Manufacturing jobs or service jobs, you're always just shuffling money aroun
Well, no. When you perform a service, you transition labor from one person to another but in such a way that allows some increased efficiency through an aggregation of expertise.
When you make something, you encode into the machine that you have made a tremendous labor savings. Because the machine can be re-used, you save that labor many times.
So, manufacturing is always more wealth generating than a simple service model.
Of course it's easy to pay cheap wages and not care about safety or manufacture correctly. It's all short sighted profits.
It's not short sighted profits, its called, lowering the price of the good. Democrats always talk about how much they help lower classes, but they've done more to systematically screw them in the last 30 years with their safety and environmental legislation than you can imagine. If you have a car that cost 5k to build, but then stack 10k of junk up on top of it, you've got a lot less people that can afford to buy that car, and you've made them -poorer-, not richer, as a result. Democrats have this idea that they can create some sort of a new economy by piling on more and more crap onto the back of something that people actually want through legislation, but all this new economy does is make goods more expensive so that people can't get them. I mean, if enviro-dems had everything they could want, there would be no meat for most people because industrial foods would be banned and thus make it too expensive, and all that starvation would be called as much progress as people having to give up their cars because of greenhouse gasses and other goblins is called progress today.
The feature list provided, the integrated chat, the quick loads, and word list, all describe a sort of a tile based game that is essentially different from scrabble the board game. Really, by Hasbro making an online tile thing, they are infringing on scrabulous's intellectual property. Scrabulous should patent everything about their work, and sue Hasbro for infringement on their invention.
Ah yes, because all those career Democrat politicians are spending their lives working for a government..... But there's no vast left-wing conspiracy to take down the American economy.
Nationalize everything, and therefor, the government has a lot more power. I don't see what the Dems are doing as maliciously minded. I perfectly concede that they genuinely believe that everything would be better if they ran everything. It's just that, humans have tried socialism over and over again and it simply hasn't worked. You need to have private property and businesses for the economy to work. Everyone knows this. Even Cuba is now gradually increasing private property rights for individual farmers in a bid to increase its own production.
Of all great ironies, though, is that, if we step forward 100 years, Reagan and Clinton will be seen as more alike than apart, and similarly, Bush and Obama will both represent a more activist and centralized government.
i agree the bailing out of the banks and all the crap they are pull
The problem is one of moral hazard and responsibilities of both political parties. Republicans are supposed to be the bulwark against the excesses of Washington and they've honestly been terrible.
The expansion of the budget deficit under Bush, and I am a Republican, has been utterly foolish and wasteful. The bottom line is, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to be the ones that want to tax and spend and, even if sometimes it is needed, they are the ones that should do that.
But, the real problem is that, if you've got the Feds bailing out a bunch of banks - and the sweetheart deal for Bear Sterns so that rich people could keep some of their stock, was utterly wrong. If the Fed can come up with 200 billion to bail out rich people, its basic fairness that advocates for the left wing and the poor might ask , geez, maybe they should be able to get some money to bail them out too. So, we need to have some leadership in Washington that is capable of saying no, and Bush just isn't doing the job.
I almost welcome an Obama Presidency so that those Republicans in the Congress that had the courage to vote against this bailout will be the Republicans we rebuild our party around, and in doing so, I should hope we focus on the positive messages of free enterprise, individual thrift and responsibility, or at least an acceptance of one's own failures, and less on ridiculous and wrong headed crap like picking on gays and supposed national security.
When it is a closed system, that I would call that clean.
It's not a closed system because you really have no idea what you are doing under ground, and you are getting that water from somewhere. The bottom line is, if drilling through a few miles of rock to get some heat were economic, there would be drills all over the place.
But what I don't get is, how you can advocate people drilling thousands of holes into the ground to get heat but you are opposed to people drilling a handful of holes to go get a trillion dollars. I'd say that, if a trillion dollars is so unimportant that you can just let it sit in the ground, I'd say, quit bitching about the cost of the war!
Odd, when the Republicans were in power everybody I knew was hurting financially, but then again I don't know many rich people.
What you are missing is that a lot of people in this board work in the service sector, which is to say, we shuffle a lot of other people's money around and don't add value to ourselves. Yet, during the so-called Clinton boom years, oil, coal , steel and producers of virtually every material in the economy all got screwed. Now, demand is up for all of those things, largely because Dems shot themselves in the foot by demanding and getting an end to all of that resource extraction.
But even when it was ninety five degrees farenheight you rolled the windows up driving through Sauget where Monsanto had their plant.
We used to have a saying in Akron when the rubber mills were there. People would drive along I76 and note the sulfure stench and say, but yeah, that's the smell of money. Now Akron is one of the cleanest cities in America and it is a dying town with no jobs and less opportunity. Yep, and look at the Chicago area now. There's no jobs. So, enjoy that clean free air while you go and bitch about how people in other countries have manufacturing and have the wealth that goes with it, as you chase it out of our country. As I said, Democrats wrecked the country.
When I got a detached retina this year I was damned glad I had a "greedy surgeon", who charged a lot more than the lawyers. You, sir, have a jealousy problem. And no, IANAL. I do databases at work for a whole lot less maney than the doctors and lawyers I have been GLAD to pay.
Surgeons add value to the economy, lawyers don't. Of course they are entitled to their pay, just as much as a good CEO is entitled to his.
When Evil-X left me and my two teenaged daughters for another man (have you any idea what that did to the kids?) I was damned glad to have one of the "greedy lawyers" you hate so much. Likewise when I was forced into bankrupcy because the bitch had run my finances into the ground, I was damned glad I had a "greedy lawyer".
And what did you do to contribute to that relationship? Sure its easy to paint your ex as evil but some bit of evil is a part of -all- women and thus the breakdown in your marriage is to some extent your responsibility. I guess then, its only natural then, that you would get a greedy lawyer to go after your evil-ex.... you don't have to deal with the selfishness that no doubt contributed to the end of your relationship.
Regardless of where you stand on the telco wiretapping, the legislative issue on wiretapping was only whether or not a bunch of greedy lawyers want another set of deep pockets to go plundering. Left wing leaders don't care about the spying. They just want another set of excuses to try and destroy the American economy even more than all their environmental regulation already has. The sad thing is that Republicans open themselves up over and over again for this sort of plundering by the left, as some twisted form of appeasement. They should have just made the wiretapping illegal, should have let the banks fail and homeowners get foreclosed, and stood for something rather than borrowing ever more on the backs of the taxpayers for others moral hazards.
Alaska would be better off drilling ANWR and just burning 1/2 the crude for energy than it would be to invest in geothermal, then selling the rest. They would have 500 billion in cash and enough oil to last them ages. In fact, ANWR is so much money that Alaskans would almost be silly not to think of seceding from the USA to escape environmental laws since the economic impact to that state would be so huge.
Geothermal means drilling and a lot of it. Then, on top of that, you have to have a lot of water to run through your geothermal holes and basically what you've done is create a system that pumps heavy metals back from deep underground up to the surface of the earth.
The suits are those guys that have to go in front of a bunch of movie theater owners and persuade them to buy the movie that you made. They are going to have relationships with these people and so are going to have a pretty good feel for what those people are interested in paying for, and what they aren't. So, say, for example, you making a movie and the central part of the plot has to do with, for whatever reason, a cantaloupe. For whatever reason, the suit happens to know that the guy who owns whatever movie chain that has 100 screens, really, really hates cantaloupe, and, he knows from having lunch that a guy who owns 50 screens just said, "hey when are they going to make a movie about bananas. I think bananas are a funny fruit."
Guess what! The suit isn't going to even try and sell the chain owner on the cantaloupe. Since he's writing you the check to make the movie, he's going to take down that barrier for himself, and come to you and say, "hey, would it really be that much worse if it were say, a banana"?
If you answer correctly, you just picked up 150 more screens for your film. If you didn't, then, you possibly don't get your movie made.
I know it may not sound all that "nice", but, if you could make some kind of a gismo that could detect camcorders and then jam them, and have it in a movie theater, I bet you could get stinking rich.
The great irony of this, is that everyone on the board thinks that the studio can just arbitrarily make a good movie button.
"well, just make a good movie", betrays a total lack of understanding for the arts.
No one really knows a canned formula for making a good movie. A studio can do everything that it thinks will make a movie, best writers, best directors, best actors, and that doesn't guarantee a good picture at all. If you had 100 guys in a room, each of which with their own ideas, how do you know which of those is going to make a movie that will gross 300 million dollars? Clearly, if it was so easy to make a hit movie, then, don't you think they would do it. And, even if they did have a formula to make hit movies, half of the people on this board would be complaining that movies are formulaic.
I am not an attorney but in a past life I was a computer consultant who did e-discovery for litigation plaintiffs attorneys. Although not in the field, its become my understanding that as of late it is actually required under recent Federal rules to retain your e-mail.
It seems to me that the only thing worse than the incessant squabbling between Democrats and Republicans is when they arrive at a consensus on a piece of "important" legislation.
People who are old like me and remember the famous battles between Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan remember when Republicans really were conservative and Democrats really were liberal. Now we just have two parties of triangulating whores selling out to try and grab the middle and flipping sides on every issue at the earliest possible opportunity.
They think that God should rule every thing that we do and that this country was founded on religious values It was really founded by people running from the government and a religion that they didn't believe.
It's a pretty simple historical fact, actually. The country was founded by religious people leaving Europe for both money and because they were actually more religious than the people they left behind. Do read about the Puritans and the like. They were hard core religious people.
These days, Puritanism abounds in both the left and right in the USA. Sure, the right wing has its goofy Baptist crap, but the left wing is downright puritanical when it comes to the environment. Like, a more moderate position would be, so what if a species goes extinct every now and then any more than who cares about who is sleeping with whom. So, be it god or not, puritanism is engrained in our culture, and, generally speaking, Americans tend to judge the strength of other cultures based on how puritanical they are.
To the right wing, gay marriage would be like, well, the KKK suddenly decided that they wanted to lobby for, well, a Malcom X day. Marriage is a lifelong commitment grounded in a religious ritual and gay activism has never been either in favor of commitment or religion. You would have to always wonder what the punchline is. So it has to be, in their mind, an assault on their values, sorta in the same way that gay people dressing up as sailors in that Tom Hanks movie is sorta read as an assault on the military.
The system works fine, the people are fucked, and they did it to themselves. He didn't flip out, they fucked with him and he fucked them back.
It was not his system and therefor he had no right. If he did not like the job, he should have found another one. Period. Since you do not allow for the man to be waterboarded briefly to give up the passwords, then he has to go to jail and for a long time. It wasn't his property, his act was one of vandalism and destruction, and quite against the law.
All you people seem to think that you are entitled to something, or have a hand in other people's property, and you don't.
Isn't there a small but significant number of torturees who will choose to allow themselves to be drowned rather than give up the password?
Then, you cap the time and extent of the waterboarding so that the guy doesn't die, and he's looking at a year in jail.
Someone who is already conditioned not to panic when they are upside down in a sea kayak while the gash on their head from hitting the lava rock is gushing out so much blood they can't see. (I've had that).
See, here's the thing, in the case of waterboarding, they stuff a towel down your mouth and puff it up with water, so that, some water definitely enters the airways and it -always- triggers the drowning / death reflex. It's a very brutal thing, but, the damage tends to be more psychological then physical, if you live through the stress of the torture itself.
From waterboarding where do you go? Cutting off appendages and genitalia? Branding? And what happens when it becomes known that the city council used these techniques against an IT manager
Absolutely not. Waterboarding is actually worse in some ways than all of those things. If they don't talk after being waterboarded, they aren't going to talk at all.
I mean, really. What do we have now? The guy loses control, flips out, locks everyone out of the system, they are down for who knows how long as they bring in crackers and consultants and what not, and the guy goes to jail.
But...
If you just waterboard the guy, until he coughs up the password, the system's not down for really any longer than it takes a Windows Update to screw everything up, so you can just let the guy who locked you out walk, instead of putting him in jail or prison for who knows how long.
Waterboard in this case would be simpler, safer, and better for everyone.
When Obama drafts the Declaration of Independence, in doing so works to win a war against a power many times in economic and military strength, doubles the size of the United States, I'd then put him in the same category as Jefferson.
When Obama sleeps with the equivalent of Marylin Munroe, then I'd put him in the same category as Kennedy.
So would you prefer if all Ford and GM cars were actually manufactured in China and just the advertisements were created in USA? That does not seem like a nationalistic position to me.
The one thing that I really do like about the closed model is that Apple and Microsoft seem to be the only two American companies capable of actually taking on foreign competition in their core competencies and winning.
They are just kicking the shit out of Sony and as guy who watched RCA flounder and go down for an answer to the Walkman every iPod and xBox 360 sold just gives me great delight. And now, the even possibility of Microsoft taking back at least the design of electronic screens back from asian manufacturers is pretty damned sweet.
You all may hate Microsoft and Apple and love Linux, but is there any doubt that if Ford and GM were as adeptly run as Microsoft and Apple were, American car companies wouldn't be caught building giant trucks -again- and then take seemingly 5 years to turn around.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, you need to take an economics class.
Manufacturing jobs or service jobs, you're always just shuffling money aroun
Well, no. When you perform a service, you transition labor from one person to another but in such a way that allows some increased efficiency through an aggregation of expertise.
When you make something, you encode into the machine that you have made a tremendous labor savings. Because the machine can be re-used, you save that labor many times.
So, manufacturing is always more wealth generating than a simple service model.
Of course it's easy to pay cheap wages and not care about safety or manufacture correctly. It's all short sighted profits.
It's not short sighted profits, its called, lowering the price of the good. Democrats always talk about how much they help lower classes, but they've done more to systematically screw them in the last 30 years with their safety and environmental legislation than you can imagine. If you have a car that cost 5k to build, but then stack 10k of junk up on top of it, you've got a lot less people that can afford to buy that car, and you've made them -poorer-, not richer, as a result. Democrats have this idea that they can create some sort of a new economy by piling on more and more crap onto the back of something that people actually want through legislation, but all this new economy does is make goods more expensive so that people can't get them. I mean, if enviro-dems had everything they could want, there would be no meat for most people because industrial foods would be banned and thus make it too expensive, and all that starvation would be called as much progress as people having to give up their cars because of greenhouse gasses and other goblins is called progress today.
The feature list provided, the integrated chat, the quick loads, and word list, all describe a sort of a tile based game that is essentially different from scrabble the board game. Really, by Hasbro making an online tile thing, they are infringing on scrabulous's intellectual property. Scrabulous should patent everything about their work, and sue Hasbro for infringement on their invention.
Ah yes, because all those career Democrat politicians are spending their lives working for a government..... But there's no vast left-wing conspiracy to take down the American economy.
Nationalize everything, and therefor, the government has a lot more power. I don't see what the Dems are doing as maliciously minded. I perfectly concede that they genuinely believe that everything would be better if they ran everything. It's just that, humans have tried socialism over and over again and it simply hasn't worked. You need to have private property and businesses for the economy to work. Everyone knows this. Even Cuba is now gradually increasing private property rights for individual farmers in a bid to increase its own production.
Of all great ironies, though, is that, if we step forward 100 years, Reagan and Clinton will be seen as more alike than apart, and similarly, Bush and Obama will both represent a more activist and centralized government.
i agree the bailing out of the banks and all the crap they are pull
The problem is one of moral hazard and responsibilities of both political parties. Republicans are supposed to be the bulwark against the excesses of Washington and they've honestly been terrible.
The expansion of the budget deficit under Bush, and I am a Republican, has been utterly foolish and wasteful. The bottom line is, Democrats are the ones that are supposed to be the ones that want to tax and spend and, even if sometimes it is needed, they are the ones that should do that.
But, the real problem is that, if you've got the Feds bailing out a bunch of banks - and the sweetheart deal for Bear Sterns so that rich people could keep some of their stock, was utterly wrong. If the Fed can come up with 200 billion to bail out rich people, its basic fairness that advocates for the left wing and the poor might ask , geez, maybe they should be able to get some money to bail them out too. So, we need to have some leadership in Washington that is capable of saying no, and Bush just isn't doing the job.
I almost welcome an Obama Presidency so that those Republicans in the Congress that had the courage to vote against this bailout will be the Republicans we rebuild our party around, and in doing so, I should hope we focus on the positive messages of free enterprise, individual thrift and responsibility, or at least an acceptance of one's own failures, and less on ridiculous and wrong headed crap like picking on gays and supposed national security.
When it is a closed system, that I would call that clean.
It's not a closed system because you really have no idea what you are doing under ground, and you are getting that water from somewhere. The bottom line is, if drilling through a few miles of rock to get some heat were economic, there would be drills all over the place.
But what I don't get is, how you can advocate people drilling thousands of holes into the ground to get heat but you are opposed to people drilling a handful of holes to go get a trillion dollars. I'd say that, if a trillion dollars is so unimportant that you can just let it sit in the ground, I'd say, quit bitching about the cost of the war!
Odd, when the Republicans were in power everybody I knew was hurting financially, but then again I don't know many rich people.
What you are missing is that a lot of people in this board work in the service sector, which is to say, we shuffle a lot of other people's money around and don't add value to ourselves. Yet, during the so-called Clinton boom years, oil, coal , steel and producers of virtually every material in the economy all got screwed. Now, demand is up for all of those things, largely because Dems shot themselves in the foot by demanding and getting an end to all of that resource extraction.
But even when it was ninety five degrees farenheight you rolled the windows up driving through Sauget where Monsanto had their plant.
We used to have a saying in Akron when the rubber mills were there. People would drive along I76 and note the sulfure stench and say, but yeah, that's the smell of money. Now Akron is one of the cleanest cities in America and it is a dying town with no jobs and less opportunity. Yep, and look at the Chicago area now. There's no jobs. So, enjoy that clean free air while you go and bitch about how people in other countries have manufacturing and have the wealth that goes with it, as you chase it out of our country. As I said, Democrats wrecked the country.
When I got a detached retina this year I was damned glad I had a "greedy surgeon", who charged a lot more than the lawyers. You, sir, have a jealousy problem. And no, IANAL. I do databases at work for a whole lot less maney than the doctors and lawyers I have been GLAD to pay.
Surgeons add value to the economy, lawyers don't. Of course they are entitled to their pay, just as much as a good CEO is entitled to his.
When Evil-X left me and my two teenaged daughters for another man (have you any idea what that did to the kids?) I was damned glad to have one of the "greedy lawyers" you hate so much. Likewise when I was forced into bankrupcy because the bitch had run my finances into the ground, I was damned glad I had a "greedy lawyer".
And what did you do to contribute to that relationship? Sure its easy to paint your ex as evil but some bit of evil is a part of -all- women and thus the breakdown in your marriage is to some extent your responsibility. I guess then, its only natural then, that you would get a greedy lawyer to go after your evil-ex.... you don't have to deal with the selfishness that no doubt contributed to the end of your relationship.
Regardless of where you stand on the telco wiretapping, the legislative issue on wiretapping was only whether or not a bunch of greedy lawyers want another set of deep pockets to go plundering. Left wing leaders don't care about the spying. They just want another set of excuses to try and destroy the American economy even more than all their environmental regulation already has. The sad thing is that Republicans open themselves up over and over again for this sort of plundering by the left, as some twisted form of appeasement. They should have just made the wiretapping illegal, should have let the banks fail and homeowners get foreclosed, and stood for something rather than borrowing ever more on the backs of the taxpayers for others moral hazards.
Alaska would be better off drilling ANWR and just burning 1/2 the crude for energy than it would be to invest in geothermal, then selling the rest. They would have 500 billion in cash and enough oil to last them ages. In fact, ANWR is so much money that Alaskans would almost be silly not to think of seceding from the USA to escape environmental laws since the economic impact to that state would be so huge.
Geothermal means drilling and a lot of it. Then, on top of that, you have to have a lot of water to run through your geothermal holes and basically what you've done is create a system that pumps heavy metals back from deep underground up to the surface of the earth.
The crazy thing is that every popular movie from 1941 seems more interesting than today's fare
http://movies.yahoo.com/browse/year/1941
The suits are those guys that have to go in front of a bunch of movie theater owners and persuade them to buy the movie that you made. They are going to have relationships with these people and so are going to have a pretty good feel for what those people are interested in paying for, and what they aren't. So, say, for example, you making a movie and the central part of the plot has to do with, for whatever reason, a cantaloupe. For whatever reason, the suit happens to know that the guy who owns whatever movie chain that has 100 screens, really, really hates cantaloupe, and, he knows from having lunch that a guy who owns 50 screens just said, "hey when are they going to make a movie about bananas. I think bananas are a funny fruit."
Guess what! The suit isn't going to even try and sell the chain owner on the cantaloupe. Since he's writing you the check to make the movie, he's going to take down that barrier for himself, and come to you and say, "hey, would it really be that much worse if it were say, a banana"?
If you answer correctly, you just picked up 150 more screens for your film. If you didn't, then, you possibly don't get your movie made.
I know it may not sound all that "nice", but, if you could make some kind of a gismo that could detect camcorders and then jam them, and have it in a movie theater, I bet you could get stinking rich.
The great irony of this, is that everyone on the board thinks that the studio can just arbitrarily make a good movie button.
"well, just make a good movie", betrays a total lack of understanding for the arts.
No one really knows a canned formula for making a good movie. A studio can do everything that it thinks will make a movie, best writers, best directors, best actors, and that doesn't guarantee a good picture at all. If you had 100 guys in a room, each of which with their own ideas, how do you know which of those is going to make a movie that will gross 300 million dollars? Clearly, if it was so easy to make a hit movie, then, don't you think they would do it. And, even if they did have a formula to make hit movies, half of the people on this board would be complaining that movies are formulaic.
I am not an attorney but in a past life I was a computer consultant who did e-discovery for litigation plaintiffs attorneys. Although not in the field, its become my understanding that as of late it is actually required under recent Federal rules to retain your e-mail.
It seems to me that the only thing worse than the incessant squabbling between Democrats and Republicans is when they arrive at a consensus on a piece of "important" legislation.
People who are old like me and remember the famous battles between Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan remember when Republicans really were conservative and Democrats really were liberal. Now we just have two parties of triangulating whores selling out to try and grab the middle and flipping sides on every issue at the earliest possible opportunity.
They think that God should rule every thing that we do and that this country was founded on religious values It was really founded by people running from the government and a religion that they didn't believe.
It's a pretty simple historical fact, actually. The country was founded by religious people leaving Europe for both money and because they were actually more religious than the people they left behind. Do read about the Puritans and the like. They were hard core religious people.
These days, Puritanism abounds in both the left and right in the USA. Sure, the right wing has its goofy Baptist crap, but the left wing is downright puritanical when it comes to the environment. Like, a more moderate position would be, so what if a species goes extinct every now and then any more than who cares about who is sleeping with whom. So, be it god or not, puritanism is engrained in our culture, and, generally speaking, Americans tend to judge the strength of other cultures based on how puritanical they are.
To the right wing, gay marriage would be like, well, the KKK suddenly decided that they wanted to lobby for, well, a Malcom X day. Marriage is a lifelong commitment grounded in a religious ritual and gay activism has never been either in favor of commitment or religion. You would have to always wonder what the punchline is. So it has to be, in their mind, an assault on their values, sorta in the same way that gay people dressing up as sailors in that Tom Hanks movie is sorta read as an assault on the military.
The system works fine, the people are fucked, and they did it to themselves. He didn't flip out, they fucked with him and he fucked them back.
It was not his system and therefor he had no right. If he did not like the job, he should have found another one. Period. Since you do not allow for the man to be waterboarded briefly to give up the passwords, then he has to go to jail and for a long time. It wasn't his property, his act was one of vandalism and destruction, and quite against the law.
All you people seem to think that you are entitled to something, or have a hand in other people's property, and you don't.
Isn't there a small but significant number of torturees who will choose to allow themselves to be drowned rather than give up the password?
Then, you cap the time and extent of the waterboarding so that the guy doesn't die, and he's looking at a year in jail.
Someone who is already conditioned not to panic when they are upside down in a sea kayak while the gash on their head from hitting the lava rock is gushing out so much blood they can't see. (I've had that).
See, here's the thing, in the case of waterboarding, they stuff a towel down your mouth and puff it up with water, so that, some water definitely enters the airways and it -always- triggers the drowning / death reflex. It's a very brutal thing, but, the damage tends to be more psychological then physical, if you live through the stress of the torture itself.
From waterboarding where do you go? Cutting off appendages and genitalia? Branding? And what happens when it becomes known that the city council used these techniques against an IT manager
Absolutely not. Waterboarding is actually worse in some ways than all of those things. If they don't talk after being waterboarded, they aren't going to talk at all.
I mean, really. What do we have now? The guy loses control, flips out, locks everyone out of the system, they are down for who knows how long as they bring in crackers and consultants and what not, and the guy goes to jail.
But...
If you just waterboard the guy, until he coughs up the password, the system's not down for really any longer than it takes a Windows Update to screw everything up, so you can just let the guy who locked you out walk, instead of putting him in jail or prison for who knows how long.
Waterboard in this case would be simpler, safer, and better for everyone.
Jefferon, JFKs or Obama
When Obama drafts the Declaration of Independence, in doing so works to win a war against a power many times in economic and military strength, doubles the size of the United States, I'd then put him in the same category as Jefferson.
When Obama sleeps with the equivalent of Marylin Munroe, then I'd put him in the same category as Kennedy.
If only our politicians were a 1/10th of the man that he was.
So would you prefer if all Ford and GM cars were actually manufactured in China and just the advertisements were created in USA? That does not seem like a nationalistic position to me.
You got me. That's a good point.
The one thing that I really do like about the closed model is that Apple and Microsoft seem to be the only two American companies capable of actually taking on foreign competition in their core competencies and winning.
They are just kicking the shit out of Sony and as guy who watched RCA flounder and go down for an answer to the Walkman every iPod and xBox 360 sold just gives me great delight. And now, the even possibility of Microsoft taking back at least the design of electronic screens back from asian manufacturers is pretty damned sweet.
You all may hate Microsoft and Apple and love Linux, but is there any doubt that if Ford and GM were as adeptly run as Microsoft and Apple were, American car companies wouldn't be caught building giant trucks -again- and then take seemingly 5 years to turn around.
A good programmer has to work all of his life to make enough money to feed themselves most of the time.
Only if you are working in Open Source. If you sell a proprietary, closed source application, you can make -bank-.
Show me your densest, most bug-free rendition of your "hello world" code. It's possible I can beat it...
Go for it!
msg db 'Hello World'
mov dx, offset msg
mov ah, 9
int 21h
If you store that baby as COM file, its going to be all of a handful of bytes.