Funny, you think everyone who isn't like you is an SJW.
Just so you know, it isn't that a large group of people think that "everyone who isn't like them" is an SJW. It's that a large group of people think that you, AmiMoJo and a small group of people like you are SJWs. Not everyone else, just you assholes.
I understand why that might be difficult for you to see from where you're standing.
Rent and mortgage payment aren't at all the right thing to compare - that's just being too lazy to do the diligence on a major purchase. The monthly cost of a house is interest (less tax subsidy) + taxes + insurance + upkeep. (People often underestimate upkeep, as it comes in big lumps when something expensive fails).
The principle portion of the mortgage isn't a cost. Yes, there's an opportunity cost for the down payment and principle, but with interest rates on savings being so low right now (and usually less than inflation anyhow), handwaving that as 0 is reasonable.
and if you're settled on living in a particular area... odds are it probably does make sense to buy instead of rent.
That's simply a bad assumption if it's a popular or growing city. There's plenty of places where a house will run you 2-300 months' rent. You're not coming out ahead there. Other places are having a rent crunch as Millennials like to rent, and it's a very different story.
That would make sense if AllMyVideos was a Youtube clone, where you could browse for videos to watch. But it seems to be a Megaupload clone, for hosting vids traded on forums. That's a dead giveaway.
Plenty of bubbles on the gold standard. Plenty of bubbles before fiat money was created. Heck, the earliest bubbles didn't even depend on borrowed money. If the Fed was vaguely competent (fantasy, I know), fiat money would be shrinking during bubbles - but they'd still happen, just for less damage.
A bubble is simply excess capital plus bad judgment.
That's just as wrong as the opposite claim I was responding to. Desire includes desire for safety and stability, so when facing an uncertain future, people save rather than spend, in order to satisfy their primary desire.. Also, obviously, demand is a function of price.
Also, I mean come on, home many beers do you desire today? 10? 100? Somewhere short of infinite, I expect.
When capital outstrips demand, it either sits idle, or we build a bunch of stuff in excess of demand, causing a bubble and a crash.
"trickle-down economics" is an extremely obvious lie told to the gullible.
Just wrong.
Economic growth (job creation) requires both demand and capital. This is the most basic fact of economics.
If the economy is demand constrained we need more demand, if it's capital constrained we need more capital. Nothing could be more obvious.
Now, you can argue in any given set of circumstances where the bottleneck is - that's a valid discussion. But to insist that it's always demand (or that it's always capital) regardless of circumstance is transparently politics-over-jobs. Fuck that.
TFA is about DSL Speeds FFS. This is always slower than cable. This is not about the best internet service in wealthy areas, this is about better DSL in wealthy areas - 6 Mbps instaed of 1.5 Mbps. Not exactly envy-worthy. Not other nation would even call it "broadband" to begin with.
Basically, *customers* create jobs. Not rich people.
Both are necessary, neither by himself is sufficient (except in fashion, where the rich people do create the demand). Capital-intensive products (and the associated jobs) require capital, obviously. Some few businesses can be started by just a guy by himself, and then grow to include employees, but even that takes a guy with enough saved to work with little/no pay for months or years to become cash flow positive.
Why do people even argue about this any more? Jobs require both demand and available capital - starve either side, and the jobs stop happening.
Quite simply every company will get pinged for stealing and using insider data from the companies they are hosting, can't help themselves, in their nature.
Until we get the first such scandal from AWS, Azure, or Google, I'll remain skeptical of this argument.
Yeah, there are just some toes in the water with hosted services (Office online, etc), but nothing really for "here's a basic set of services that most small companies need, all running in the cloud, cheaper than renting your own server for each thing".
Cloud won't be competitive any time soon for a company that isn't employing enough IT staff that going to the cloud won't let them reduce that staff by at least one. As soon as you're that big, the economics change completely, but for a company with 0-2 IT guys who they're going to have to keep paying anyway, the cloud has to compete with raw hardware costs, which it rarely does.
For one, any company providing a "cloud" need server guys, network guys, hardware techs, and so on.
Datacenter tech, sure, though there's some additional economies of scale for the big guys.
For everything else - it's not e.g. "network guys", but "full time software devs with a background in networking". Not everyone can make the change, and the economies of scale there are huge - you don't need many more devs to support 1 million servers than 30k, when you're building automation regardless.
many small/midsize businesses don't have the cash flow to support what cloud providers are charging and prefer to keep infrastructure as a capital expense.
Only for capital they've already expended. For small companies, large capital outlays are a real challenge, and a monthly payment that (sort of) scales with the business is vastly better, even if it's more over 3 years. For most small businesses, making payroll this month is the first, second, and third concern. I don't think "the cloud" really has it right yet for very small companies with just a couple of servers and "the guy who also does IT", but in time it will.
Traditional IT roles are getting automated out of existence - it's all devops and cloud these days. Great time to be working for a cloud provider, though. AWS and Azure are rocking, Oracle is trying desperately (and I hear they have to pay well to get anyone to come), Apple seems to be working on their own thing, rather than using Azure. Google is trying to make that business work for them.
Heck, lots of normal online businesses are hiring devs to make their stuff work in the cloud, so that's another path.
Yeah, the bottles are way better (but I find them unpalatable - fortunately, I'm not so constrained). I'd love a good 250-calorie tasty food bar that wasn't just a different kind of candy bar, though.
Oh, I agree. The thing about in-person voting is it's well understood, and the anti-fraud mechanisms are well understood, and in most places fraud is kept largely in check. I think voter ID would help, but democracy is an imperfect process, and that's not exactly our biggest issue.
OTOH, ballotless electronic voting, mail voting, voting that lets a corrupt official see who you voted for (like Oregon's system): these things open up the door to far worse fraud problems than we have today.
Yeah, then that make sense - it takes very minimal effort to hand-clean stuff well enough for a vaguely modern dishwasher to work - but that's more than no effort.
Does "vote by mail" require any sort of ID? If not, how on earth is this more secure than a ballot box?
In pretty much any kind of fraud, people are far less willing to show their face to any sort of authority. Fraud online or by mail is just much easier to work up the courage for.
What's going to stop $PARTY_YOU_HATE from mailing in thousands of ballots for people that didn't vote (the recently dead/felons, people they know directly that didn't vote, etc). When all you need is a name to forge a ballot, no risk to the fraudster, vote fraud will be epic.
Otherwise I think VR would be greatly improved with some mocap gloves and arm sleeves (or something similar to a Microsoft Kinect), to at least come close to doing something useful better than without it.
The Vive solved that well, by all accounts. Its "wands" work better than the Wii - good enough that you can easily pick them up when seeing only the VR view of where they are.
If that is the case then the AI should have that data to parse objectively and make decisions on. There is no benefit to forcing loans to be given to people who don't pay them.
No benefit? The last time banks did that, they got $1.6 trillion in bailouts from taxpayers. Ka-ching!
Slashdot Mirror
Funny, you think everyone who isn't like you is an SJW.
Just so you know, it isn't that a large group of people think that "everyone who isn't like them" is an SJW. It's that a large group of people think that you, AmiMoJo and a small group of people like you are SJWs. Not everyone else, just you assholes.
I understand why that might be difficult for you to see from where you're standing.
Rent and mortgage payment aren't at all the right thing to compare - that's just being too lazy to do the diligence on a major purchase. The monthly cost of a house is interest (less tax subsidy) + taxes + insurance + upkeep. (People often underestimate upkeep, as it comes in big lumps when something expensive fails).
The principle portion of the mortgage isn't a cost. Yes, there's an opportunity cost for the down payment and principle, but with interest rates on savings being so low right now (and usually less than inflation anyhow), handwaving that as 0 is reasonable.
and if you're settled on living in a particular area... odds are it probably does make sense to buy instead of rent.
That's simply a bad assumption if it's a popular or growing city. There's plenty of places where a house will run you 2-300 months' rent. You're not coming out ahead there. Other places are having a rent crunch as Millennials like to rent, and it's a very different story.
Do the math, or get taken.
That would make sense if AllMyVideos was a Youtube clone, where you could browse for videos to watch. But it seems to be a Megaupload clone, for hosting vids traded on forums. That's a dead giveaway.
Plenty of bubbles on the gold standard. Plenty of bubbles before fiat money was created. Heck, the earliest bubbles didn't even depend on borrowed money. If the Fed was vaguely competent (fantasy, I know), fiat money would be shrinking during bubbles - but they'd still happen, just for less damage.
A bubble is simply excess capital plus bad judgment.
That's just as wrong as the opposite claim I was responding to. Desire includes desire for safety and stability, so when facing an uncertain future, people save rather than spend, in order to satisfy their primary desire.. Also, obviously, demand is a function of price.
Also, I mean come on, home many beers do you desire today? 10? 100? Somewhere short of infinite, I expect.
When capital outstrips demand, it either sits idle, or we build a bunch of stuff in excess of demand, causing a bubble and a crash.
"trickle-down economics" is an extremely obvious lie told to the gullible.
Just wrong.
Economic growth (job creation) requires both demand and capital. This is the most basic fact of economics.
If the economy is demand constrained we need more demand, if it's capital constrained we need more capital. Nothing could be more obvious.
Now, you can argue in any given set of circumstances where the bottleneck is - that's a valid discussion. But to insist that it's always demand (or that it's always capital) regardless of circumstance is transparently politics-over-jobs. Fuck that.
TFA is about DSL Speeds FFS. This is always slower than cable. This is not about the best internet service in wealthy areas, this is about better DSL in wealthy areas - 6 Mbps instaed of 1.5 Mbps. Not exactly envy-worthy. Not other nation would even call it "broadband" to begin with.
Did you try turning your career off and back on again?
Basically, *customers* create jobs. Not rich people.
Both are necessary, neither by himself is sufficient (except in fashion, where the rich people do create the demand). Capital-intensive products (and the associated jobs) require capital, obviously. Some few businesses can be started by just a guy by himself, and then grow to include employees, but even that takes a guy with enough saved to work with little/no pay for months or years to become cash flow positive.
Why do people even argue about this any more? Jobs require both demand and available capital - starve either side, and the jobs stop happening.
Quite simply every company will get pinged for stealing and using insider data from the companies they are hosting, can't help themselves, in their nature.
Until we get the first such scandal from AWS, Azure, or Google, I'll remain skeptical of this argument.
Yeah, there are just some toes in the water with hosted services (Office online, etc), but nothing really for "here's a basic set of services that most small companies need, all running in the cloud, cheaper than renting your own server for each thing".
Cloud won't be competitive any time soon for a company that isn't employing enough IT staff that going to the cloud won't let them reduce that staff by at least one. As soon as you're that big, the economics change completely, but for a company with 0-2 IT guys who they're going to have to keep paying anyway, the cloud has to compete with raw hardware costs, which it rarely does.
For one, any company providing a "cloud" need server guys, network guys, hardware techs, and so on.
Datacenter tech, sure, though there's some additional economies of scale for the big guys.
For everything else - it's not e.g. "network guys", but "full time software devs with a background in networking". Not everyone can make the change, and the economies of scale there are huge - you don't need many more devs to support 1 million servers than 30k, when you're building automation regardless.
many small/midsize businesses don't have the cash flow to support what cloud providers are charging and prefer to keep infrastructure as a capital expense.
Only for capital they've already expended. For small companies, large capital outlays are a real challenge, and a monthly payment that (sort of) scales with the business is vastly better, even if it's more over 3 years. For most small businesses, making payroll this month is the first, second, and third concern. I don't think "the cloud" really has it right yet for very small companies with just a couple of servers and "the guy who also does IT", but in time it will.
Yes there is, but I'm not going to google it from work.
Traditional IT roles are getting automated out of existence - it's all devops and cloud these days. Great time to be working for a cloud provider, though. AWS and Azure are rocking, Oracle is trying desperately (and I hear they have to pay well to get anyone to come), Apple seems to be working on their own thing, rather than using Azure. Google is trying to make that business work for them.
Heck, lots of normal online businesses are hiring devs to make their stuff work in the cloud, so that's another path.
"do the needful"
You will not find these words in TFA.
Whipslash has some 'splaining to do. I've suspected Manish was an outsourced editor, but this new guy is obviously so fresh he still nods sideways.
I hear the Mountain Dew billboards in India advertise "Dew the needful!"
Bollywood is making a version of the Big Lebowski - the central character will be "Dude, the weedful"
Yeah, the bottles are way better (but I find them unpalatable - fortunately, I'm not so constrained). I'd love a good 250-calorie tasty food bar that wasn't just a different kind of candy bar, though.
Oh, I agree. The thing about in-person voting is it's well understood, and the anti-fraud mechanisms are well understood, and in most places fraud is kept largely in check. I think voter ID would help, but democracy is an imperfect process, and that's not exactly our biggest issue.
OTOH, ballotless electronic voting, mail voting, voting that lets a corrupt official see who you voted for (like Oregon's system): these things open up the door to far worse fraud problems than we have today.
Yeah, then that make sense - it takes very minimal effort to hand-clean stuff well enough for a vaguely modern dishwasher to work - but that's more than no effort.
Not technically required by the standard.
2.3.2 418 I'm a teapot
Any attempt to brew coffee with a teapot should result in the error
code "418 I'm a teapot". The resulting entity body MAY be short and
stout.
Sadly, the bars are 10% sugar by weight (and half carbs). Energy bards, not actual food.
Are you not in the US? This isn't generally a problem with (mechanical) dishwashers, unless she's heroically lazy.
In person voter fraud is a manufactured myth created by the GOP
You might find this interesting. straight from the mouth of a NYC (Democratic) election commissioner.
Well, you might find it interesting if your confirmation bias isn't extreme.
Does "vote by mail" require any sort of ID? If not, how on earth is this more secure than a ballot box?
In pretty much any kind of fraud, people are far less willing to show their face to any sort of authority. Fraud online or by mail is just much easier to work up the courage for.
What's going to stop $PARTY_YOU_HATE from mailing in thousands of ballots for people that didn't vote (the recently dead/felons, people they know directly that didn't vote, etc). When all you need is a name to forge a ballot, no risk to the fraudster, vote fraud will be epic.
Otherwise I think VR would be greatly improved with some mocap gloves and arm sleeves (or something similar to a Microsoft Kinect), to at least come close to doing something useful better than without it.
The Vive solved that well, by all accounts. Its "wands" work better than the Wii - good enough that you can easily pick them up when seeing only the VR view of where they are.
If that is the case then the AI should have that data to parse objectively and make decisions on. There is no benefit to forcing loans to be given to people who don't pay them.
No benefit? The last time banks did that, they got $1.6 trillion in bailouts from taxpayers. Ka-ching!