And public confidence in a company has exactly nothing to do with whether "software" is more valuable than "oil" - notice neither software nor oil are companies.
Here's the claim:
Apple [AAPL] briefly became the world's most valuable company this week, surpassing Exxon Mobil with a $341.5 billion valuation. Why? Because while Exxon's main business is essentially found in peddling the world's slowly-shrinking crop of fossil fuels, Apple makes its fortune selling the one resource the world has plenty of: ideas.
Seriously?
That isn't a statement about Apple having a larger market cap meaning people are more confident in it than Exxon. It's not a claim about what relative market caps means. It's a claim about the CAUSE of the market cap. And it's complete garbage. Apple is not worth more than Exxon because ideas are more plentiful than fossil fuels. Apple is worth more because of the reasons you cited (and because of plain old randomness with no actual valid reasoning behind it).
My annual trip to see the family sees me traveling with a 7 year old (well an 8 year old next time). It is 23.5 hours from when we board the plane to when we land at our final destination. And then 2 months spent in that foreign region during which time the kid might want to play a game on the 3 hour car trip to see grandma.
I tend not to sleep for 24 hours straight, and neither does the kid.
There are also these things called noise cancelling headphones which work wonders for that noise.
if you aren't going to play your portable console while traveling, why do you have a portable console in the first place? Surely an xbox/ps/wii would be a better choice for playing when not traveling. The only time the DS we currently have gets used is while we are traveling - it is literally stored away at the top of a closet with the other travel stuff like power plug adapters at other times.
obviously I don't own a 3DS, battery life isn't good enough for said trip and region locking means you can't try a new game for the trip back. Why would I bother hacking around the locking when I can just use a different device that isn't locked to start with. And no I don't even have a huge library of games, it's just useful to be able to buy something the day before flying home - gives the kid something to look forward to for the boring flight.
And yes I agree it isn't a huge market subset, it's just larger than the percentage for a non-portable console. And there hasn't been a region locked portable console prior to this, so obviously it hasn't "EVER" been the reason before (not existing makes that hard). Given there's no prior data for the case I'm not sure how you can know whether it has an impact or not. And "Nobody cares" is clearly false, your initial reply was to someone who cares.
Yeah that and regurgitating twitter messages (because I really want to here what idiots on the internet are saying about world events rather than maybe an expert or two) are my pet hates of the current news fads.
Seriously, they can't afford an intern to press buttons off camera and control the damn screen instead of wasting airtime with the a presenter dragging windows around a screen...
I did a startup about 5 years ago that involved home computing devices that were paid for by the distributed computing that ran on them. Among the things that made it unsuccessful was that we knew we needed this kind of technology but didn't have the resources to develop it.
That's an understatement. This is cutting edge cryptography. IBM and Microsoft didn't have the resources to develop this 5 years ago.
Sure that might be a use. The bigger reason though is you can implement your DRM so that the DRM logic and the decryption keys that need to be on the end user device are encrypted and never decrypted on the end user device, instead they run via this. But for that it needs to be faster, since you are effectively building boolean logic with it and running on that.
It's not willingness. It's that selling all at once it in a forced auction isn't what solvency is about. Yes if I had to sell my house tomorrow (well I'd have to own it first, but details) then it would sell for significantly less than market value - that doesn't mean that when balancing it with the mortgage we take that low value.
You don't consider that when determining accounting solvency, since the plan isn't to sell it, just that the debts and assets aren't completely out of whack.
Liabilities to yourself don't count. Sure the people will be mighty pissed when you don't pay but that's a different story entirely. This is also why Japan's debt doesn't matter...
The US clearly isn't insolvent, given it isn't missing payments on its debts.
Even accounting insolvency, the Federal Government owns over 600,000,000 acres of land in the US. The book value of that is at least an order of magnitude larger than the government's debts. Oh and it has powers of imminent domain, how much book value do you give those?
Are you seriously claiming I would be insolvent is I hadn't missed a single payment of my debts in the last 30 years, and I currently have a total debt load (including the mortgage) of 10% of the current market value of my home? The government is in a better solvency position than that.
Slashdot Mirror
No that smell is your stupidity at not knowing what the word turbine means.
Maybe you could try checking what a "rare earth mineral" is instead of parsing the sentence incorrectly.
And public confidence in a company has exactly nothing to do with whether "software" is more valuable than "oil" - notice neither software nor oil are companies.
Here's the claim:
Apple [AAPL] briefly became the world's most valuable company this week, surpassing Exxon Mobil with a $341.5 billion valuation. Why? Because while Exxon's main business is essentially found in peddling the world's slowly-shrinking crop of fossil fuels, Apple makes its fortune selling the one resource the world has plenty of: ideas.
Seriously?
That isn't a statement about Apple having a larger market cap meaning people are more confident in it than Exxon. It's not a claim about what relative market caps means. It's a claim about the CAUSE of the market cap. And it's complete garbage. Apple is not worth more than Exxon because ideas are more plentiful than fossil fuels. Apple is worth more because of the reasons you cited (and because of plain old randomness with no actual valid reasoning behind it).
For most people anyway.
However, if you have to ask - then yes no matter what your actual age is you are too old.
My annual trip to see the family sees me traveling with a 7 year old (well an 8 year old next time). It is 23.5 hours from when we board the plane to when we land at our final destination. And then 2 months spent in that foreign region during which time the kid might want to play a game on the 3 hour car trip to see grandma.
I tend not to sleep for 24 hours straight, and neither does the kid.
There are also these things called noise cancelling headphones which work wonders for that noise.
if you aren't going to play your portable console while traveling, why do you have a portable console in the first place? Surely an xbox/ps/wii would be a better choice for playing when not traveling. The only time the DS we currently have gets used is while we are traveling - it is literally stored away at the top of a closet with the other travel stuff like power plug adapters at other times.
obviously I don't own a 3DS, battery life isn't good enough for said trip and region locking means you can't try a new game for the trip back. Why would I bother hacking around the locking when I can just use a different device that isn't locked to start with. And no I don't even have a huge library of games, it's just useful to be able to buy something the day before flying home - gives the kid something to look forward to for the boring flight.
And yes I agree it isn't a huge market subset, it's just larger than the percentage for a non-portable console. And there hasn't been a region locked portable console prior to this, so obviously it hasn't "EVER" been the reason before (not existing makes that hard). Given there's no prior data for the case I'm not sure how you can know whether it has an impact or not. And "Nobody cares" is clearly false, your initial reply was to someone who cares.
Sure for a normal console. But the topic is a hand held portable device. You know that you play on the plane trips often from other regions.
Because when you return from that vacation you have hours on a plane and would like to play a game? You know what a hand held console is for.
Just because you are a moron who can't see the obvious uses that devices are designed for doesn't mean everyone else is as retarded.
These are the people who in days gone by would read tea leaves.
Yeah that and regurgitating twitter messages (because I really want to here what idiots on the internet are saying about world events rather than maybe an expert or two) are my pet hates of the current news fads.
Seriously, they can't afford an intern to press buttons off camera and control the damn screen instead of wasting airtime with the a presenter dragging windows around a screen...
Or that he thinks the rest of the industry patent trolls as well.
But of course you discount that option at a whim. So why do you think that's not possible?
And Ted Bundy wasn't a murderer because Stalin killed more people, right?
Only if they had a 100% chance of winning, which seems pretty unlikely.
That's an understatement. This is cutting edge cryptography. IBM and Microsoft didn't have the resources to develop this 5 years ago.
Sure that might be a use. The bigger reason though is you can implement your DRM so that the DRM logic and the decryption keys that need to be on the end user device are encrypted and never decrypted on the end user device, instead they run via this. But for that it needs to be faster, since you are effectively building boolean logic with it and running on that.
Relative compared to the items mentioned in the sentence obviously.
If other athletes man up and instead of taking steroids start having their legs amputated then we'll know there's an advantage.
It's not willingness. It's that selling all at once it in a forced auction isn't what solvency is about. Yes if I had to sell my house tomorrow (well I'd have to own it first, but details) then it would sell for significantly less than market value - that doesn't mean that when balancing it with the mortgage we take that low value.
Do you know what the word "relatively" means?
The police just get a warrant* for the data and then "Give us the decryption keys or you go to jail" to each BB executive/IP staff member.
* Or is mumbling "terrorist" sufficient these days?
Why would I argue in favor of something I don't agree with? And which has nothing to do with whether the US is technically insolvent?
Private citizens cannot file antitrust suits.
So we'll just ignore everything else you wrote, since that's likely made up too.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/5:2008cv05391/209307/
You don't consider that when determining accounting solvency, since the plan isn't to sell it, just that the debts and assets aren't completely out of whack.
It's a perfectly reasonable land price, most would be lower but a small percentage would be much much higher, bring up the average.
However, it ignores that the government owns the mineral rights as well, likely worth far more than the acreage.
Liabilities to yourself don't count. Sure the people will be mighty pissed when you don't pay but that's a different story entirely. This is also why Japan's debt doesn't matter...
The US clearly isn't insolvent, given it isn't missing payments on its debts.
Even accounting insolvency, the Federal Government owns over 600,000,000 acres of land in the US. The book value of that is at least an order of magnitude larger than the government's debts. Oh and it has powers of imminent domain, how much book value do you give those?
Are you seriously claiming I would be insolvent is I hadn't missed a single payment of my debts in the last 30 years, and I currently have a total debt load (including the mortgage) of 10% of the current market value of my home? The government is in a better solvency position than that.