You can't at the same time claim that the low interest rates in the 20s caused the depression AND claim that the growth in the 20s was purely market driven. People were taking on too much debt because of the artificially low interest rates, private debt ballooned from the early 20s onwards... but in the short term that was what was driving growth at the pace it did.
The 20s were the same as the 00s... the bubble setting us up for the fall. The fact that the Fed set the economy up for the fall with low interest rates is neither here nor there... what's done is done.
The debt overhang is there and we need to get rid of it. We can all start saving money, including government, but that has a predictable outcome... less spending, less investment, less employment... deflationary depression until everyone has finished defaulting.
There was a recession at the end of WW2, as well as stimulus in the form of the G.I. Bill.
The pre-WW2 problem was a lack of demand due to private debt and unemployment... WW2 wiped out private debt (by converting it to government debt, which government then evaporated by an increased level of inflation). This removal of debt made the post WW2 recovery possible... from a demand side perspective.
Debt is the mechanism by which capitalism eats itself (the more free it is the better it is at creating debt).
The Chinese accumulation of debt also made it absorb investment, ie. offshoring, making the US less independent. It's hardly a pure benefit to the US... and it had to stop sooner or later, you can't just buy from them on credit indefinitely. Debts have to be paid off sooner or later... isn't it better to pay it off with fiat money?
It's not like the US doesn't still have a huge industrial output to pay for imports with, instead of debt. Even if the US starts running balanced trade it can manage perfectly well. Without the dangers and instability too much foreign debt causes (instability which Keynes predicted).
The social security fund in the US is just there to cover short term fluctuations in expenses/taxes... it's not a fully funded pension fund (it would have to be 30x greater than it is).
I do think a standardized design open to all manufacturers would be the way to go, but I don't think they'd need all game developers... just Valve and a couple of big titles. If they had a special section(s) on Steam for games with some QA done to insure it works well with the system/controller/widescreen displays/etc it would convince other developers to do the little extra work (I say sections because eventually they might want to release different versions of the box).
Ideally the system would use virtualization, so users can't fuck up the ability to play games (so the root OS running the games would be maintained by internet updates from the manufacturer and users would use a separate OS they could fuck up to their hearts content without breaking the ability for the box to play games, expert users might be provided with a way to boot into a traditional windows install with the full ability to fuck up the system).
I think Valve should get together with Acer and/or Dell and do this right now... they can't rely on Microsoft to make PC gaming less of a clusterfuck, they are completely schizophrenic in their intent for PC gaming (because they have conflicting goals, PC gaming sells windows and competes with XBOX at the same time).
If it comes to litigation let courts decide the matter with independent (domain) experts. These are the only people who can truly judge obviousness any way.
There can be no rationale for an obviousness test... ultimately something is obvious just because.
Of course lawyers will never accept this... having to take the word from experts without being able to weasel their way into the decision? No fucking way.
The mechanical connection to the wheels keeps the "propellers" turning....
It's not the wind which makes energy extraction (and locomotion) possible, it's the speed difference between the wind and the ground... as long as there is a speed difference between the ground and the wind you can push against the ground to get energy out of the wind.
Don't worry, the US patent owners will earn a lot more profit on it than the Chinese (they don't give a damn about patents, but if they want to sell it in the US they need the license nonetheless).
Action works just fine in stereoscopic view. Quick cuts and shaky cam not so much... which is the greatest reason I like it, even more than the effect itself. Nothing lazier than turning the screen into one gigantic 24 Hz clusterfuck of juddering unrecognisable crap to imply action. Anything that reduces shaky cam is okay in my book.
PS. Nolan's love of shaky cam is probably part of the reason for remaining 2D...
The backlash in the industry is mostly inertia, people are either afraid of change and rationalize their fear with bullshit arguments or they don't want the skill they have build up making the best of the old medium become useless... the same reason we still have 24 juddery frames per second (tripple flashed so it doesn't flicker any more, but judders all the same). Another thing Cameron wants to get rid of.
Cameron is simply adventurous, where Nolan is conservative... when making what will be a sure fire hit any way being conservative is economically optimal. Cowardly, but optimal.
Metal oxide is not an insulator, it's a semiconductor... using metal oxides is pretty common already, you might recognize the term MOS. The difference is the use of an insulator instead of a semiconductor.
Hmm? Apple's products are refined, but technologically innovative? No.
As for why Apple fanboys love patents... if you had any experience with fanboys you would know all hardware fanboys love patents. If you look at consoles or graphic card fanboys it works exactly the same. Microsoft in general (with exception for their consoles) does not have fanboys in quite the same way as Apple because it wasn't a vertically integrated software/hardware company for the most part... and software patents are boring.
Before Apple got into mobile devices their fanboys didn't care much about patents either.
This might be true, but looking at the thesis linked below the main target seems large area/feature size devices devices such as TFT display backplanes and drivers.
Flash orders are just one way exchanges expose traditionally secret data to HFT to court their business. The relationships between HFT and exchanges is inherently corrupting... and at the moment the relationship is corrupt and they are getting away with it.
Also the emperor has no clothes... the whole clown parade to try to claim HFT doesn't cause flash crashes is a fucking embarrassment. How stupid do they think people are? As you say, HFT doesn't bet... and if you get caught out with a large position in a down trending market as a non better there is only one strategy, with 75% of liquidity choosing that strategy the results are obvious. Worst thing, the exchanges again showing how corrupt they are, add moral hazard to the mix by simply protecting the HFT traders from their own algorithms.
Get rid of flash orders, get rid of trade invalidations, get rid of naked shorting (ie. close out trades immediately, perfectly possible on a computerized exchange, fuck market maker privilege as well in this regard). After that you can try to persuade me HFT is a good idea, at the moment it's just something which makes a bad clusterfuck worse.
PS. some of this is being addressed at the moment, but it shows where the real money in HFT is coming from... and it sure as hell isn't being better at price discovery.
The HFT algorithms aren't value based, how could they cause the stocks to accurately reflect value? HFT is a pure arbitrage play, gaming the restricted strategies of long term investors (in some cases legally restricted). Forcing volatility beyond normal variance to try to benefit from stop loss orders is a perfectly valid HFT strategy... does nothing to make stocks reflect value though.
HFT has one benefit, increased liquidity, and one downfall, increased volatility. For the moment humans are still the only ones capable of judging value... the HFT algorithms add nothing there.
It's more than that... it's about the reclaimable memory, often it will chose to throw much more recent data to swap because it's priority algorithms think that is a better idea than reclaiming (which costs CPU). Linux's VM developers seem to me to be a very myopic bunch... leaving me with no other choice than not letting their code not make too many decisions... ie. turn off swap.
PS. why the hell was drop_caches dropped, it almost feels like the VM developers just couldn't stand the plebian end users second guessing their brilliant code.
Slashdot Mirror
You can't at the same time claim that the low interest rates in the 20s caused the depression AND claim that the growth in the 20s was purely market driven. People were taking on too much debt because of the artificially low interest rates, private debt ballooned from the early 20s onwards ... but in the short term that was what was driving growth at the pace it did.
The 20s were the same as the 00s ... the bubble setting us up for the fall. The fact that the Fed set the economy up for the fall with low interest rates is neither here nor there ... what's done is done.
The debt overhang is there and we need to get rid of it. We can all start saving money, including government, but that has a predictable outcome ... less spending, less investment, less employment ... deflationary depression until everyone has finished defaulting.
There was a recession at the end of WW2, as well as stimulus in the form of the G.I. Bill.
The pre-WW2 problem was a lack of demand due to private debt and unemployment ... WW2 wiped out private debt (by converting it to government debt, which government then evaporated by an increased level of inflation). This removal of debt made the post WW2 recovery possible ... from a demand side perspective.
Debt is the mechanism by which capitalism eats itself (the more free it is the better it is at creating debt).
The Chinese accumulation of debt also made it absorb investment, ie. offshoring, making the US less independent. It's hardly a pure benefit to the US ... and it had to stop sooner or later, you can't just buy from them on credit indefinitely. Debts have to be paid off sooner or later ... isn't it better to pay it off with fiat money?
It's not like the US doesn't still have a huge industrial output to pay for imports with, instead of debt. Even if the US starts running balanced trade it can manage perfectly well. Without the dangers and instability too much foreign debt causes (instability which Keynes predicted).
The median citizen holds negative currency, is granted purchasing power and becomes richer. Most of us are net debtors, just like the government.
Isn't minimum wage compensated for inflation?
The social security fund in the US is just there to cover short term fluctuations in expenses/taxes ... it's not a fully funded pension fund (it would have to be 30x greater than it is).
So nothing like a college fund.
Why would Microsoft/Intel/Google care if they default as long as the tax rates don't change?
I do think a standardized design open to all manufacturers would be the way to go, but I don't think they'd need all game developers ... just Valve and a couple of big titles. If they had a special section(s) on Steam for games with some QA done to insure it works well with the system/controller/widescreen displays/etc it would convince other developers to do the little extra work (I say sections because eventually they might want to release different versions of the box).
Ideally the system would use virtualization, so users can't fuck up the ability to play games (so the root OS running the games would be maintained by internet updates from the manufacturer and users would use a separate OS they could fuck up to their hearts content without breaking the ability for the box to play games, expert users might be provided with a way to boot into a traditional windows install with the full ability to fuck up the system).
I think Valve should get together with Acer and/or Dell and do this right now ... they can't rely on Microsoft to make PC gaming less of a clusterfuck, they are completely schizophrenic in their intent for PC gaming (because they have conflicting goals, PC gaming sells windows and competes with XBOX at the same time).
The ticket is sold with an EULA ... breaking a contract for monetary gain is no more "black market capitalism" than robbing a convenience store.
The price of not getting shot is also below the demand driven price.
I propose all patents get rubber stamped.
If it comes to litigation let courts decide the matter with independent (domain) experts. These are the only people who can truly judge obviousness any way.
There can be no rationale for an obviousness test ... ultimately something is obvious just because.
Of course lawyers will never accept this ... having to take the word from experts without being able to weasel their way into the decision? No fucking way.
The mechanical connection to the wheels keeps the "propellers" turning ....
It's not the wind which makes energy extraction (and locomotion) possible, it's the speed difference between the wind and the ground ... as long as there is a speed difference between the ground and the wind you can push against the ground to get energy out of the wind.
How to do it is just a technicality.
Don't worry, the US patent owners will earn a lot more profit on it than the Chinese (they don't give a damn about patents, but if they want to sell it in the US they need the license nonetheless).
Action works just fine in stereoscopic view. Quick cuts and shaky cam not so much ... which is the greatest reason I like it, even more than the effect itself. Nothing lazier than turning the screen into one gigantic 24 Hz clusterfuck of juddering unrecognisable crap to imply action. Anything that reduces shaky cam is okay in my book.
PS. Nolan's love of shaky cam is probably part of the reason for remaining 2D ...
I'm actually not so sure the contra zoom wouldn't work in stereoscopic video ... have you tried it?
The backlash in the industry is mostly inertia, people are either afraid of change and rationalize their fear with bullshit arguments or they don't want the skill they have build up making the best of the old medium become useless ... the same reason we still have 24 juddery frames per second (tripple flashed so it doesn't flicker any more, but judders all the same). Another thing Cameron wants to get rid of.
Cameron is simply adventurous, where Nolan is conservative ... when making what will be a sure fire hit any way being conservative is economically optimal. Cowardly, but optimal.
Metal oxide is not an insulator, it's a semiconductor ... using metal oxides is pretty common already, you might recognize the term MOS. The difference is the use of an insulator instead of a semiconductor.
Hmm? Apple's products are refined, but technologically innovative? No.
As for why Apple fanboys love patents ... if you had any experience with fanboys you would know all hardware fanboys love patents. If you look at consoles or graphic card fanboys it works exactly the same. Microsoft in general (with exception for their consoles) does not have fanboys in quite the same way as Apple because it wasn't a vertically integrated software/hardware company for the most part ... and software patents are boring.
Before Apple got into mobile devices their fanboys didn't care much about patents either.
This might be true, but looking at the thesis linked below the main target seems large area/feature size devices devices such as TFT display backplanes and drivers.
Flash orders are just one way exchanges expose traditionally secret data to HFT to court their business. The relationships between HFT and exchanges is inherently corrupting ... and at the moment the relationship is corrupt and they are getting away with it.
Also the emperor has no clothes ... the whole clown parade to try to claim HFT doesn't cause flash crashes is a fucking embarrassment. How stupid do they think people are? As you say, HFT doesn't bet ... and if you get caught out with a large position in a down trending market as a non better there is only one strategy, with 75% of liquidity choosing that strategy the results are obvious. Worst thing, the exchanges again showing how corrupt they are, add moral hazard to the mix by simply protecting the HFT traders from their own algorithms.
Get rid of flash orders, get rid of trade invalidations, get rid of naked shorting (ie. close out trades immediately, perfectly possible on a computerized exchange, fuck market maker privilege as well in this regard). After that you can try to persuade me HFT is a good idea, at the moment it's just something which makes a bad clusterfuck worse.
This is far too sensible to ever happen.
Themis Trading has a white papers on the kind of information HFT algorithms get to play with (for a fee of course, the exchanges want their cut).
http://blog.themistrading.com/?p=906
PS. some of this is being addressed at the moment, but it shows where the real money in HFT is coming from ... and it sure as hell isn't being better at price discovery.
The HFT algorithms aren't value based, how could they cause the stocks to accurately reflect value? HFT is a pure arbitrage play, gaming the restricted strategies of long term investors (in some cases legally restricted). Forcing volatility beyond normal variance to try to benefit from stop loss orders is a perfectly valid HFT strategy ... does nothing to make stocks reflect value though.
HFT has one benefit, increased liquidity, and one downfall, increased volatility. For the moment humans are still the only ones capable of judging value ... the HFT algorithms add nothing there.
It's more than that ... it's about the reclaimable memory, often it will chose to throw much more recent data to swap because it's priority algorithms think that is a better idea than reclaiming (which costs CPU). Linux's VM developers seem to me to be a very myopic bunch ... leaving me with no other choice than not letting their code not make too many decisions ... ie. turn off swap.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12309
PS. why the hell was drop_caches dropped, it almost feels like the VM developers just couldn't stand the plebian end users second guessing their brilliant code.
Diminishing the reward for success isn't the same as punishing success.