It does actually depend on what the money gets spent on. If a person uses it to buy Japanese cartoon porn then the only local stimulation is to the delivery guys and represents a small percentage of the overall cost--assuming you buy your cartoon porn in sufficient bulk. On the other hand if those tax dollars went to lay the first fiber optic lines, then it was a good investment.
Secondly, this idea that private companies are so much more efficient than government really needs to be proved. I've worked in or with 5 Fortune 100 companies and the amount of wasted money and man-hours I've seen boggles the mind. I'm sure government waste is at least as bad, but the difference is when public money is used they are under obligation to give detailed spending reports so you know when it's wasted. Private companies, even publicly traded ones, only have to show a profit and loss sheet. And they do a good job burying those losses as various expenses in order to protect their own asses.
Think of it like open source software. Government, at least in theory, is supposed to be transparent so you can see all the flaws and you are free to try and fix them. Companies tell you to trust them. That they know best and everything is great so you should give them your money (401k). Personally I think they're both good for different things, but if you don't like the government or taxes so much then either get constructive and fix it, or move to a different country.
You're correct in that too many people on the left seem to think the purpose of stimulus is just to "save/create jobs." But too many people on the right use that to blind themselves and sit comfortable in the idea that the invisible hand will magically solve everything without that pesky gubmint stealin' their tax monies.
The primary benefit of stimulus should be infrastructure. Putting people to work and keynsian multipliers are all just gravy. Unfortunately infrastructure has become is all the more important in the modern era where fear of dinging a companies quarterly earnings report has choked of most private investment in the future. Keynes didn't get that either. You don't build something just to build it, you need to have an eye toward future value.
The railroads, telegraph, telephone, interstate, and internet were all funded, at least in part, with public money and those investments have paid for themselves many times over. As per your example, the Panama Canal was a publicly funded project that probably paid for itself (hard to quantify the cost of all those malaria deaths). Similar investments in domestic energy, and wireless communications should have started 20 years ago. There's nothing wrong, and a lot right, about the government building something and then selling or leasing it to private companies with an agreement to serve the public good.
Stimulus certainly can be a good idea. Now as for the way the current administration has been spending that money... Umm... Not so good.
You joke, but I remember on my 15th birthday I had the option of going to a comic book and game convention, or a school dance. It was a tough decision for a 15-year-old. I ultimately went to the dance and ended up hooking up with my first girlfriend as a result of it--which surprised me more than anybody. If I'd gone to that comic convention I'd probably still be a virgin to this day.
Where in the world did you find someone who'd never read it?
Ummm... anywhere in the southern United States. Although the percentage that may have read it anywhere in the US is probably pretty small.
If you'd said how many people haven't seen a parody or reference to the balcony scene on a cartoon or sitcom then the number would be much lower.
As for the crap that takes place in high school English classes across the country where they do something with Romeo and Juliet I really can't call that reading although I can think of no term for it.
Outsourcing makes the economy more fair. That screws everyone currently on the top. Ethically we should be OK with fair systems.
I get your point but I just wanted to point out that the people "on the top" are doing better than ever in the global economy. It's the upper-middle class that's taking it on the chin. Outsourcing drives down the cost of labor which increases profit margins and/or lowers prices. While prices have gone down some, most of those gains have gone into obscene executive pay and shareholder dividends.
The upper-middle class was an anomaly sitting between the two kinds of people in this world. Those people that work for their money, and those people that expect their money to work for them.
To be fair, the upper-middle class slit their own throats by using debt to offset the stagnation of wages, and grow their quality of life, leaving ourselves without a safety net. But as an upper-middle classman that avoided debt and thought he might be within spitting distance of that second kind of people someday--I can say it was a fun dream while it lasted.
As for the fairness of the system I can't really claim to know what is fair in a system this large, but I am suspicious of any system that widens the gap between rich and poor. Because when you look at the shanty towns in Mexico where the factory packed up and left for China when they found out they could pay $0.40/hour instead of $1.20/hour and you see what they did to the water, the birth defects, and the people left behind with work related injuries you wonder how much it really helped them.
Granted coding isn't the scorched earth business that auto making is, but you get my point.
I know I'm late to the party but I wanted to thank you for starting this thread. I'm in pretty much the same boat; as my G5 tower needs to be upgraded (more for software compatibility reasons than performance), but I can't afford the cost of the current Mac Pros. Also, I've been thinking it's time to go portable anyway, but buying a MacBook Pro isn't any cheaper and I need the screen real estate for my work (Graphic Designer/Web Programmer).
Anyway, some of the replies were helpful and it's nice to know I'm not the only one that thinks Apple has a huge hole in their lineup. I miss the clones.
No, the fact is that the iphone is a piece of crap that doesn't do anything special. It's a triumph of marketing.
The only reason the iphone is popular in the US is that other US cell phone options are so crappy, but that's a reflection of what the US carriers are selling.
So which is it; A piece of crap, or better than all the other cellphones in the US? I don't think you can really have it both ways.
I understand being sick of all the hype surrounding the iPhone, it's gone past the point of absurd. But it's funny you would focus your anger on Apple for selling a better phone rather than at the cell phone companies for not letting us buy something better. Or more importantly, for not offering better calling and data plans.
The biggest problem I have with the iPhone is AT&T. I paid my $200 dollar fine to get away from them a few years ago so I don't care how "cool" their phones are I won't be going back.
I can't believe how far I had to scroll before someone pointed out the hypocrisy of the OP saying we have a right to pirate because Nintendo doesn't include enough DRM. Encouraging a company to implement DRM on/.? That's usually the kind of grist this mill feeds on like sharks to chum. But apparently the need to blindly support anything that justifies piracy wins out.
Posting anon because people like you, whom get overly carried away with little ideas such as your socialism and refuse to listen to anything else are the kind that become violent when your status-quo is upset.
Yes, if only we could all be as tolerant of opposing viewpoints as yourself. Your eloquence shows a deep understanding of the issues. I'm sure you're accurate in labeling anyone that doesn't agree with you as a "fucktard" and "butt-buddy" and you are right to fear them. There is nothing more frightening than an attack from an enraged butt-buddy. I'm sure your libertarian militia-mates will "watch your back" while you wait for the Ron Paul revolution to come charging to your rescue.
Or might there be another reason for your anger? Perhaps that you are unable to come up with a better argument so you resort to righteous indignation and profanity to stand in place of information or simple reason?
Is it more likely Slashdot and the butt-buddies are out to get you, or that you might get modded negatively because you are in fact wrong? In which case you may get angry rather than doing something more difficult like reassessing your flawed outlook on life?
You're right, prefacing things with "I'm no expert" and "I could be wrong" shows that I was obviously spouting off and declaring myself the foremost authority on the topic. I get your point, I could have looked into the topic more before posting, and I bow to your/. policing abilities.
What's interesting is that two people (including the OP) commented before you and provided the information without getting modded informative. You swoop in with righteous indignation by your side and get insightful karma. I guess it shows we love our commentary more than news. I'll be sure not to ask for references and post with a more arrogant tone to attract more mod points in the future. You have taught me well.
I'm no expert, but I don't see how the mothers antibodies could be protecting the child after delivery. And if her antibodies could be transferred I don't think they would disappear. That's one of the more amazing things to me about fetal development (my wife is pregnant now) that the mother and child never exchange blood through the umbilical cord. The placenta transfers nutrients and oxygen but prevents blood mixing.
But I could be wrong, maybe antibodies get through as well, it just doesn't seem likely.
We clashed a while back on some story here about Gitmo, I think.
Anyway, you keep bringing up the Federalist Papers, and I think you mean to be supporting the Anti-Federalist Papers since the Federalist Papers were about expanding the reach of the federal government after the failure of the Articles of Confederation.
The entire existence of the Constitution is because originally the founders/framers wanted, "states to do most of the heavy lifting in governing" so they wrote the Articles of Confederation which failed utterly. The Constitution was written to expand the powers of the federal government and the Federalist Papers were written to support that expansion of federal power. The Anti-Fedralist Papers were written in opposition to the expansion of that power. It is probably due to the influence of the anti-federalist that we got the Bill of Rights so they do deserve more credit than they usually receive.
If not, let me know which articles of the Federalist Papers you are referring to, I could always use a refresher.
We actually owe more to the Australian government for our current system of voting than we do to the framers of our constitution, although their methods were originally adopted largely to disenfranchise blacks, it worked out in the long run. The electoral college is about the only thing we have left of our founders vision for elections.
No, you're not wrong--even though you may have misunderstood the issue when you posted.
Since this law wouldn't go into effect until all other states adopted the same law, the law will most likely NEVER go into effect!
So it's a much better idea to give candidates electoral votes proportional to their percentage of the vote within the state. Imagine if California or Texas were to do this? People belonging to the minority party would be more likely to vote because it would have some impact on the national election and third party candidates could actually siphon off a proportion of the electoral votes from both candidates instead of handing electoral votes to the party they most oppose.
Maine and Nebraska use a system kind of like this. I think they do winner take all, per electoral vote, on a district by district basis so it makes representation a little more granular, if not proportional.
Most importantly it could go into effect right away so you wouldn't have to wait until every other state got their act together before it could make a difference.
You've been modded funny but I would give this an insightful myself. It's similar to my new favorite phrase that I may have made up, "The less you know, the easier it is to have a strong opinion about it."
With the amount of money spent on marketing dwarfing what is spent on R&D by almost every industry, I cringe at someone saying too much is being spent on R&D. It may or may not be true in this case, but I think the larger problem is Microsoft's inability to execute on the ideas they come up with.
Case in point, the Zune could have been a great product had they taken the time to make the wifi useful and used their weight to pressure the music industry into giving customers a better, non-DRM'ed, experience. Instead they slapped together a product in their usual manner and went to the music industry to let the RIAA dictate what kind of experience they could give their customers.
Apple can spend a fraction of what M$ spends on R&D because they make up for it with good execution.
It might help if you actually read some of the articles in that search. (hint: headlines are designed to grab attention not relay facts) The "update" section at the bottom of the Wired article is especially sad, although maybe not as sad as the NYT article that conflates iTunes with the iPhone's app store.
Fair enough, pricing out a Dell on their site usually makes them a lot more expensive for hardware comparable to a Mac. The difference is you can get them at a fraction of that price when they put them on sale, or if your company is big enough to get a discount. Also, I can buy the parts to make a comparable PC for a lot less than a Mac. But if I have the money and I want to save myself the hassle I can pay the extra and just get a Mac. Which is what I usually do, but I don't really like it when it comes time to shell out the cash.
Yes, but you still haven't explained why your Apple II molested poor BitZtream.;p
Seriously though, my comment was in reference to the numerous comments BitZtream has left on this thread attacking you. A lot of people try to deify those people that come first, or at least are given credit for getting there first, so I understand the temptation to attack them to compensate for it, but doing so is even more asinine than deifying them. I don't need to pee all over myself in deference to you, but I see no reason why I shouldn't be grateful for all your contributions to personal computing.
You're an ordinary man that stood on the shoulders of giants, as anyone that has ever accomplished anything has. And in case you haven't noticed more than a few people have clamored onto your back to make a name for themselves.
Anyway, good luck with DWTS I know you'll have some fun with it. And thanks for everything.
No hatred of Woz himself, just this retarded idea that he's something special.
Ah, I see.
Well, you're special too BitZtream. I see all the amazing things you do and I hope you realize how important it is to all of us. It's not like you just stumbled into making the personal computer like Woz. You didn't just happen to be in the right place at the right time, and in spite of that you still managed to do so many things that haven't made you famous, or rich, or get you invited onto a TV show. So keep up the good work and let us know about any other titans of the industry that aren't worthy of our recognition.
Slashdot Mirror
It does actually depend on what the money gets spent on. If a person uses it to buy Japanese cartoon porn then the only local stimulation is to the delivery guys and represents a small percentage of the overall cost--assuming you buy your cartoon porn in sufficient bulk. On the other hand if those tax dollars went to lay the first fiber optic lines, then it was a good investment.
Secondly, this idea that private companies are so much more efficient than government really needs to be proved. I've worked in or with 5 Fortune 100 companies and the amount of wasted money and man-hours I've seen boggles the mind. I'm sure government waste is at least as bad, but the difference is when public money is used they are under obligation to give detailed spending reports so you know when it's wasted. Private companies, even publicly traded ones, only have to show a profit and loss sheet. And they do a good job burying those losses as various expenses in order to protect their own asses.
Think of it like open source software. Government, at least in theory, is supposed to be transparent so you can see all the flaws and you are free to try and fix them. Companies tell you to trust them. That they know best and everything is great so you should give them your money (401k). Personally I think they're both good for different things, but if you don't like the government or taxes so much then either get constructive and fix it, or move to a different country.
You're correct in that too many people on the left seem to think the purpose of stimulus is just to "save/create jobs." But too many people on the right use that to blind themselves and sit comfortable in the idea that the invisible hand will magically solve everything without that pesky gubmint stealin' their tax monies.
The primary benefit of stimulus should be infrastructure. Putting people to work and keynsian multipliers are all just gravy. Unfortunately infrastructure has become is all the more important in the modern era where fear of dinging a companies quarterly earnings report has choked of most private investment in the future. Keynes didn't get that either. You don't build something just to build it, you need to have an eye toward future value.
The railroads, telegraph, telephone, interstate, and internet were all funded, at least in part, with public money and those investments have paid for themselves many times over. As per your example, the Panama Canal was a publicly funded project that probably paid for itself (hard to quantify the cost of all those malaria deaths). Similar investments in domestic energy, and wireless communications should have started 20 years ago. There's nothing wrong, and a lot right, about the government building something and then selling or leasing it to private companies with an agreement to serve the public good.
Stimulus certainly can be a good idea. Now as for the way the current administration has been spending that money... Umm... Not so good.
You joke, but I remember on my 15th birthday I had the option of going to a comic book and game convention, or a school dance. It was a tough decision for a 15-year-old. I ultimately went to the dance and ended up hooking up with my first girlfriend as a result of it--which surprised me more than anybody. If I'd gone to that comic convention I'd probably still be a virgin to this day.
Where in the world did you find someone who'd never read it?
Ummm... anywhere in the southern United States. Although the percentage that may have read it anywhere in the US is probably pretty small.
If you'd said how many people haven't seen a parody or reference to the balcony scene on a cartoon or sitcom then the number would be much lower.
As for the crap that takes place in high school English classes across the country where they do something with Romeo and Juliet I really can't call that reading although I can think of no term for it.
Outsourcing makes the economy more fair. That screws everyone currently on the top. Ethically we should be OK with fair systems.
I get your point but I just wanted to point out that the people "on the top" are doing better than ever in the global economy. It's the upper-middle class that's taking it on the chin. Outsourcing drives down the cost of labor which increases profit margins and/or lowers prices. While prices have gone down some, most of those gains have gone into obscene executive pay and shareholder dividends.
The upper-middle class was an anomaly sitting between the two kinds of people in this world. Those people that work for their money, and those people that expect their money to work for them.
To be fair, the upper-middle class slit their own throats by using debt to offset the stagnation of wages, and grow their quality of life, leaving ourselves without a safety net. But as an upper-middle classman that avoided debt and thought he might be within spitting distance of that second kind of people someday--I can say it was a fun dream while it lasted.
As for the fairness of the system I can't really claim to know what is fair in a system this large, but I am suspicious of any system that widens the gap between rich and poor. Because when you look at the shanty towns in Mexico where the factory packed up and left for China when they found out they could pay $0.40/hour instead of $1.20/hour and you see what they did to the water, the birth defects, and the people left behind with work related injuries you wonder how much it really helped them.
Granted coding isn't the scorched earth business that auto making is, but you get my point.
I know I'm late to the party but I wanted to thank you for starting this thread. I'm in pretty much the same boat; as my G5 tower needs to be upgraded (more for software compatibility reasons than performance), but I can't afford the cost of the current Mac Pros. Also, I've been thinking it's time to go portable anyway, but buying a MacBook Pro isn't any cheaper and I need the screen real estate for my work (Graphic Designer/Web Programmer).
Anyway, some of the replies were helpful and it's nice to know I'm not the only one that thinks Apple has a huge hole in their lineup. I miss the clones.
No, the fact is that the iphone is a piece of crap that doesn't do anything special. It's a triumph of marketing.
The only reason the iphone is popular in the US is that other US cell phone options are so crappy, but that's a reflection of what the US carriers are selling.
So which is it; A piece of crap, or better than all the other cellphones in the US? I don't think you can really have it both ways.
I understand being sick of all the hype surrounding the iPhone, it's gone past the point of absurd. But it's funny you would focus your anger on Apple for selling a better phone rather than at the cell phone companies for not letting us buy something better. Or more importantly, for not offering better calling and data plans.
The biggest problem I have with the iPhone is AT&T. I paid my $200 dollar fine to get away from them a few years ago so I don't care how "cool" their phones are I won't be going back.
I can't believe how far I had to scroll before someone pointed out the hypocrisy of the OP saying we have a right to pirate because Nintendo doesn't include enough DRM. Encouraging a company to implement DRM on /.? That's usually the kind of grist this mill feeds on like sharks to chum. But apparently the need to blindly support anything that justifies piracy wins out.
Posting anon because people like you, whom get overly carried away with little ideas such as your socialism and refuse to listen to anything else are the kind that become violent when your status-quo is upset.
Yes, if only we could all be as tolerant of opposing viewpoints as yourself. Your eloquence shows a deep understanding of the issues. I'm sure you're accurate in labeling anyone that doesn't agree with you as a "fucktard" and "butt-buddy" and you are right to fear them. There is nothing more frightening than an attack from an enraged butt-buddy. I'm sure your libertarian militia-mates will "watch your back" while you wait for the Ron Paul revolution to come charging to your rescue.
Or might there be another reason for your anger? Perhaps that you are unable to come up with a better argument so you resort to righteous indignation and profanity to stand in place of information or simple reason?
Is it more likely Slashdot and the butt-buddies are out to get you, or that you might get modded negatively because you are in fact wrong? In which case you may get angry rather than doing something more difficult like reassessing your flawed outlook on life?
Do you put the asterisk in place of the "u" in "fuck" so that God can't hear you type it?
Seriously, if you don't want to swear or offend anybody then don't swear. Swapping a letter isn't really fooling anyone.
Although, Slashdot may have a filter for the F-Bomb so if that's the case you won't be seeing this f*cking post.
You're right, prefacing things with "I'm no expert" and "I could be wrong" shows that I was obviously spouting off and declaring myself the foremost authority on the topic. I get your point, I could have looked into the topic more before posting, and I bow to your /. policing abilities.
What's interesting is that two people (including the OP) commented before you and provided the information without getting modded informative. You swoop in with righteous indignation by your side and get insightful karma. I guess it shows we love our commentary more than news. I'll be sure not to ask for references and post with a more arrogant tone to attract more mod points in the future. You have taught me well.
Do you have a reference for this?
I'm no expert, but I don't see how the mothers antibodies could be protecting the child after delivery. And if her antibodies could be transferred I don't think they would disappear. That's one of the more amazing things to me about fetal development (my wife is pregnant now) that the mother and child never exchange blood through the umbilical cord. The placenta transfers nutrients and oxygen but prevents blood mixing.
But I could be wrong, maybe antibodies get through as well, it just doesn't seem likely.
Damn! Where can I invest?
Also, I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Yes, but at the theater I can tell my wife to be quiet and I can enjoy the movie. At home... no such luck.
And I do truly hope there is a special place in hell for child molesters and people that talk in the theater.
Hey FireStormZ,
We clashed a while back on some story here about Gitmo, I think.
Anyway, you keep bringing up the Federalist Papers, and I think you mean to be supporting the Anti-Federalist Papers since the Federalist Papers were about expanding the reach of the federal government after the failure of the Articles of Confederation.
The entire existence of the Constitution is because originally the founders/framers wanted, "states to do most of the heavy lifting in governing" so they wrote the Articles of Confederation which failed utterly. The Constitution was written to expand the powers of the federal government and the Federalist Papers were written to support that expansion of federal power. The Anti-Fedralist Papers were written in opposition to the expansion of that power. It is probably due to the influence of the anti-federalist that we got the Bill of Rights so they do deserve more credit than they usually receive.
If not, let me know which articles of the Federalist Papers you are referring to, I could always use a refresher.
Public education and some reforms to the election system have definitely made things better.
Voter fraud and intimidation was a lot worse when a large portion of the electorate was illiterate.
Here is an awesome, if lengthy (4400 words), article on the history of voting in the United States.
We actually owe more to the Australian government for our current system of voting than we do to the framers of our constitution, although their methods were originally adopted largely to disenfranchise blacks, it worked out in the long run. The electoral college is about the only thing we have left of our founders vision for elections.
No, you're not wrong--even though you may have misunderstood the issue when you posted.
Since this law wouldn't go into effect until all other states adopted the same law, the law will most likely NEVER go into effect!
So it's a much better idea to give candidates electoral votes proportional to their percentage of the vote within the state. Imagine if California or Texas were to do this? People belonging to the minority party would be more likely to vote because it would have some impact on the national election and third party candidates could actually siphon off a proportion of the electoral votes from both candidates instead of handing electoral votes to the party they most oppose.
Maine and Nebraska use a system kind of like this. I think they do winner take all, per electoral vote, on a district by district basis so it makes representation a little more granular, if not proportional.
Most importantly it could go into effect right away so you wouldn't have to wait until every other state got their act together before it could make a difference.
* I have demands that require MS Windows.
That's funny. I have requirements that demand MS Windows... we should hang out.
Being famous, rich and ASKED to be on TV are forms of recognition. Something came before to bring them about. Cause and Effect. Figure it out.
You've been modded funny but I would give this an insightful myself. It's similar to my new favorite phrase that I may have made up, "The less you know, the easier it is to have a strong opinion about it."
With the amount of money spent on marketing dwarfing what is spent on R&D by almost every industry, I cringe at someone saying too much is being spent on R&D. It may or may not be true in this case, but I think the larger problem is Microsoft's inability to execute on the ideas they come up with.
Case in point, the Zune could have been a great product had they taken the time to make the wifi useful and used their weight to pressure the music industry into giving customers a better, non-DRM'ed, experience. Instead they slapped together a product in their usual manner and went to the music industry to let the RIAA dictate what kind of experience they could give their customers.
Apple can spend a fraction of what M$ spends on R&D because they make up for it with good execution.
You have it tattooed just above your anus.
It might help if you actually read some of the articles in that search. (hint: headlines are designed to grab attention not relay facts) The "update" section at the bottom of the Wired article is especially sad, although maybe not as sad as the NYT article that conflates iTunes with the iPhone's app store.
My kingdom for a journalist.
Fair enough, pricing out a Dell on their site usually makes them a lot more expensive for hardware comparable to a Mac. The difference is you can get them at a fraction of that price when they put them on sale, or if your company is big enough to get a discount. Also, I can buy the parts to make a comparable PC for a lot less than a Mac. But if I have the money and I want to save myself the hassle I can pay the extra and just get a Mac. Which is what I usually do, but I don't really like it when it comes time to shell out the cash.
Yes, but you still haven't explained why your Apple II molested poor BitZtream. ;p
Seriously though, my comment was in reference to the numerous comments BitZtream has left on this thread attacking you. A lot of people try to deify those people that come first, or at least are given credit for getting there first, so I understand the temptation to attack them to compensate for it, but doing so is even more asinine than deifying them. I don't need to pee all over myself in deference to you, but I see no reason why I shouldn't be grateful for all your contributions to personal computing.
You're an ordinary man that stood on the shoulders of giants, as anyone that has ever accomplished anything has. And in case you haven't noticed more than a few people have clamored onto your back to make a name for themselves.
Anyway, good luck with DWTS I know you'll have some fun with it. And thanks for everything.
No hatred of Woz himself, just this retarded idea that he's something special.
Ah, I see.
Well, you're special too BitZtream. I see all the amazing things you do and I hope you realize how important it is to all of us. It's not like you just stumbled into making the personal computer like Woz. You didn't just happen to be in the right place at the right time, and in spite of that you still managed to do so many things that haven't made you famous, or rich, or get you invited onto a TV show. So keep up the good work and let us know about any other titans of the industry that aren't worthy of our recognition.