The current debt is just below or approaching 100% of GDP, so your claim that per-capita income per tax payer is $40k with only 140mn tax payers "feels" wrong. Workplace participation rates in the US are around the 65% mark, so I'd suggest the number is a bit higher. That said, given companies tax only accounts for around $200bn, compared to a total tax take of around $2.4tn, there's certainly a gap there that might explain the average x number being far less than GDP. No-one is seriously arguing to pay off the whole outstanding debt in the next 7 - 10 years - there's hardly a government out there without some level of debt, some more manageable than others.
The closeness of default was entirely based on political reasons - it's not as though the US isn't getting income to pay bills, it's just that the bills at the moment outweigh the income, so by borrowing now the payments & needs of today can be met. If the debt ceiling wasn't raised, the choice would be to dishonour debt or dishonour payments to social security etc. The situation is different from Greece, where they literally don't have the income to pay the debt bill, no matter what they do - and not being able to repay their debts in a currency they control the flow of means they can't escape obligations through fiat currency. The dollar dropping makes American exports cheaper and more competitive - it's not necessarily a bad thing.
The folk arguing for more debt are saying this is the wrong time to impose financial discipline - in a bad economy, government demand attempts to make up for the shortfall of private demand, with the intent being that any stimulus is withdrawn with increasing private demand. It's a Keynesian response that worked to pull the US out of the Great Depression, through programs such as the WPA - it's only in the 70s and 80s that the free market fundamentalists argued that wasn't the appropriate response. What this approach does require however is fiscal discipline in good times - not lowering taxes, introducing structural deficit, just because more tax is coming in than needs to be spent. That's when you repay your debt.
(all that said, I agree D.C. doesn't look like they could find their way out of this quagmire even if they weren't just concerned with saving their asses at the next round of elections)
Yes, but even you couldn't argue that the concept outlined in the abstract:
A device with a touch-sensitive display may be unlocked via gestures performed on the touch-sensitive display. The device is unlocked if contact with the display corresponds to a predefined gesture for unlocking the device. The device displays one or more unlock images with respect to which the predefined gesture is to be performed in order to unlock the device. The performance of the predefined gesture with respect to the unlock image may include moving the unlock image to a predefined location and/or moving the unlock image along a predefined path. The device may also display visual cues of the predefined gesture on the touch screen to remind a user of the gesture.
... is at all similar to something where you unlock a device by moving a physical switch. It's quite explicit in that it talks about unlocking a touch screen device - no claim is made to the concept of locking/unlocking interaction with a device. Nokia's two-factor unlock with a physical keyboard wouldn't be affected by this, for instance. Nor would the dot-pattern-trace unlock - unless some judge chooses to accept "predefined" as meaning "predefined by the user", which I don't believe would be the case.
So Apple have a reasonably non-generic patent on the concept of sliding an image on-screen along a path (or to a location) to unlock functionality. They don't have a patent on the generic concept of unlocking functionality.
Apple's got the patent: it's patent no. 7,657,849. They could sue if it falls under the claims of the patent - it's clearly worded to be separate to a physical unlock switch.
1) except the games industry is bigger than Hollywood by far 2) The department that provided the funding looks to be Commercialisation Australia, which seems to basically be a government-backed VC-like operation - I can only imagine that exists because of the paltry VC in Australia.
Unfortunately, the standard for prior art on patents is not "It works kinda like that other thing I saw in a different context." - Apple's "innovation" in taking the hold switch concept and implementing it in a touch-based interface is sufficient for it to be granted a patent, for better or worse.
The FBI might not have direct jurisdiction, but they've certainly got agreements with the major law enforcement agencies around the world, and you can bet that hacking across international lines is a sensational enough crime that they're going to assist the FBI in any way they can. See also the recent cases of "Anonymous members" getting picked up in the UK.
why shouldn't PayPal just leave that up to the FBI to check? After all, they're the ones that are supposed to have the public's interest at heart, not PayPal, the corporation that got attacked here.
That's only in the cases where the theory provides a "good enough" explanation and the question is about explaining the edge cases. In this case, if the work here is shown to be true, it would mean that current models are invalid, and need more than a pinch of salt to say "this might not be accruate".
Just thinking about it - surely someone's gone and regressed these models, right? e.g., take the known data at 1990 and project to 2010 and work out if the model matches the observed data?
Providing evidence to the contrary is sufficient to disprove a hypothesis, but it does not come with a requirement to provide an alternative hypothesis.
(not that I disagree with the AGW theory, just that if you're going to argue for science, stick to the principle rather than being dogmatic about it. This claim needs to be tested & reviewed, and if it's found to be true then a revised theory is required.)
CISRO is fairly independent, and I don't recall ever hearing of government interference in communicating results. I'm not even a "Liberal" (Conservative in Australia) apologist. Besides, this kind of openness is what the scientific journals and the goddamn internet is for, isn't it?
Now there's an explanation for today's politics I can actually understand. What happens 15 years down the track when the middle/power group is the children of cocaine users?
It's even more insidious than that - the plug is the same, but the restriction is now in software, so you don't realise your folly until you plug it in and it fails to load.
... it's the other way around. Planning stages that are bogged down in process never seem to get off the ground; good, effective project management in development & testing phases keeps everyone corralled and on track.
That said, it sounds like your project manager was (a) incompetent, and (b) had little experience of the software development process himself.
1) huh? how are you going to "integrate" Buzz into Plus? Have you even seen Plus? Buzz offers at best a subset of features Plus already offers, barring Twitter & GReader integration.
2) there's hardly a lack of invites these days; I thought everyone can just flick it on from their Google profile now?
Slashdot Mirror
"Not enough minerals."
I was going to ask for citation/corroboration, but it's pretty straightforward to find: http://www.ag.gov.au/www/cob/classification.nsf/Page/HowtoComplywithClassificationLaws_Informationforimporters
You don't know much about the patent system, do you?
Or Goo-"don't be evil? yeah right"-gle, for that matter?
The current debt is just below or approaching 100% of GDP, so your claim that per-capita income per tax payer is $40k with only 140mn tax payers "feels" wrong. Workplace participation rates in the US are around the 65% mark, so I'd suggest the number is a bit higher.
That said, given companies tax only accounts for around $200bn, compared to a total tax take of around $2.4tn, there's certainly a gap there that might explain the average x number being far less than GDP. No-one is seriously arguing to pay off the whole outstanding debt in the next 7 - 10 years - there's hardly a government out there without some level of debt, some more manageable than others.
The closeness of default was entirely based on political reasons - it's not as though the US isn't getting income to pay bills, it's just that the bills at the moment outweigh the income, so by borrowing now the payments & needs of today can be met. If the debt ceiling wasn't raised, the choice would be to dishonour debt or dishonour payments to social security etc. The situation is different from Greece, where they literally don't have the income to pay the debt bill, no matter what they do - and not being able to repay their debts in a currency they control the flow of means they can't escape obligations through fiat currency. The dollar dropping makes American exports cheaper and more competitive - it's not necessarily a bad thing.
The folk arguing for more debt are saying this is the wrong time to impose financial discipline - in a bad economy, government demand attempts to make up for the shortfall of private demand, with the intent being that any stimulus is withdrawn with increasing private demand. It's a Keynesian response that worked to pull the US out of the Great Depression, through programs such as the WPA - it's only in the 70s and 80s that the free market fundamentalists argued that wasn't the appropriate response. What this approach does require however is fiscal discipline in good times - not lowering taxes, introducing structural deficit, just because more tax is coming in than needs to be spent. That's when you repay your debt.
(all that said, I agree D.C. doesn't look like they could find their way out of this quagmire even if they weren't just concerned with saving their asses at the next round of elections)
Yes, but even you couldn't argue that the concept outlined in the abstract:
A device with a touch-sensitive display may be unlocked via gestures performed on the touch-sensitive display. The device is unlocked if contact with the display corresponds to a predefined gesture for unlocking the device. The device displays one or more unlock images with respect to which the predefined gesture is to be performed in order to unlock the device. The performance of the predefined gesture with respect to the unlock image may include moving the unlock image to a predefined location and/or moving the unlock image along a predefined path. The device may also display visual cues of the predefined gesture on the touch screen to remind a user of the gesture.
... is at all similar to something where you unlock a device by moving a physical switch. It's quite explicit in that it talks about unlocking a touch screen device - no claim is made to the concept of locking/unlocking interaction with a device. Nokia's two-factor unlock with a physical keyboard wouldn't be affected by this, for instance. Nor would the dot-pattern-trace unlock - unless some judge chooses to accept "predefined" as meaning "predefined by the user", which I don't believe would be the case.
So Apple have a reasonably non-generic patent on the concept of sliding an image on-screen along a path (or to a location) to unlock functionality. They don't have a patent on the generic concept of unlocking functionality.
Apple's got the patent: it's patent no. 7,657,849. They could sue if it falls under the claims of the patent - it's clearly worded to be separate to a physical unlock switch.
1) except the games industry is bigger than Hollywood by far
2) The department that provided the funding looks to be Commercialisation Australia, which seems to basically be a government-backed VC-like operation - I can only imagine that exists because of the paltry VC in Australia.
Unfortunately, the standard for prior art on patents is not "It works kinda like that other thing I saw in a different context." - Apple's "innovation" in taking the hold switch concept and implementing it in a touch-based interface is sufficient for it to be granted a patent, for better or worse.
You can claim gambling losses as a tax deduction? Holy shit, just how broken is the US tax code?!
(speaking from Australia, where I can only imagine someone is about to point out the same thing in our tax code...)
Is it ironic, or is it a built-in perverse incentive for the teachers to focus on... other areas of teaching, shall we say?
The FBI might not have direct jurisdiction, but they've certainly got agreements with the major law enforcement agencies around the world, and you can bet that hacking across international lines is a sensational enough crime that they're going to assist the FBI in any way they can. See also the recent cases of "Anonymous members" getting picked up in the UK.
why shouldn't PayPal just leave that up to the FBI to check? After all, they're the ones that are supposed to have the public's interest at heart, not PayPal, the corporation that got attacked here.
That's only in the cases where the theory provides a "good enough" explanation and the question is about explaining the edge cases. In this case, if the work here is shown to be true, it would mean that current models are invalid, and need more than a pinch of salt to say "this might not be accruate".
Just thinking about it - surely someone's gone and regressed these models, right? e.g., take the known data at 1990 and project to 2010 and work out if the model matches the observed data?
Right?
I suppose artists should be celebrating getting 0.00029c per play than nothing at all, right?
Providing evidence to the contrary is sufficient to disprove a hypothesis, but it does not come with a requirement to provide an alternative hypothesis.
(not that I disagree with the AGW theory, just that if you're going to argue for science, stick to the principle rather than being dogmatic about it. This claim needs to be tested & reviewed, and if it's found to be true then a revised theory is required.)
They might be using a different micro-architecture but it's still x86 compatible.
The word they should be using is translucent.
[Citation needed]
CISRO is fairly independent, and I don't recall ever hearing of government interference in communicating results. I'm not even a "Liberal" (Conservative in Australia) apologist. Besides, this kind of openness is what the scientific journals and the goddamn internet is for, isn't it?
Now there's an explanation for today's politics I can actually understand. What happens 15 years down the track when the middle/power group is the children of cocaine users?
If you've got a Wii, I can understand getting a Xbox 360 or a PS3. But if you've already got a Wii and an Xbox... why exactly are you getting the PS3?
It's even more insidious than that - the plug is the same, but the restriction is now in software, so you don't realise your folly until you plug it in and it fails to load.
... it's the other way around. Planning stages that are bogged down in process never seem to get off the ground; good, effective project management in development & testing phases keeps everyone corralled and on track.
That said, it sounds like your project manager was (a) incompetent, and (b) had little experience of the software development process himself.
1) huh? how are you going to "integrate" Buzz into Plus? Have you even seen Plus? Buzz offers at best a subset of features Plus already offers, barring Twitter & GReader integration.
2) there's hardly a lack of invites these days; I thought everyone can just flick it on from their Google profile now?
This is Slashdot. Many here would be happy to admit to having an SO with whom they are having regular sex.