But honestly... are we going to debate whether a US president, sitting or past, is responsible for the actions of KJI? That guy is a nutjob and an egomaniac and to pretend that he's only that way because of the behavior of the US is dangerously naive.
The summary makes a leap of logic. The company was never really worth 200 billion except in the eyes of the guy that bought his shares at $253.88 back in September of 2000.
So the loss of value isn't strictly due to mistakes the company made. The stock market crash accounts for most of that drop.
That would be a crime - and if there were evidence they were doing that, they would be indicted. That charge is leveled at oil companies every time gas becomes expensive and their executives are hauled in front of congress and grilled about it. Congress makes a big show of it so everyone thinks they're getting tough on oil companies. The charge is investigated and dropped every time - as it was already this year. If you have evidence that they missed you should let your representatives know.
You're telling me that 500 feet away from ANWR they can't make money pumping oil
"I happen to think it's an unfair profit. If you believe otherwise, just go ahead and state that you believe the profits are fair."
I believe the profits are fair.
The oil companies invest BILLIONS of dollars and put enormous effort into getting gas to the filling stations. They have tens of thousands of employees doing that every day. They take huge risks with their capital.
During the lean times they were out there extracting oil when it was $25 per barrel and nobody was shedding tears for them.
I'm not going to begrudge them their 11% margin during boom times. It's the nature of capitalism. The way to encourage people to take risks is to let them keep their profit when the risks pay off.
"There are 20-plus million acres that are currently leased by the oil companies which have either been drilled and then capped or never drilled at all."
That's a politicians talking point. I'm tired of hearing it from every talking head and I'm not buying it.
If they capped the wells it's because they weren't profitable enough. If they didn't drill it's because they didn't think it would make money.
Have you done the geological surveys on that land? How much would the average cost of extraction be for a barrel of oil in those 20 million acres? An oil company might have to spend tens of millions of dollars to develop an oil field. If you're so certain that there's oil there, are YOU willing to guarantee that they'll make a profit after their geologists say it's not worth it?
"Name one drug that was discovered in an academic setting. "
I can name plenty - but your point is correct. What comes out of universities is largely in vitro studies or in vivo studies in mice.
Turning that research into a drug is an excruciating process of patient studies that can involve thousands of subjects and take 10 years. That work is mostly done by biotech companies or big pharma.
Most of those biotechs die on the vine when they can't figure out how to administer the drug in a way that yields reliable results.
While I don't shed any tears for Merck's bottom line here, the possibility for an out-sized payout creates a mad scramble to find effective drugs. Take that away and we may not like the results.
Cheese and yoghurt are legal, but only if they are made from pasteurized milk - which supposedly makes the end-product different from the European variety (dunno, never tried theirs).
I think the parent was overstating his point. If you go to a regular supermarket and buy yoghurt that says "Contains live and active cultures", you'll be getting the real thing - just made from pasteurized milk.
No, the precursor to conscription is the Selective Service, which has been in force in one form or another since Franklin Roosevelt signed it into law in 1940
Unfortunately, companies of this size comprise the bulk of American business
I think that is incorrect. No matter how you measure it, small businesses are a larger component of the economy.
Represent more than 99.7 percent of all employers.
Employ more than half of all private sector employees
Pay 44.5 percent of total U.S. private payroll.
Generate 60 to 80 percent of net new jobs annually.
Create more than 50 percent of nonfarm private gross domestic product (GDP).
Produce 13 to 14 times more patents per employee than large patenting firms. These patents are twice as likely as large firm patents to be among the one percent most cited.
Are employers of 39 percent of high tech workers (such as scientists, engineers, and computer workers ).
Are 53 percent home-based and 3 percent franchises.
Made up 97 percent of all identified exporters and produced 29 percent of the known export value in FY 2001.
I realize you're an expat and not a Canadian, but your comment is very similar to a lot of the/. posters that identify themselves as Canadian and I find it simultaneously amusing and puzzling. You say how polite and nice you are compared to Americans, and to prove your point, you pull out a great big brush dripping with vile shit and start smearing every american who ever walked the earth with it.
For example, you describe Americans:
arrogant, stuck on themselves
socialized to think its their prerogative to shit on the rest of the world
routinely assholes
rabid like the American right wing.
Americans are too fat dumb and happy
I've been to Canada, I got married in Canada, I had a great time. I detected none of the snobbery I see in these forums. Is your attitude unique to Canadian slashdotters or are they just SO good at covering up their disgust for us that I couldn't detect it in person? If, as you say, they were trying to "do their best screw" me given the chance, it wasn't a very hearty attempt.
I'm not seeing too many Americans in this thread shitting on our neighbors up north. So really, who's being polite here?
I don't think so. Ozone reflects radiation. Near the earth's surface, that's a bad thing because it keeps heat down. In the upper atmosphere, it's a good thing because it keeps far more heat out.
"Ozone reflects light in the upper part of the stratosphere, and thereby has a cooling effect. However, ozone in the troposphere acts as a greenhouse gas, and has a direct warming effect."
Dana Point, CA, in Orange County was named after Richard Henry Dana. You can visit a reproduction of the ship, the Pilgrim, in Dana Point Harbor about 50 miles south of Los Angeles.
I've noticed a pro-sco slant in forbes articles as well. Sometimes overtly in the text, but also frequently in the choice of stories they run (and don't run).
Note in the last paragraph:
"Linux zealots will no doubt write off SCO's latest claim as yet another PR ploy."
Well, that's exactly my situation, and I've always avoided Stored Procs because if the query is written in the cf, then I can see the actual sql being passed to the server in the cf debug info while the page is being executed - and if there's a problem with it it's pretty easy to find.
When we use stored procs, I don't have that luxury - i just get the sql server error number and description, but not the query itself. Worse, if there's a problem that doesn't result in a db error (wrong data inserted, e.g.), I don't have any feedback at all.
If I knew a way around that one little problem, i'd move to stored procedures immediately.
If history is any guide, it is protected, but not like you'd think.
Essentially, it sounds like Scotts is producing a "roundup ready" (rr) grass.
The scam works like this: Monsanto owns patents on the most widely used herbicide in the world (roundup). They also own patents on Roundup Ready crops (wheat, soybeans, canola...). They sell the seeds to farmers who can now safely spray their crops to keep the weeds down.
So lets say you own the farm next to a RR field and grow the same crop (but not a monsanto version of it). Natually, some seeds will find their way onto your property so your field will be contaminated. Next season you replant from what you produced last year - well NOW you have some rr crops.
Monsanto hires private investigators to tresspass on your property, take some of your wheat, soybeans, whatever, and take them back to their lab to test. If they find you have rr crops, then, my friend, you just got 0wn3d! That's right, farmber bob, they OWN YOUR CROPS! And don't think that being in Canada or Europe gives you immunity - for the most part, it doesn't. Monsanto is trying desperately to get it's GM seeds to propogate throughout the world so they'll be able to permanently extract licensing fees from farmers (that's right - you license their seed for a year, you don't buy it).
Having trouble swallowing that one? Try this on for size.
I don't see how changing the players changes anything. The rules are the rules and Scotts can do the same thing Monsanto does.
Lest you think this is coming from some wack-job leftie environmentalist, it ain't. I just think that Monsanto is every bit as evil as MS - even more because they're mucking about with the food supply - which means peoples LIVES!
Who decides which countries have "consensual governments"?
Good question, but doesn't the UN make it it's business to monitor elections? In doing so, they would certainly be in a position to certify that that the government in question is consensual.
Flawed, perhaps, but as long as they presume to monitor, they ought to stand by their findings.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? How are Java and Javascript nearly identical?
In the same way lightning is nearly identical to lightning bugs.
October 9, 2006, not 2008.
But honestly... are we going to debate whether a US president, sitting or past, is responsible for the actions of KJI? That guy is a nutjob and an egomaniac and to pretend that he's only that way because of the behavior of the US is dangerously naive.
My grandpa called em nips. But then, he'd been carrying some Japanese shrapnel in his brain since '42.
The summary makes a leap of logic. The company was never really worth 200 billion except in the eyes of the guy that bought his shares at $253.88 back in September of 2000.
So the loss of value isn't strictly due to mistakes the company made. The stock market crash accounts for most of that drop.
My personal favorite
Working for a defense company doing 9/80 - they claim to be saving tons of money on power and other services that they can cut on 9/80 Friday.
Personally, my productivity starts declining after lunch so it's difficult to make the case that they are squeezing more work out of me.
Or, they want to limit supply to push up prices.
That would be a crime - and if there were evidence they were doing that, they would be indicted. That charge is leveled at oil companies every time gas becomes expensive and their executives are hauled in front of congress and grilled about it. Congress makes a big show of it so everyone thinks they're getting tough on oil companies. The charge is investigated and dropped every time - as it was already this year. If you have evidence that they missed you should let your representatives know.
You're telling me that 500 feet away from ANWR they can't make money pumping oil
No. I didn't mention ANWR.
"I happen to think it's an unfair profit. If you believe otherwise, just go ahead and state that you believe the profits are fair."
I believe the profits are fair.
The oil companies invest BILLIONS of dollars and put enormous effort into getting gas to the filling stations. They have tens of thousands of employees doing that every day. They take huge risks with their capital.
During the lean times they were out there extracting oil when it was $25 per barrel and nobody was shedding tears for them.
I'm not going to begrudge them their 11% margin during boom times. It's the nature of capitalism. The way to encourage people to take risks is to let them keep their profit when the risks pay off.
"There are 20-plus million acres that are currently leased by the oil companies which have either been drilled and then capped or never drilled at all."
That's a politicians talking point. I'm tired of hearing it from every talking head and I'm not buying it.
If they capped the wells it's because they weren't profitable enough. If they didn't drill it's because they didn't think it would make money.
Have you done the geological surveys on that land? How much would the average cost of extraction be for a barrel of oil in those 20 million acres? An oil company might have to spend tens of millions of dollars to develop an oil field. If you're so certain that there's oil there, are YOU willing to guarantee that they'll make a profit after their geologists say it's not worth it?
"Name one drug that was discovered in an academic setting. "
I can name plenty - but your point is correct. What comes out of universities is largely in vitro studies or in vivo studies in mice.
Turning that research into a drug is an excruciating process of patient studies that can involve thousands of subjects and take 10 years. That work is mostly done by biotech companies or big pharma.
Most of those biotechs die on the vine when they can't figure out how to administer the drug in a way that yields reliable results.
While I don't shed any tears for Merck's bottom line here, the possibility for an out-sized payout creates a mad scramble to find effective drugs. Take that away and we may not like the results.
Cheese and yoghurt are legal, but only if they are made from pasteurized milk - which supposedly makes the end-product different from the European variety (dunno, never tried theirs).
I think the parent was overstating his point. If you go to a regular supermarket and buy yoghurt that says "Contains live and active cultures", you'll be getting the real thing - just made from pasteurized milk.
Is it a precursor to conscription?
No, the precursor to conscription is the Selective Service, which has been in force in one form or another since Franklin Roosevelt signed it into law in 1940
Unfortunately, companies of this size comprise the bulk of American business
I think that is incorrect. No matter how you measure it, small businesses are a larger component of the economy.
4 year old stats, but I don't think it's changed
link
For example, you describe Americans:
I've been to Canada, I got married in Canada, I had a great time. I detected none of the snobbery I see in these forums. Is your attitude unique to Canadian slashdotters or are they just SO good at covering up their disgust for us that I couldn't detect it in person? If, as you say, they were trying to "do their best screw" me given the chance, it wasn't a very hearty attempt.
I'm not seeing too many Americans in this thread shitting on our neighbors up north. So really, who's being polite here?
ozone depletion actually reduces global warming
m
I don't think so. Ozone reflects radiation. Near the earth's surface, that's a bad thing because it keeps heat down. In the upper atmosphere, it's a good thing because it keeps far more heat out.
"Ozone reflects light in the upper part of the stratosphere, and thereby has a cooling effect. However, ozone in the troposphere acts as a greenhouse gas, and has a direct warming effect."
http://www.grida.no/inf/kurs/themes/ozon/ozon4.ht
Dana Point, CA, in Orange County was named after Richard Henry Dana. You can visit a reproduction of the ship, the Pilgrim, in Dana Point Harbor about 50 miles south of Los Angeles.
His book is truly an excellent read.
I've noticed a pro-sco slant in forbes articles as well. Sometimes overtly in the text, but also frequently in the choice of stories they run (and don't run).
Note in the last paragraph:
"Linux zealots will no doubt write off SCO's latest claim as yet another PR ploy."
Does that sound like unbiased journalism?
Well, that's exactly my situation, and I've always avoided Stored Procs because if the query is written in the cf, then I can see the actual sql being passed to the server in the cf debug info while the page is being executed - and if there's a problem with it it's pretty easy to find.
When we use stored procs, I don't have that luxury - i just get the sql server error number and description, but not the query itself. Worse, if there's a problem that doesn't result in a db error (wrong data inserted, e.g.), I don't have any feedback at all.
If I knew a way around that one little problem, i'd move to stored procedures immediately.
You know, it's a great euphemism in print, but I tried saying it out loud a few times and it falls kinda flat.
OMG That's funny as hell!
Completely false, but funny.
If history is any guide, it is protected, but not like you'd think.
Essentially, it sounds like Scotts is producing a "roundup ready" (rr) grass.
The scam works like this: Monsanto owns patents on the most widely used herbicide in the world (roundup). They also own patents on Roundup Ready crops (wheat, soybeans, canola...). They sell the seeds to farmers who can now safely spray their crops to keep the weeds down.
So lets say you own the farm next to a RR field and grow the same crop (but not a monsanto version of it). Natually, some seeds will find their way onto your property so your field will be contaminated. Next season you replant from what you produced last year - well NOW you have some rr crops.
Monsanto hires private investigators to tresspass on your property, take some of your wheat, soybeans, whatever, and take them back to their lab to test. If they find you have rr crops, then, my friend, you just got 0wn3d! That's right, farmber bob, they OWN YOUR CROPS! And don't think that being in Canada or Europe gives you immunity - for the most part, it doesn't. Monsanto is trying desperately to get it's GM seeds to propogate throughout the world so they'll be able to permanently extract licensing fees from farmers (that's right - you license their seed for a year, you don't buy it).
Having trouble swallowing that one? Try this on for size.
I don't see how changing the players changes anything. The rules are the rules and Scotts can do the same thing Monsanto does.
Lest you think this is coming from some wack-job leftie environmentalist, it ain't. I just think that Monsanto is every bit as evil as MS - even more because they're mucking about with the food supply - which means peoples LIVES!
Who decides which countries have "consensual governments"?
Good question, but doesn't the UN make it it's business to monitor elections? In doing so, they would certainly be in a position to certify that that the government in question is consensual.
Flawed, perhaps, but as long as they presume to monitor, they ought to stand by their findings.
This is slashdot. You are the peer review.
Also
- Richard Causey, Enron's former chief accounting officer - Charged
- CFO Andrew Fastow - plead guilty to wire and securities fraud
I think Fastow's wife is also in jail, but i don't recall the charge.
But the big fish is still swimming around. I won't be satisfied until he's in chains.
He who breaks a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom. (J.R.R. Tolkien)