Only 28 years since its been legal for an American company to launch things into space using their own equipment, and even after that western governments (including the U.S) were actively hostile towards private space flight. For instance they forced OTRAG operations into a 3rd world country and then banned using them because it might help the 3rd world country to develop long range missiles.
So no, not 40 years you ignorant statist twat. You give the state so much power that they prevent free markets from working, and then later claim that the "free market" you set up to fail didnt work.
Give people liberty, and free markets work just fine.
Under normal conditions, humans don't do these kind of errors.
In this case however, it should be noted that the humans are ALSO in error. They see both images as the same, when the images are in fact not the same.
With this realization, there is no remaining controversy here. Both the wetware and the software use different methodologies, so its no surprise then that they have different error distributions.
A far better method of comparing the two systems with regard to "accuracy" would be to throw many family photo albums at both the wetware and software and have both tag all the photos that include at least one of a set of randomly chosen members from each family. The kind of errors humans would be making here arent the same as the kind that software would be making, but humans sure as hell would be making a lot of errors.
The re-election rate is so high because of gerrymandering, and both parties do it.
Put all the Democrats in one district, and all the Republicans in another, and then one of the effects is that neither Republicans nor Democrats have to worry much about winning their district. Another of the effects is that campaigns are much more polarized. If everyone in your district is majority Republican then you start off shooting right down the middle of that demographic, which doesnt include many Democrats.
Its a false dichotomy of course... voting 3rd party is not a waste of a vote. Voting for the majority candidate is a waste of a vote
Wheeler is (apparently) saying, given the finite bandwidth connecting Comcast and L3, that it would be prohibited for Netflix to pay Comcast to favor Netflix traffic through that pipe, if it has the effect of blocking or reducing Coca-Cola traffic.
Which is no different than my mid-tier connection having adverse effects on my neighbors low-tier connection, which it surely does during peak usage.
Would you care to try again? because right now you havent framed the argument in a way that doesnt apply to the fast lane I have purchased.
In the end I think the real problem with your argument is that its hypocritical to allow me to buy a fast lane but not allow netflix to buy a fast lane. That clearly its not fast lanes that are the problem.. its the fear of sliding down the slippery slope that brings us to the attack on fast lanes, essentially just a FUD argument. Write laws that prevent what you want to prevent, not what might lead to what you want to prevent.
I as an end user pay already for a fast lane. I am not on the most basic plan, after all.
Is it being suggested that my fast lane degrading other users own bandwidth (which it surely does at peak times) is going to be prohibited? I am going to get the same bandwidth as my neighbor who has the basic plan during peak usage hours?
Careful what you wish for folks. Rarely does anyone point out that we already have fast and slow lanes and that many of us eagerly pay more for faster lanes. In our efforts to justify not allowing a company to buy better access, we quite easily use arguments which undermine our own buying of better access.
Are you really that stupid as to not be able to remember what you wrote?
Its worse than that. There is a rapidly growing segment of the population that doesnt say what they mean, and thinks that its quite alright that they do not say what they mean. This goes further in that they presume that nobody else says what they mean, in spite of the fact that most of the people from my generation and older carefully make sure that they are saying exactly what they mean.
One has to wonder what these young fools would have had to say if they actually meant what they said.
does that mean that Nick Rahall is just an idiot for thinking that Net Neutrality is a bad idea?
I think it means that he took a lot more than the otherwise top guy. It just wasnt a campaign donation... it was a straight up bribe such as a promise of a position when he leaves office.
I don't understand why they can do it here, but make a big thing about it in other cities.
In other cities they arent allowed to do that because of regulator capture. Livery licenses are restricted to a fixed number which is already filled by the existing companies, which then lobby to prevent increases in the number of livery licenses.
The only way to get in and own and operate a cab in New York City, for instance, requires buying a license from an existing license owner. These licenses (called medallions) go for over a million dollars today. This is the state of livery services in most cities, and even entire States in the case of the U.S.
Look at all the astroturfing about rapists and murderers in this article. Appeals to consequences, rooted in appeals to emotion, all to continue protecting the existing livery services from further competition. Its not a free market now and the argument is that if it ever becomes a free market that you will 100% certain be raped and then murdered by a crazy person that drives a cab.
Any serious baseball player will tell you that its your peripheral vision that is fast enough for this sort of catching-unexpected-things behavior.
See this fine catch for evidence of how not only is the speed almost instant, but that the player himself wasnt even surprised that he caught it. "Keep it on the field, guys."
The point of write amplification is solely to get more sectors into the erasure party. A single small write forces the SSD to migrate full sector A to empty sector B.
Irrelevant and you would know it if you actually read my post, or bothered to think about the technology for a longer period of time than the dismal amount you invested to confirm whatever it was you were trying to confirm.
The device cannot erase blocks at a rate faster than blocks can be written. If they could then they wouldnt increase costs with useless things like over-provisioning, something that is only useful because erases are slower than writes. Therefore the erase rate must be less than the maximum write rate, so using the maximum write rate is a valid upper bound on the speed with which erases can be performed.
All arguments such as yours which call upon write amplification hand waving to imply that erases can occur at faster rates than the devices upper bound write speed is just bullshit thought up by someone so trivially versed in the subject that confirmation bias has made them look like a complete fool, for they latched on to tiny bits of information that arent at all relevant but arent informed enough to know it.
No matter what you do you cannot burn through more than the maximum (ideal conditions) write speed, and the strategies you are talking about would ultimately be far from maximum.
At 400MB/sec max erase throughput and 250 erase cycles per block (conservative?), it would still take 30 days to wear down this 4TB drive.
Write amplification is a red herring when you are calculating time to failure because write amplification doesnt magically give the SSD more erase ability. These things arent constructed to be able to erase any faster than they can write, and in fact are actually constructed to mitigate the problem that they cannot erase as fast as they can write (over-provisioning, write combining, etc..)
The law merely required the USPS to calculate their unfunded liability and then go ahead and start funding it. They calculate that unfunded liability based on a 75 year projection (a non-arbitrary duration given by Office of Personnel Management guidelines.) They do not have to fund the retirements of anyone who isnt employed by them yet, nor any other obligations that they do not actually have.
They were doing pay-as-you-go to cover their unfunded liabilities, which usually works fine so long as their revenue never experiences long term declines. However, demand for postal services has been declining worldwide. Its down 25% globally over the past 7 years alone.
Other government entities that used pay-as-you-go included Detroit, San Bernardino, Stockton, and Central Falls. What you are witnessing is just the tip of the iceberg and its not like you werent warned. Unfunded liabilities in this country will continue to be front page news, and no amount of dishonest hand waving by you makes those liabilities go away.
When a private entity doesnt fund its liabilities and then has to declare bankruptcy I bet you have something to say about that too, and it certainly isnt in defense of the private entity. I bet the words "stole their retirement" have come out of your mouth much more than once. Here we have a situation where something is done about unfunded liabilities before it becomes an unsolvable problem, at least for one entity, and you are crying about that too.
The requirement to fund their liabilities isnt the problem. The fact that their unfunded liabilities was already over $200 billion before something was done about it was the problem.
The problem with USPS is that they have to pre-pay pensions 70 years out. No other Government agency or private company needs to do this, that's purely USPS regulation thanks to Congress.
You guys keep saying this but its not accurate.
The law merely required the USPS to calculate their unfunded liability and then go ahead and start funding it. They calculate that unfunded liability based on a 75 year projection (a non-arbitrary duration given by Office of Personnel Management guidelines.) They do not have to fund the retirements of anyone who isnt employed by them yet. If it was based on a 200 year projection their unfunded liability wouldnt change because it continues to be based on the existing promises to existing people, not speculation about future promises to future people.
They were doing pay-as-you-go to cover their unfunded liabilities, which usually works fine so long as their revenue never experiences long term declines. However, demand for postal services has been declining worldwide. Its down 25% globally over the past 7 years alone.
Other government entities that used pay-as-you-go included Detroit, San Bernardino, Stockton, and Central Falls. What you are witnessing is just the tip of the iceberg and its not like you werent warned. Unfunded liabilities in this country will continue to be front page news, and no amount of dishonest hand waving by you makes those liabilities go away.
So says a post that brings ZERO facts to the table
I brought several facts to the table, and you just provided a citation for one of them. You are a democrat and you immediately attacked the messenger. You guys are too shallow to not be easily predictable.
That's a very "special" excuse for why it's perfectly fine to avoid tax, not put money in the collection plate etc.
See, its commies (and I mean that) like you that are the real problem. You admit right here that you think there needs to be an excuse to pay as little tax as legally possible. Not only doesnt there need to be an excuse... its a no-brainer as to why there doesnt need to be one. Yet there you are with this theory that there must exist an excuse.
Dont let reality knock your logical fallacies down on the way out.
Its OK for the government to hurt people so long as its in a way his team says is OK.
The modern democrat cannot be bothered with facts, logical arguments, or even doing things legally. When the facts don't fit, they aggressively attack the messenger every single time.
They claim that people opposed to them are lying because they themselves lie a lot. Projection.
There is a large group of people here that think that its not just moral, but a complete obligation, for governments to maximize their revenue. These same people are of course against corporations doing that very same thing.
Logical fallacies all the way down the statist trail.
I really don't see a fundamental difference between that and just collecting it from the sun from the ground.
Why dont you? have you even considered how it would be transmitted? Apparently not, because you seem to think we will have a flashlight in space shining light on the earth.
Slashdot Mirror
In the world I live in, the wealth of a country is properly defined as the amount of goods and services that its people enjoy.
Greater efficiencies is the road we should always be on.
we just think that your fairy tale pure capitalism can't exist
Only 28 years since its been legal for an American company to launch things into space using their own equipment, and even after that western governments (including the U.S) were actively hostile towards private space flight. For instance they forced OTRAG operations into a 3rd world country and then banned using them because it might help the 3rd world country to develop long range missiles.
So no, not 40 years you ignorant statist twat. You give the state so much power that they prevent free markets from working, and then later claim that the "free market" you set up to fail didnt work.
Give people liberty, and free markets work just fine.
Under normal conditions, humans don't do these kind of errors.
In this case however, it should be noted that the humans are ALSO in error. They see both images as the same, when the images are in fact not the same.
With this realization, there is no remaining controversy here. Both the wetware and the software use different methodologies, so its no surprise then that they have different error distributions.
A far better method of comparing the two systems with regard to "accuracy" would be to throw many family photo albums at both the wetware and software and have both tag all the photos that include at least one of a set of randomly chosen members from each family. The kind of errors humans would be making here arent the same as the kind that software would be making, but humans sure as hell would be making a lot of errors.
Did John Stuart detail why its so?
The re-election rate is so high because of gerrymandering, and both parties do it.
Put all the Democrats in one district, and all the Republicans in another, and then one of the effects is that neither Republicans nor Democrats have to worry much about winning their district. Another of the effects is that campaigns are much more polarized. If everyone in your district is majority Republican then you start off shooting right down the middle of that demographic, which doesnt include many Democrats.
Its a false dichotomy of course... voting 3rd party is not a waste of a vote. Voting for the majority candidate is a waste of a vote
Wheeler is (apparently) saying, given the finite bandwidth connecting Comcast and L3, that it would be prohibited for Netflix to pay Comcast to favor Netflix traffic through that pipe, if it has the effect of blocking or reducing Coca-Cola traffic.
Which is no different than my mid-tier connection having adverse effects on my neighbors low-tier connection, which it surely does during peak usage.
Would you care to try again? because right now you havent framed the argument in a way that doesnt apply to the fast lane I have purchased.
In the end I think the real problem with your argument is that its hypocritical to allow me to buy a fast lane but not allow netflix to buy a fast lane. That clearly its not fast lanes that are the problem.. its the fear of sliding down the slippery slope that brings us to the attack on fast lanes, essentially just a FUD argument. Write laws that prevent what you want to prevent, not what might lead to what you want to prevent.
So let me get this straight....
I as an end user pay already for a fast lane. I am not on the most basic plan, after all.
Is it being suggested that my fast lane degrading other users own bandwidth (which it surely does at peak times) is going to be prohibited? I am going to get the same bandwidth as my neighbor who has the basic plan during peak usage hours?
Careful what you wish for folks. Rarely does anyone point out that we already have fast and slow lanes and that many of us eagerly pay more for faster lanes. In our efforts to justify not allowing a company to buy better access, we quite easily use arguments which undermine our own buying of better access.
Are you really that stupid as to not be able to remember what you wrote?
Its worse than that. There is a rapidly growing segment of the population that doesnt say what they mean, and thinks that its quite alright that they do not say what they mean. This goes further in that they presume that nobody else says what they mean, in spite of the fact that most of the people from my generation and older carefully make sure that they are saying exactly what they mean.
One has to wonder what these young fools would have had to say if they actually meant what they said.
does that mean that Nick Rahall is just an idiot for thinking that Net Neutrality is a bad idea?
I think it means that he took a lot more than the otherwise top guy. It just wasnt a campaign donation... it was a straight up bribe such as a promise of a position when he leaves office.
My method: minute-plus, minute-plus, minute-plus
Your method: 3, 3, 3, start
3 entries vs 4
I don't understand why they can do it here, but make a big thing about it in other cities.
In other cities they arent allowed to do that because of regulator capture. Livery licenses are restricted to a fixed number which is already filled by the existing companies, which then lobby to prevent increases in the number of livery licenses.
The only way to get in and own and operate a cab in New York City, for instance, requires buying a license from an existing license owner. These licenses (called medallions) go for over a million dollars today. This is the state of livery services in most cities, and even entire States in the case of the U.S.
Look at all the astroturfing about rapists and murderers in this article. Appeals to consequences, rooted in appeals to emotion, all to continue protecting the existing livery services from further competition. Its not a free market now and the argument is that if it ever becomes a free market that you will 100% certain be raped and then murdered by a crazy person that drives a cab.
since they orbit the nucleus
No, they don't do that.
Electrons exist as standing waves when coupled within an atom.
Any serious baseball player will tell you that its your peripheral vision that is fast enough for this sort of catching-unexpected-things behavior.
See this fine catch for evidence of how not only is the speed almost instant, but that the player himself wasnt even surprised that he caught it. "Keep it on the field, guys."
The point of write amplification is solely to get more sectors into the erasure party. A single small write forces the SSD to migrate full sector A to empty sector B.
Irrelevant and you would know it if you actually read my post, or bothered to think about the technology for a longer period of time than the dismal amount you invested to confirm whatever it was you were trying to confirm.
The device cannot erase blocks at a rate faster than blocks can be written. If they could then they wouldnt increase costs with useless things like over-provisioning, something that is only useful because erases are slower than writes. Therefore the erase rate must be less than the maximum write rate, so using the maximum write rate is a valid upper bound on the speed with which erases can be performed.
All arguments such as yours which call upon write amplification hand waving to imply that erases can occur at faster rates than the devices upper bound write speed is just bullshit thought up by someone so trivially versed in the subject that confirmation bias has made them look like a complete fool, for they latched on to tiny bits of information that arent at all relevant but arent informed enough to know it.
No matter what you do you cannot burn through more than the maximum (ideal conditions) write speed, and the strategies you are talking about would ultimately be far from maximum.
At 400MB/sec max erase throughput and 250 erase cycles per block (conservative?), it would still take 30 days to wear down this 4TB drive.
Write amplification is a red herring when you are calculating time to failure because write amplification doesnt magically give the SSD more erase ability. These things arent constructed to be able to erase any faster than they can write, and in fact are actually constructed to mitigate the problem that they cannot erase as fast as they can write (over-provisioning, write combining, etc..)
yes...
Buying an SSD only from Sandisk, Samsung, or Intel is a no-brainer. These are the companies that actually make flash chips..
OCZ and the various re-branders begin at a competitive disadvantage and then make things worse in their endless effort to undercut each other.
You guys keep saying this but its not accurate.
The law merely required the USPS to calculate their unfunded liability and then go ahead and start funding it. They calculate that unfunded liability based on a 75 year projection (a non-arbitrary duration given by Office of Personnel Management guidelines.) They do not have to fund the retirements of anyone who isnt employed by them yet, nor any other obligations that they do not actually have.
They were doing pay-as-you-go to cover their unfunded liabilities, which usually works fine so long as their revenue never experiences long term declines. However, demand for postal services has been declining worldwide. Its down 25% globally over the past 7 years alone.
Other government entities that used pay-as-you-go included Detroit, San Bernardino, Stockton, and Central Falls. What you are witnessing is just the tip of the iceberg and its not like you werent warned. Unfunded liabilities in this country will continue to be front page news, and no amount of dishonest hand waving by you makes those liabilities go away.
When a private entity doesnt fund its liabilities and then has to declare bankruptcy I bet you have something to say about that too, and it certainly isnt in defense of the private entity. I bet the words "stole their retirement" have come out of your mouth much more than once. Here we have a situation where something is done about unfunded liabilities before it becomes an unsolvable problem, at least for one entity, and you are crying about that too.
The requirement to fund their liabilities isnt the problem. The fact that their unfunded liabilities was already over $200 billion before something was done about it was the problem.
The problem with USPS is that they have to pre-pay pensions 70 years out. No other Government agency or private company needs to do this, that's purely USPS regulation thanks to Congress.
You guys keep saying this but its not accurate.
The law merely required the USPS to calculate their unfunded liability and then go ahead and start funding it. They calculate that unfunded liability based on a 75 year projection (a non-arbitrary duration given by Office of Personnel Management guidelines.) They do not have to fund the retirements of anyone who isnt employed by them yet. If it was based on a 200 year projection their unfunded liability wouldnt change because it continues to be based on the existing promises to existing people, not speculation about future promises to future people.
They were doing pay-as-you-go to cover their unfunded liabilities, which usually works fine so long as their revenue never experiences long term declines. However, demand for postal services has been declining worldwide. Its down 25% globally over the past 7 years alone.
Other government entities that used pay-as-you-go included Detroit, San Bernardino, Stockton, and Central Falls. What you are witnessing is just the tip of the iceberg and its not like you werent warned. Unfunded liabilities in this country will continue to be front page news, and no amount of dishonest hand waving by you makes those liabilities go away.
Yep, typical commie that thinks the only way to help others out is by giving government money and power.
You are a pure totalitarian statist - also known as a commie.
So says a post that brings ZERO facts to the table
I brought several facts to the table, and you just provided a citation for one of them. You are a democrat and you immediately attacked the messenger. You guys are too shallow to not be easily predictable.
That's a very "special" excuse for why it's perfectly fine to avoid tax, not put money in the collection plate etc.
See, its commies (and I mean that) like you that are the real problem. You admit right here that you think there needs to be an excuse to pay as little tax as legally possible. Not only doesnt there need to be an excuse... its a no-brainer as to why there doesnt need to be one. Yet there you are with this theory that there must exist an excuse.
Dont let reality knock your logical fallacies down on the way out.
Its OK for the government to hurt people so long as its in a way his team says is OK.
The modern democrat cannot be bothered with facts, logical arguments, or even doing things legally. When the facts don't fit, they aggressively attack the messenger every single time.
They claim that people opposed to them are lying because they themselves lie a lot. Projection.
There is a large group of people here that think that its not just moral, but a complete obligation, for governments to maximize their revenue. These same people are of course against corporations doing that very same thing.
Logical fallacies all the way down the statist trail.
I really don't see a fundamental difference between that and just collecting it from the sun from the ground.
Why dont you? have you even considered how it would be transmitted? Apparently not, because you seem to think we will have a flashlight in space shining light on the earth.
So you're arguing that you should be able to use the "I bought it in another state" loophole to avoid sales taxes?
Seems reasonable if the State that is trying to collect the sales tax had enacted laws that prevented you from buying it locally.