones that didn't even make this list) will be forced to come up to.
Voodoo rendering quality, better than voodoo1 performance, good 3D on a desktop integration, and all textures come from AGP memory so there is no texture swapping at all.
Lack of 24 bit rendering is the only negative of any kind I can think of.
Their current MCD OpenGL on NT runs quake 2 pretty well. I have seen their ICD driver on '95 running quake 2, and it seems to be progressing well. The chip has the potential to outperform voodoo 1 across the board, but 3DFX has more highly tuned drivers right now, giving it a performance edge. I expect intel will get the performance up before releasing the ICD.
It is worth mentioning that of all the drivers we have tested, intel's MCD was the only driver that did absolutely everything flawlessly. I hope that their ICD has a similar level of quality (it's a MUCH bigger job).
An 8mb i740 will be a very good setup for 3D development work.

IIRC, the "integrated vs discrete" distinction came about because intel's integrated chipsets were so very slow, didn't support the ATI/NVIDIA extensions to OpenGL, and the developers didn't want to spend time optimizing non ATI/nVidia codepaths.

Generating debt by buying cryptocurrencies is stupid.

More stupid than using your credit card for gambling? Why ban just cryptocurrencies and not all other forms of gambling?

Wells fargo is not alone in banning cryptocurrency purchases. BofA, Chase, Citi, Discover, CapitalOne, Lloyds, and TD already have bans on cryptocurrencies...

FWIW, I seem to remember visa and mastercard already banned charges from known gambling sites after the UIGEA passed... Also several states have laws against buying securities/stocks using credit cards.

Even though Intel is sloppily managed in many ways, Intel does well because there is a huge worldwide need for faster and better processors.

One story: Is Intel a Buy? The chip giant's stock should be due for a huge correction after soaring 48% higher over the last year, right? Well, not so fast.

Quote from that article: "Intel is experiencing 'an unrelenting demand for compute performance driven by the continuing growth of data and the need to process, analyze, store, and share that data.' "

What profits??? Tesla has NO PROFITS.

Wow, this isn't the first time you have said this right here on Slashdot. I remember you saying it, and I remember the flurry of posts trying to educate you as to why you were mistaken on this point. I guess you just didn't learn anything. Or maybe you prefer alternate facts?

Tesla is believed to make over $20K per Model S and Model X. https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/03/27/how-tesla-motors-could-be-profitable-if-it-wanted.aspx

Tesla is expected to make about a 25% profit margin on each Model 3 once they hit the production rate of 5000 cars per month. https://cleantechnica.com/2018/05/14/tesla-model-3-gross-margins/

It's dishonest to take all the money they make on car sales, then divide it by all the expenses they have (R&D, building out the Supercharger network, etc.) and claim that they are losing money on each car sold. No, they are making money on each car sold, and then spending it all, plus more money they borrowed, on all their growth plans. https://cleantechnica.com/2018/05/13/why-tesla-is-a-very-profitable-company-tesla-bankwuptcy-explained-part-2/

Note that GM is believed to lose about $9K per Chevy Bolt sold; the car only pencils out because of EV credits. Tesla is on track to make more money per Model 3 than GM loses. If GM wants to get serious about EVs, then GM needs to invest heavily in battery technology the way Tesla did. https://cleantechnica.com/2018/04/02/tesla-model-3-competitive-advantage-costs-10000-less-to-make-than-chevy-bolt/

Not only is Tesla now very cost-efficient on battery cells due to having their own factory, they have developed their own next-generation battery pack technology. According to this teardown the Tesla Model 3 battery pack contains advanced technology unlike anything that came before. If you like geeky discussions of technology, you will enjoy reading this link: http://evtv.me/2018/05/tesla-model-3-gone-battshit/

Elon Musk has said that 2018 is going to be the year where Tesla starts making money. He has a simple plan: cut any excessive expenses (such as contractors that hire subcontractors that hire subcontractors; Musk compared this to a "Russian Doll") and get Model 3 production above 5000 per month. You will only have to wait a few months to see if he was correct in this prediction. https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/13/elon-musk-says-tesla-will-be-profitable-in-q3-and-q4/

Already done.

The carriers, by and large, already don't own many towers. There might be a few legacy locations where they still do, but companies like American Tower and Crown Castle own the vast majority of them at this point, and the carriers just lease space on them for their antennas. Anyone with a spectrum license and money for the antennas/base stations can rent some position on most any tower.

https://www.fool.com/investing...

Now, if you mean that cell carriers shouldn't own spectrum licenses, that's an entirely different animal.

Social Security is busted already. Anyone under the age of 50 who's counting on it needs to wake up - because at best you'll get 75% of what a retiree gets now. The average today is about $1400, meaning you'll get around $1000 per month. If you think living on $4K a month is hard - try 1/4 of that, with higher drug and medical costs to boot (half are covered by their employers today).

Unemployment continues to grow. The economy is not working for American citizens. A few already-rich people have got richer, and everyone else got poorer under Trump. Those ordinary people who saved anything on their taxes saved on average about sixty bucks, and will get reamed forever after.

Do you not perform research, or are you just functionally retarded? America's unemployment rate is SUPER low right now....because of Trump and his policies.

Source: https://www.bls.gov/news.relea...

"According to recently released data, the IRS has processed 128.8 million tax returns submitted in 2017 so far, and has issued more than 97 million refunds. The average taxpayer who received a refund got $2,763, an increase of roughly 2% over last year."

Source: https://www.fool.com/retiremen...

There is ample evidence showing that coffee is surprisingly good for you. Saying it has to be labelled a "carcinogen" is doing nothing to help anybody's health, but is contributing to people ignoring warning labels, which is not a good thing.

Nobody wants to label coffee a carcinogen. Yes, it's good for you. This particular court wants to label the acrylamide in coffee a carcinogen. Which it is. Coffee can be roasted to contain much less acrylamide, and it's not even hard. The longer you roast coffee, the less acrylamide it contains. Espresso contains much less acrylamide than automatic drip.

California's laws are stupid and counterproductive.

California has some of the lowest cancer rates in the country, so maybe not so stupid and counterproductive.

https://www.fool.com/investing...

progressive society ends up at war with the Idirans, a deeply religious, warlike race intent on dominating the entire galaxy

"Progressive"? Uh-oh... Something tells me, the adaptation will lose the book's subtlety and end up being a story of enlightened Democrats fighting the evil RethugliKKKan war-mongers. Despite "Culture" being, if anything, a Libertarian society.

Bezos, though, may have a better motive than petty politics — the entire "Culture" series describes, how AI, despite displacing (a.k.a. "destroying jobs" of) 99.9% of human workers, has significantly improved lives for everyone (even if, as Idirans point out, turning people into something more of a pet). It may help blunt the hyped and pumped backlash against AI-development, an unfortunate turn of events of non-trivial significance to Amazon.

Dont forget apples massive debt
https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/11/07/heres-how-much-debt-apple-inc-ended-up-raising-yes.aspx

You sound like you have never worked in the space industry. You cannot make a 50K payload that does anything useful.

I call bullshit. You can get the components to build a microsat for $25K so you absolutely could design something to do some task more useful than being dead weight for under $50K. But even if it cost 5X that much it still would be a bargain and much more useful than launching a fracking car. And it certainly wouldn't cost SpaceX a thin dime more than what they are already doing.

Oh and FYI in my day job I am the lead engineer and GM for a company that has made equipment that has been sent into space to the ISS.

Active payload is designed and tested like you wouldn't believe and this alone costs oodles of money.

That is for something that is expected to be reliable. Not necessary to test something to have absurd levels of reliability and safety in this circumstance. It will be lucky to even make it to orbit. The usual expectations don't apply here. You merely would have to do some rudimentary checking to ensure it wouldn't screw up the primary mission (testing the launch vehicle) which doesn't need to cost vast sums.

The fact that you say it shouldn't be a hard problem to come up with a sub 50K payload for any scientist proves to pretty much anyone who has worked in the space industry that you are clueless when it comes to payload development.

You sound like someone who works for a cost+ contractor who cannot imagine that things can be done for less than millions of dollars. I don't have a doubt in my mind that someone could develop some sort of payload to do something scientifically interesting for less money than a luxury car.

What is the maximum Federal income tax rate? HINT: it's not 40%. And the effective Federal income tax rate, for the top 1%, is 27%, which is quite a bit off from 40%. Long term capital gains taxes for the vast majority of people are 0% to 15%. If people did what the AC suggested, they'd probably pay between 15% and 20%, depending upon their level of income.

Let's not forget that Intel's CEO sold the maximum number of shares he was allowed to suspiciously close to (before) this bug was public.

https://www.fool.com/investing...

https://www.fool.com/investing...

Who the hell do you think you're kidding?

Worst case you're going to get a bunch of overtime when it starts back up again which will level your pay back up.

I almost felt bad for a minute... I looked into it... maybe there is something going on with "you" but from what I can tell... the vast majority of workers that stay home during a shut down get paid back one way or another.

That you're telling me not to talk when you're wrong and I'm apparently right. Maybe you shouldn't talk if all you're going to do with the privilege is lie?

Just an idea.

Also, according to this and a few other sources... you do seem to get paid back:
https://www.fool.com/investing...

""But just because workers are furloughed doesn't mean they'll go without pay. Once the government starts up again, most furloughed works will receive back pay for their time off. Bloomberg crunched the numbers and came up with a specific tab: $174 million per day the government is shut down. And this really is a cost, not just a reimbursement. Work that needs to get done (processing tax returns, issuing passports) piles up while employees are furloughed, creating a need for massive overtime once the government starts back up.""

So... is this wrong? This lines up rather cleanly with what everything costs after a shutdown. There are no savings. There are if anything costs. You say "we lose a week of pay"... tragic... so where is the savings off the federal balance sheet? It doesn't exist. So...

So... Sir, bullshit on YOU.

First of all, most of McDonald's locations are franchisee owned. Only 18% are corporate owned, 6,444 stores as of 2015.

Secondly, McDonald's does not employ 1.5 million people. They employed more than 375,000 at the end of 2016.

The PR is phrased and written in such a way that indicates only one goal was in mind: to try and keep stock prices from plummeting. Any time a large corporation issues a PR response, this is their #1 focus, technical details and engineering facts be damned. Intel's CEO selling US$11M worth of stock mid-December doesn't help either (the issue at hand was given to Intel, AMD, and other companies in June of 2017).

https://www.fool.com/investing...
But if he helped backdoor ME maybe he won't get prosecuted.

I am relieved for Brian Krzanich, Intel's CEO. He was lucky enough to sell all the stock he could right before this made the news:

https://www.fool.com/investing...

Otherwise God forbid, he would have lost a lot of money.

Intel's CEO just sold all the stock he legally could sell.

I have a sneaking suspicion Intel shares will fall through the floor

Intel's CEO agrees; a couple weeks ago he sold all the Intel stock he can. If he'd dumped any more shares, he would have had to forfeit his job. That isn't a man who's confident about the future of his company...

Intel CEO, Brian Krzanich, apparently sold a bunch of shares on Nov. 29. While that's not unusual in and of itself, apparently Intel corporate bylaws require its CEO to maintain a minimum number 250,000 shares, and that's exactly how many shares Mr. Krzanich has left. Despite predicting future market growth, the guy dumped his stock for some reason.

https://www.fool.com/investing...

https://www.fool.com/investing...

Less than a month before we know the linux kernel was being patched for this bug.

My old S5 and my current V20 both have user replaceable batteries.

The $29 offer is for the phones they've been throttling, and only to the end of the year

https://www.apple.com/batterie...

Your battery is designed to retain up to 80% of its original capacity at 500 complete charge cycles. The one-year warranty includes service coverage for a defective battery. If it is out of warranty, Apple offers a battery service for $79, plus $6.95 shipping, subject to local tax.

And you have to either send it in or make an appointment and bring it in

https://support.apple.com/ipho...

Plus they don't promote that service. And they didn't tell the people whose phones they throttled that it would fix it to try to nudge the non technical ones into replacing the phone, which Apple users do more frequently than Android ones.

https://www.fool.com/investing...

But those days are largely over, according to new information from Citigroup. Americans now take an average of 29 months to upgrade their cell phone, up from 28 months at the end of last year, and an increase of 24 to 26 months that was typical just a couple of years ago, as noted in a recent Wall Street Journal article. And just four years ago, the upgrade cycle was just 22 months. ...
Originally, Munster thought the program would reduce the average iPhone user's upgrade time frame from 22 months to only 15 months. But that 15 month time frame would mean iPhone users would be upgrading their phones 14 months earlier than the average American, based on Citigroup's new data. And with Apple's iPhone sales currently slowing, that quick upgrade time seems even more unlikely.

I.e. the average for all cell phone users in the US is 29 months, for iPhone users it is 22. And Apple are trying to push that down.

Meanwhile on an S5 or V20 you can pop out to the store, buy a battery and change it yourself with zero downtime.

Wake up sheeple, Farmer Tim Cook is fattening you up for SLAUGHTER!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

I would argue that peopling buying an iPhone X could violate all of these, especially if they upgrade early. As Apple users do, the fucking sinners.

https://www.fool.com/investing...

And I would argue that only an idiot would see an iPhone fit any definition of food. IOW you.