- except that it is you, who does not understand history or economics or politics or people.
If government was not in business of creating monopolies in preferred industries the market would have taken care of problems of bad banks and bad loans, and this has nothing to do with morality. Your problem is that you believe everybody must receive 100% of justice every time and I do not see this as viable. This means that market is amoral, it has nothing to do with morals, it is only a balancing act. Your company screws some people, the word gets out and people move to competitors. Governments kill off competitors by introducing regulations that are aimed at the actual monopolies that governments create, but in reality those monopolies are already powerful enough not to care about any regulations, that's just a small cost to them, but to small competition it is the difference between existing and not existing.
Government is running gigantic ponzi schemes by being involved in economics and monetary policies in the first place. Whoever gets the first cut of the money printed/borrowed by the government wins, whoever is the last in line loses. Ponzi schemes are in everything - from social security, where first people to get it paid the least into it, where taxes always went up and payouts always went down, where the old age was always pushed up and which was always used as a piggybank to run wars and projects, to the printing of money itself - government does not produce any single thing of value, how can it be in business of printing money, especially once it unpegged the fiat currency from a valuable enough commodity like gold, that has been the standard of currencies for thousands of years.
All of the regulations that government sets upon the market end up manipulating the market in ways that are either predictable or not, and definitely in more ways than one way that is touted as the reason for the regulations themselves.
Your thinking is too shallow, you believe regulations are necessary, and that is your problem. Regulations are created by people after the fact of some problem, thus regulations are always late. Regulations rely on systems to stay the way they were before the regulations were introduced, thus regulations are useless because the only thing they create is an extra step for a monopoly to think of to move right around them. Regulations are often created by the monopolies in the first place, there is a reason there are so many lobbyists in the government, those people write the regulations, they change the laws.
The reason why those people are doing it, is to protect the interests of the monopolies, and the reason this will not get fixed is the reason government creates monopolies in the first place - they get the recycled money back into their campaigns/contributions/bribes.
I argue that governments kill economies, they don't help economies in the long run, they cause inflation, they get countries into wars instead of doing their job: protecting the country by the minimum necessary force and keeping themselves out of economics but doing the policing work. Police and justice system - that is the referee you are talking about, that's all that's needed.
Governments create gigantic moral hazards, like FDIC, like Freddy and Fannie, like Medicare, like Guaranteed Loans for anything, student loans, car loans or home loans, anything at all introduced by a government that has the word 'guaranteed' on it is bullshit and will end up removing some balance from the market by creating moral hazards and increasing prices.
Most importantly, there is nothing on this very notion of 'guaranteed by government' that is any different from the marketing you despise so much, because in reality government can guarantee nothing.
This entire idea that something is guaranteed by the government and thus it is going to be solid, will stay solid is bullshit, it is all about perception and lies you were talking about earlier.
You also don't need to keep standing for this, the reality is going to hit.
Most of LIFE is based on lies, on perception, on deceit, this is not only business, we start our lives and immediately people lie to us and at the minimum they only tell us half the truth, so this is not limited to business or politics, it is the entire existence.
Marketing is manipulation, so is schooling. So are relationships.
Why do you get your girlfriend that blood stained rock anyway? So she wants one, don't give it her. She is manipulating you into giving you things, well you are giving them to her to manipulate her as well. Do you want something from her? Probably yes, otherwise why is she your girlfriend? What is fidelity anyway? What does it matter if you have sex with people other than your girlfriend as long as there are no diseases transmitted and unwanted pregnancies on the side that would eat your resources she wants you to spend on her?
Why are our lives so routine, that when we do afford to spend time outside of the routine some asshole says we mustn't, we shouldn't go to a restaurant? I am a vegetarian, the stake analogy is lost on me, but my salad costs in a restaurant so much, I could feed myself for a week for that money completely just eating home.
Here is where you start diverging from the truth: why did everyone think that home prices should grow and grow, your answer is businessmen are lying to you.
Here is the truth: your government is lying to you, and that is why the home-prices were expected to go up forever. Your government knows the manufacturing and production is going down, to keep the 'GDP' from falling and to keep it raising, your government created a policy of keeping you in debt indefinitely, and they7 are using the businesses for this purpose. Your government creates inflation, who else? It is printing and borrowing and it is setting up corporations to get you to buy mortgages you cannot afford. What is Freddy and Fannie but exactly that - manipulation of the housing market, manipulation of the mortgage market to keep the selling/buying going where in fact the housing prices should be falling they were rising due to the government manipulation.
INTERVIEWER: Ben, there's been a lot of talk about a housing bubble, particularly, you know [inaudible] from all sorts of places. Can you give us your view as to whether or not there is a housing bubble out there?
BERNANKE: Well, unquestionably, housing prices are up quite a bit; I think it's important to note that fundamentals are also very strong. We've got a growing economy, jobs, incomes. We've got very low mortgage rates. We've got demographics supporting housing growth. We've got restricted supply in some places. So it's certainly understandable that prices would go up some. I don't know whether prices are exactly where they should be, but I think it's fair to say that much of what's happened is supported by the strength of the economy.
July 2005
INTERVIEWER: Tell me, what is the worst-case scenario? Sir, we have so many economists coming on our air and saying, "Oh, this is a bubble, and it's going to burst, and this is going to be a real issue for the economy." Some say it could even cause a recession at some point. What is the worst-case scenario, if in fact we were to see prices come down substantially across the country?
BERNANKE: Well, I guess I don't buy your premise. It's a pretty unlikely possibility. We've never had a decline in house prices on a nationwide basis. So what I think is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe stabilize: might slow co
Well, it's not a surprise. Do you know what the markup is at a clothing store on those designer jeans or any suit or dress, etc?
Here are the numbers: anything at all did not cost the store more than 20 dollars. In fact $20 is the highest price that a store would ever pay for any dress or any single piece of clothing.
A cashmere sweater cost you $350? It cost the store $14.
Of-course I am not talking about sable fur coats, that's a different purchase price, but it's not thousands of dollars either.
Here is one reason why I could be against Net Neutrality as a principle:
IFF the infrastructure that Telco is providing to serve as an ISP is built entirely without any government help at all.
If I own a business and I never took any help from anybody to create my infrastructure, I paid out of pocket for everything myself, nobody should be able to prevent me from selling services that totally discriminate on basis of protocols/content/anything, it's up to me to come up with the contract wording and pricing schemes and it's up to the consumers either to accept it or not.
If I am taking any sort of subsidies in form of tax breaks or direct money from the government to lay the infrastructure, then I have to accept that with that kind of help come some rules, in that case if the government giving me money is also giving me a set of rules to follow, it is then up to me to accept or not to accept the contract.
My numbers are even better. I never lost any calls on an iPhone, whether the first, the second, third or the last generation.
If you want to know how I did it, all you have to do is provide me with two simple payments of 99.99 and I will explain this fact to you in great detail and depth.
Issue a memo requiring that Ken Thompson never be allowed near your computers. Any computer that Mr. Thompson has touched is to be disposed of and replaced immediately, for security reasons.
- totally. This is the solution, it will fix this problem once and for all. ONCE AND FOR ALL!
And who manufactured the firmware chips? Another question is then: how do you know that the rest of the design/manufacturing wasn't tampered with? That's what Thompson's story was about: can you trust a compiler unless you wrote it yourself? Can you trust compiler of a compiler? Can you trust a manufacturing process that places your design upon a wafer? Can you trust the wafer? etc.
If something has to give, well, then again, how do you know that what gave can be trusted?
Ken Thompson would show you how you'd fail in this anyway. You'd THINK you flashed the chips, but there would be some other code somewhere in the chip that would contain a Trojan. Unless you are in the loop 100% of the time and nobody can inject any modifications into any manufacturing processes, you can't be certain that nothing at all was modified.
The Pentagon is spending millions on research designed to ensure it can trust the microchips in critical systems, especially those made outside the US.
- I think the only true way to be sure is to manufacture the microchips yourself, of-course this costs much more than millions.
There is always the question of complying with certain rules set by other governments in order to ensure cooperation with those governments on different issues, like on trade for example. There is always a possibility for a country not to honor any such rules, the question becomes: is there a possibility that the country will be cut off from those whose rules it is unwilling to ensure?
There is a possibility that the country will be left to its own Internet, cut off from the networks of other countries. There is also a possibility of a military invasion.
Well yes, but in our case we have to convince the victim that he or she really has no reason to continue living, then we point out the conveniently located suicide booth. It's cheap too, only 25 cents, even at that cut-throat price some stupid robot just had to use a 'coin on a string' trick. Joke was on him, the machine only pretended to kill him, but he got hurt a lot later.
Unfortunately for you probably the only really useful thing to do is to replace the screen (if you can't find a filter that fixes the problem).
I hate glossy screens, they are as bad from my point of view as keyboards with layout that screws up up/down/left/right keys and places insert/delete/home/end/pgup/pgdn vertically rather than horizontally, which means I can't use Borland style shortcuts for cut/paste/delete without looking.
Slashdot Mirror
You seriously misunderstand the history
- except that it is you, who does not understand history or economics or politics or people.
If government was not in business of creating monopolies in preferred industries the market would have taken care of problems of bad banks and bad loans, and this has nothing to do with morality. Your problem is that you believe everybody must receive 100% of justice every time and I do not see this as viable. This means that market is amoral, it has nothing to do with morals, it is only a balancing act. Your company screws some people, the word gets out and people move to competitors. Governments kill off competitors by introducing regulations that are aimed at the actual monopolies that governments create, but in reality those monopolies are already powerful enough not to care about any regulations, that's just a small cost to them, but to small competition it is the difference between existing and not existing.
Government is running gigantic ponzi schemes by being involved in economics and monetary policies in the first place. Whoever gets the first cut of the money printed/borrowed by the government wins, whoever is the last in line loses. Ponzi schemes are in everything - from social security, where first people to get it paid the least into it, where taxes always went up and payouts always went down, where the old age was always pushed up and which was always used as a piggybank to run wars and projects, to the printing of money itself - government does not produce any single thing of value, how can it be in business of printing money, especially once it unpegged the fiat currency from a valuable enough commodity like gold, that has been the standard of currencies for thousands of years.
All of the regulations that government sets upon the market end up manipulating the market in ways that are either predictable or not, and definitely in more ways than one way that is touted as the reason for the regulations themselves.
Your thinking is too shallow, you believe regulations are necessary, and that is your problem. Regulations are created by people after the fact of some problem, thus regulations are always late. Regulations rely on systems to stay the way they were before the regulations were introduced, thus regulations are useless because the only thing they create is an extra step for a monopoly to think of to move right around them. Regulations are often created by the monopolies in the first place, there is a reason there are so many lobbyists in the government, those people write the regulations, they change the laws.
The reason why those people are doing it, is to protect the interests of the monopolies, and the reason this will not get fixed is the reason government creates monopolies in the first place - they get the recycled money back into their campaigns/contributions/bribes.
I argue that governments kill economies, they don't help economies in the long run, they cause inflation, they get countries into wars instead of doing their job: protecting the country by the minimum necessary force and keeping themselves out of economics but doing the policing work. Police and justice system - that is the referee you are talking about, that's all that's needed.
Governments create gigantic moral hazards, like FDIC, like Freddy and Fannie, like Medicare, like Guaranteed Loans for anything, student loans, car loans or home loans, anything at all introduced by a government that has the word 'guaranteed' on it is bullshit and will end up removing some balance from the market by creating moral hazards and increasing prices.
Most importantly, there is nothing on this very notion of 'guaranteed by government' that is any different from the marketing you despise so much, because in reality government can guarantee nothing.
This entire idea that something is guaranteed by the government and thus it is going to be solid, will stay solid is bullshit, it is all about perception and lies you were talking about earlier.
You also don't need to keep standing for this, the reality is going to hit.
Most of LIFE is based on lies, on perception, on deceit, this is not only business, we start our lives and immediately people lie to us and at the minimum they only tell us half the truth, so this is not limited to business or politics, it is the entire existence.
Marketing is manipulation, so is schooling. So are relationships.
Why do you get your girlfriend that blood stained rock anyway? So she wants one, don't give it her. She is manipulating you into giving you things, well you are giving them to her to manipulate her as well. Do you want something from her? Probably yes, otherwise why is she your girlfriend? What is fidelity anyway? What does it matter if you have sex with people other than your girlfriend as long as there are no diseases transmitted and unwanted pregnancies on the side that would eat your resources she wants you to spend on her?
Why are our lives so routine, that when we do afford to spend time outside of the routine some asshole says we mustn't, we shouldn't go to a restaurant? I am a vegetarian, the stake analogy is lost on me, but my salad costs in a restaurant so much, I could feed myself for a week for that money completely just eating home.
Here is where you start diverging from the truth: why did everyone think that home prices should grow and grow, your answer is businessmen are lying to you.
Here is the truth: your government is lying to you, and that is why the home-prices were expected to go up forever. Your government knows the manufacturing and production is going down, to keep the 'GDP' from falling and to keep it raising, your government created a policy of keeping you in debt indefinitely, and they7 are using the businesses for this purpose. Your government creates inflation, who else? It is printing and borrowing and it is setting up corporations to get you to buy mortgages you cannot afford. What is Freddy and Fannie but exactly that - manipulation of the housing market, manipulation of the mortgage market to keep the selling/buying going where in fact the housing prices should be falling they were rising due to the government manipulation.
And even as the government was manipulating you, its representatives who are directly responsible for inflation and manipulation were saying nonsense like this
July 2005
INTERVIEWER: Ben, there's been a lot of talk about a housing bubble, particularly, you know [inaudible] from all sorts of places. Can you give us your view as to whether or not there is a housing bubble out there?
BERNANKE: Well, unquestionably, housing prices are up quite a bit; I think it's important to note that fundamentals are also very strong. We've got a growing economy, jobs, incomes. We've got very low mortgage rates. We've got demographics supporting housing growth. We've got restricted supply in some places. So it's certainly understandable that prices would go up some. I don't know whether prices are exactly where they should be, but I think it's fair to say that much of what's happened is supported by the strength of the economy.
July 2005
INTERVIEWER: Tell me, what is the worst-case scenario? Sir, we have so many economists coming on our air and saying, "Oh, this is a bubble, and it's going to burst, and this is going to be a real issue for the economy." Some say it could even cause a recession at some point. What is the worst-case scenario, if in fact we were to see prices come down substantially across the country?
BERNANKE: Well, I guess I don't buy your premise. It's a pretty unlikely possibility. We've never had a decline in house prices on a nationwide basis. So what I think is more likely is that house prices will slow, maybe stabilize: might slow co
Exquise me? (yeah, not excuse, exquise). Heat in vacuum of space can only be really dissipated through electromagnetic radiation.
Oh, that's a number that is absolutely right, it's a wholesale number.
Well, it's not a surprise. Do you know what the markup is at a clothing store on those designer jeans or any suit or dress, etc?
Here are the numbers: anything at all did not cost the store more than 20 dollars. In fact $20 is the highest price that a store would ever pay for any dress or any single piece of clothing.
A cashmere sweater cost you $350? It cost the store $14.
Of-course I am not talking about sable fur coats, that's a different purchase price, but it's not thousands of dollars either.
And that's the way the cookie crumbles.
Obviously god faked the results of these measurements to test our resolve to worship him.
This is wonderful, I actually need a logo, will be using 99designs now.
Here is one reason why I could be against Net Neutrality as a principle:
IFF the infrastructure that Telco is providing to serve as an ISP is built entirely without any government help at all.
If I own a business and I never took any help from anybody to create my infrastructure, I paid out of pocket for everything myself, nobody should be able to prevent me from selling services that totally discriminate on basis of protocols/content/anything, it's up to me to come up with the contract wording and pricing schemes and it's up to the consumers either to accept it or not.
If I am taking any sort of subsidies in form of tax breaks or direct money from the government to lay the infrastructure, then I have to accept that with that kind of help come some rules, in that case if the government giving me money is also giving me a set of rules to follow, it is then up to me to accept or not to accept the contract.
you are Kraken me up
My numbers are even better. I never lost any calls on an iPhone, whether the first, the second, third or the last generation.
If you want to know how I did it, all you have to do is provide me with two simple payments of 99.99 and I will explain this fact to you in great detail and depth.
--
[nokia6303c user]
Yeah, it's crazy how much your gf looks like this, I'd say that is quite ugly for a gf, get a new one, better one!
Libertarian party was never in charge.
who wants to see that?
The meme: useless without pic is most appropriate here.
of-course they won't attack everything, but the threat is enough to keep some countries in check, if not all or the largest ones.
Issue a memo requiring that Ken Thompson never be allowed near your computers. Any computer that Mr. Thompson has touched is to be disposed of and replaced immediately, for security reasons.
- totally. This is the solution, it will fix this problem once and for all. ONCE AND FOR ALL!
Well, if Mr. Claus decided to honor us with a visit, we'd only be glad and bring out some milk and cookies.
Then again, Mr. Claus probably wouldn't be after us with a frivolous IP lawsuit backed up by the most expensive military force in the world.
And who manufactured the firmware chips? Another question is then: how do you know that the rest of the design/manufacturing wasn't tampered with? That's what Thompson's story was about: can you trust a compiler unless you wrote it yourself? Can you trust compiler of a compiler? Can you trust a manufacturing process that places your design upon a wafer? Can you trust the wafer? etc.
If something has to give, well, then again, how do you know that what gave can be trusted?
Ken Thompson would show you how you'd fail in this anyway. You'd THINK you flashed the chips, but there would be some other code somewhere in the chip that would contain a Trojan. Unless you are in the loop 100% of the time and nobody can inject any modifications into any manufacturing processes, you can't be certain that nothing at all was modified.
The Pentagon is spending millions on research designed to ensure it can trust the microchips in critical systems, especially those made outside the US.
- I think the only true way to be sure is to manufacture the microchips yourself, of-course this costs much more than millions.
This comes down to the old question raised by Ken Thompson of Trusting Trust.
There is always the question of complying with certain rules set by other governments in order to ensure cooperation with those governments on different issues, like on trade for example. There is always a possibility for a country not to honor any such rules, the question becomes: is there a possibility that the country will be cut off from those whose rules it is unwilling to ensure?
There is a possibility that the country will be left to its own Internet, cut off from the networks of other countries. There is also a possibility of a military invasion.
Some people still do it.
Well yes, but in our case we have to convince the victim that he or she really has no reason to continue living, then we point out the conveniently located suicide booth. It's cheap too, only 25 cents, even at that cut-throat price some stupid robot just had to use a 'coin on a string' trick. Joke was on him, the machine only pretended to kill him, but he got hurt a lot later.
I used to be with it. But then they changed what it was. Now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems scary and wierd. It'll happen to you.
My god, is this what has become of /., is that why I've been coming here all this time?
coming.
Unfortunately for you probably the only really useful thing to do is to replace the screen (if you can't find a filter that fixes the problem).
I hate glossy screens, they are as bad from my point of view as keyboards with layout that screws up up/down/left/right keys and places insert/delete/home/end/pgup/pgdn vertically rather than horizontally, which means I can't use Borland style shortcuts for cut/paste/delete without looking.