There are other reasons as well. I'm from Europe and I'm not comfortable with what passes as politicians in America being able to strong-arm the EU into adopting their asinine laws via organizations like WIPO. International trade of goods is nice, international trade of governmental corruption less so.
The great irony, of course, is that in the USA, we see the EU trying to strong-arm the USA into adopting their asinine laws via organizations like WIPO and the UN.
But the reality is, the problem is China.
In some ways, the rise of China hurts the EU more than it does the USA. The USA basically benefits via comparitive advantage versus its own domestic market and the relative strength of the dollar. On the other hand, the EU, and Germany in particular, relies very heavily on exports to pay for its domestic economy and so, as the USA shops in China, Germany loses. As the USA devalues its currency and China maintains its pegs, that makes the EU very expensive and thus Europe will really get screwed. Even now, you see German car makers shuttering some production in Europe and relocating it to the USA. As the dollar continues to fall, you should expect to see more of this.
In fact, it just makes Venus' example more dramatic. If it wasn't for the massive greenhouse effect, Venus' night side should be freezing - which it isn't. It's pretty much the same hellhole as the day side.
Well, that's the point. IF we could go and get rid of all the CO2 on Venus, which is a pretty tall order, we would then have a planet that would bake on one side while freezing on the other. It would still be completely unlivable. The planet just sucks.
On the other hand, as much as Mars seems promising, we still don't know much gravity affects human development. It may be that we have to live on an earth sized gravity environment, so that, even if we could heat up the planet and keep the atmosphere up to pressure and mix, we may still not be able to live there.
Clearly, we need to research and then get experience in industrial processes to manage atmospheric mixtures.
What Microsoft could do is, start offering doses of opium free to the Chinese with purchases of Windows. Then, if the Chinese government tried to stop it, Microsoft could claim foul to our government, who would land troops and suppress the Chinese government enough to ensure that the opium was distributed so that people would turn to Microsoft for more opium.
SO um, if all these people are victims of globalization, then, who exactly in China is buying 1000 brand new cars a week in Beijing alone? Why is Kraft making money hand over fist selling Oreo cookies to the Chinese?
Let's face it. The only reason Americans are against globalization is because we perceive ourselves as losing at it.
Why is it reasonable to take away venus. In many respects, it's our twin. You couldn't ask for a much better model - 95% the size of earth, and it's the planet closest to us, half the distance of Mars. What more do you want?
Go trap your self in a bubble and let someone pump CO2 in and then we can talk about if it is a pollutant.
I could stick your head in a bucket of water for 4 minutes and prove the same about water. I think we need to do something about the excess of water on the planet.
Ok, so, that brings me to a point. Pretty much, if you take away Venus, which, is reasonable, there's really no other comparative earth like planet out there, and with it goes the only real "other" CO2 study that there is.
The rest of your argument is really based on assumptions from backfitting data to computer models, and goes to how much faith you have in the validity of that sort of modelling. But climate warming is not a positive experiment in that there is a control we can examine to isolate variables with.
According to Wikipedia, the mass of Venus's atmosphere is roughly 93 times that of the earth, and Venus's atmosphere is 97% CO2 while the earth's atmosphere is 400ppm or 0.04% CO2. So, we're looking at 2250 times as much CO2 as on the earth.
Thus, the curious mind might be tempted to reasonably ask, why is Venus not 2250 times as hot as the earth? Or, conversely, if we examine the two knowns of CO2 planetary heating in the entire human experience, we could probably conclude that a doubling of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere would yield a fraction of a degree in heating, not the massive amounts of heating preached to us by the IPCC.
That said, a 6-month temperature decrease isn't so much as a blip on the known history of the earth's climate, I'd wait for some more data before suggesting that global warming is magically reversing itself all the sudden.
It's not a magical thing at all. It's that, the idea is there's some subtle interaction between the sun and the space around the earth, of which, the lack of sunspots also for the last few months is a sign.
See, I'm betting on Little Ice Age.
I do understand your point about GW skepticism in general. A lot of people don't buy into GW because they don't want to believe it as changing is a pain in the rear. I think its reasonable to keep the blinders on and shields up when you are talking about something that changes that much. But, if someone is going to argue it, they need to have a better climate model. Right now, GW is an effect predicted by a bunch of computer models, the source code of which looks like crap, and, the genuinely useful thing to do would be to make a climate model software that does NOT show global warming, and explain why it is different. Then, as much as the idea of backfilling a computer program is actually science, we might test it.
I think you have to want to do it. If he wants to program, he's going to learn how to do it and if he's self directed he'll figure out what questions he needs to ask.
That's only if the radius from the centre of the objects is the same. Remember, gravity decreases as a function of the square of the distance.
Isn't the case, that, at least while you are on the planet, the math works out such that the gravity is consistent at whatever point you are on. If you modelled the earth as a bunch of tiny cubes, each with their own gravitational field, then, the resolution of the sum of all of those vectors is going to be pulling you to the center of the planet.
It's only once you start getting into space does the gravitational attraction begin to fall away.
Get off it... scientists stereotypically can't communicate with anyone
No, actually... I get this from that bastion of right wing journalism, National Public Radio. Scientists are not people whose job it is to communicate. On the other hand, salesman, preachers, etc are. So, if you have a CEO out there saying that he thinks global warming is a crock, or a preacher who argues against evolution, and stand him or her beside a scientist, in a debate, 9 times out of a 10 the guy that convince someone to part with their money is going to beat the scientist. I mean, don't take it personally, but, I guarantee you that if we put even you into a debate of any kind with a halfway decent salesman, you are going to lose. Your specialty, as you say, is prion proteins, not people, and you can only be as good as much as you practice.
And the profit is $1 million, as you would have solved P=NP.
Actually, it's not been proven yet that FACTOR is np-complete. If I understand correctly (and please a real Phd in Comp Sci step in), you need to show that an NP-Complete program could use your program you are trying to show to be np-complete as a subroutine to calculate itself, and in the case of FACTOR, no one has actually done it.
Still, you're right in the larger sense that any polynomial time solution to FACTOR would be a breakthrough that should shed large insight into NP-Completeness problems.
I'm not to clear on what your getting at here? Should science be dumbed down for the masses?
Exactly opposite. What I'm saying is that organizing different kinds of knowledge for the purposes of communications is a discipline in and of itself and frankly, it's the job of writers and they've all bailed. Scientists famously can't communicate anything to anyone, even each other, that's why the emphasis is on experiment.
Look at what we have today : A drooling stinkoid shows up babbling about a ton of equations is nothing, but, then he shoots a dog, gives it a needle and it comes back to life. The scientist apologizes that you might have to change the brand of dog food because bringing them back from the dead alters some [insert physics here] and therefor, they must eat Alpo instead of Dog Chow.
Now, a good salesman will look at that, and say "you know, that's a decent piece of work but that Alpo issue is going to make it harder, but, if you can agree to say, 20%, I can sell it if I get to keep 80%. You know, I'll go and be in front of all the people and get them to give us money..." and the scientist says, "my god, people", and says, "you know, I feel bad about the Alpo thing and if you sell it I'll be happy with 17%"...
But I digress...the moral of the story is, the taxonomy of human scientific knowledge is so screwed up that not even scientists themselves can assess the value of their work.... it's just, the organization of our knowledge is draining everything, its not the job of scientists to do, its the job of writers.
I'm talking about modern American Leftist values; i.e., those of the people supporting what they hoped Obama would be all about, (until the FISA thing, anyway).
North Korea is communist. They are communist and have a dictatorship because under communism and even socialism, the government, acting as the agent of the people, ultimately decides what property should be disposed of and in what way. This is entirely what you believe and that you choose to ignore the consequence of your own failed ideology only proves how mind boggingly ignorant you really are. You know why Obama flipped on FISA, why Democrats don't -really- do anything to try and stop all of this government wiretapping you are so appalled by? It's because the core believers in that party want all the power for themselves and they want to end private property and to use the government to steal it, just like all good godless commies do. You really, really believe, that liberal leaders push the environment because they care about nature? They are doing it because its just another excuse to get their hands on more loot. That's why you see carbon taxes, government inspections, all on the plate - it's all about gathering up more power for themselves, and they've got sheeple like you believing that, if you give them power, you'll somehow get something back...
and, what is it that you've gotten back, in all of these years of supporting the American Left, what has anyone in the left wing gotten back in 1960? That's the most amazing part - year after year, african americans pull the lever for the left wing and to this day, all of the major african american population centers in the USA are ghettos, and will be ghettos, until they adopt Republican values of investment, capitalism, freedom and individual responsibility.
Nope, you're wrong again. I explained it a couple of times in a manner whic
Your explanation is worthless. Again, the guy steals the passwords, and you send in the police ruin his life, and make the victims suffer more. I send in a couple of goons, waterboard the guy, get the password, he walks, and the victims are up in rolling in a matter of minutes. You can't argue that my solution isn't worse, so you set up an easily refuted strawman of a slippery slope argument which flounders even in self contradiction before you even finish your own posts.
It used to target a readership of average citizens who were keen on the nitty-gritty of scientific developments
It's bad writing.
SciAM got political and that turned a lot of people off, the same way NYT or WashPost did. They tried to dumb things down while still pretending to be smart and all it did it was anger their core readership and they bailed.
Science has exploded beyond the ability of writers to manage... It used to be that 50 years ago, you could probably have a smattering of what's new in physics and a few other fields, but right now, what's new in physics is a highly specialized thing and it takes way too much to understand what's even old versus what's new. The baseline education of some high school teaches a mathematics based on a level of calculus that's 100 years old at best, physics that's basically newtonian mechanics and chemistry is just doing the old "let's make break up water trick" when right now scientists are looking at individual atoms.
All of this points to a colossal failure in writing. We have a body of technical knowledge that is so disorganized that it takes way too long for humans to really communicate it to each other in order to share the knowledge. Roger Penrose made a heck of a go at it in his book about how everything works, but even he falls into the horrible trap of using bad names for different mathematical constructs. At least biologists got it right when put a taxonomy on species... but in math we have Fourier Transforms, Newton's Method, and it's just a disorganized mess, and on top of that horrible language, we stack everything we know about the basic laws of the universe.
What the world needs is a bank of good writers that also know math and physics to go in there and get rid of biographically named crap, and organize things in a more direct and intuitive fashion. For the love of god, you can't let a scientist in the field do it, because they are just terrible at naming and organizing.
Apple has seen these numbers before. They're currently on a crest, but they'll sink and rise again. They have an upper limit of around 10-15% market share. They've made it quite clear that they don't *want* any more than that, and aren't interested in meeting the needs of the rest of the market.
I've got my share of -1 postings from ripping Apple but on this you are off base. I think thi would have been true in 1992 but it is certainly not true today. It's a completely different world out there. Personal computers running Windows have become corporate computing appliances, not personal ones, where Apple has doggedly focused on being a personal computer and is imaginatively building a software, service, and shopping stack designed to build a premium consumer brand.
If they decoupled their anaemic hardware offerings from their OS, they could see double digit growth yearly, but failing that they'll stay right where they've always been.
Apple has double digit growth yearly. Apple stock is kicking total butt right now in a stock market that sucks. I wish I would have bought them a couple of years ago when Jobs first came back... I'd be retired!
Secondly, Apple hardware is hardly anemic. Apple's new PowerMac, for example, is the latest Harperton Xeon and while it might be a tad pricier than the equivalent from the likes of Dell, I guarantee you that the entire service experience, from Apple store to home, is very, very good.
Christ, I'm talking myself into buying a Macintosh... and that's the thing about Apple - you walk into the store, and it reflects the sort of perfection that Americans expect from products.. indeed, Apple has gone beyond even Japanese cars when it comes to the detail of their products...
Hey Todd, I recommend you take a vacation, relax, and stop listening to right wing radio. Its all crap anyway, and repeating this stuff makes you look like an idiot.
Well, there's a lot of people posting left wing blog talking points, that need a vacation, need to relax, and it is all crap anyway that makes them look like idiots, and well, I figured I'd just join them!:-)
If people want to stay focused on the issues, and discuss those, instead of ideology, I'd rather have that.
The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac multi-billion dollar home loan mortgage fiasco just this week being the latest, with a federal bail out to pay for the result of corruption, (and no arrests; funny that). --Right on the heels of the Bear Sterns crisis, also with a federal bail out, and again no arrests. That's the Right Wing buddy system at work with billions in tax dollars. Yeah, unregulated banking and free trade
You contradict yourself. The bailouts are as a result of regulations. Had the true free marketers gotten what they wanted, Bear would have collapsed, there would not be a Fannie Mae. So... why are you complaining about the institutions that you liberals created?
Duh. Yes, trade makes money. And life will generally find a way. But you're arguing that successful countries have found success as a result of Machiavellian, greed-inspired and conscienceless American-based tactics
American tactics are not nearly what you say they were. You only say that because you are a loser, and you are bitter.
should emulate North Korea and its ultra right-wing ideals
North Korea is left wing, not right wing. I seem to recall that private property rights are a hallmark of the right wing, whereas your buddies in North Korea would prefer they do not, as you don't.
it's all just an elaborate series of dumb excuses to trick people into debasing the value of human life.
>You still have no answer to the fundamental point: waterboarding the network guy for 15 minutes to extract the passwords he stole is better for the network guy and his victim than your solution of life in prison. You argue to throw people in prison for the tiniest of offenses, and I fail to see how that improves the value of human life. Sounds rather North Korean to me.
Also, you'll note that this guy is attempting to side-step the leak of a fundamentally pathological ego through his little "Statue of worship"
I'm not trying to sidestep anything. I do have a pathological ego, and you would too, if you were as good as I am. So, why don't you get back to your statue?
I'm laughing in your face, and you know it
I really don't care what you are doing, any more than I would be concerned about a rabid dog that needs to be shot. But my original post to you, when you went off on your rabid anti-torture, posited the argument that liberal such as you are mentally ill, and diseased, and my goal has been to engage you long enough for you to prove it. After you cool off, you'll be wishing you could undo your posts.
You might find it relaxing, to be working on your statue to me.
Also, I'd say that it can be argued that the UN and the European community were founded on the principle of avoiding the situation that allowed Hitler to grab power in Germany with significant public support.
Well, no, the UN was envisioned by Roosevelt long before World War II even happened. Roosevelt served with the Wilson administration, and he took excellent notes on why Wilson's League of Nations failed first before the American people and then as an institution.
Slashdot Mirror
There are other reasons as well. I'm from Europe and I'm not comfortable with what passes as politicians in America being able to strong-arm the EU into adopting their asinine laws via organizations like WIPO. International trade of goods is nice, international trade of governmental corruption less so.
The great irony, of course, is that in the USA, we see the EU trying to strong-arm the USA into adopting their asinine laws via organizations like WIPO and the UN.
But the reality is, the problem is China.
In some ways, the rise of China hurts the EU more than it does the USA. The USA basically benefits via comparitive advantage versus its own domestic market and the relative strength of the dollar. On the other hand, the EU, and Germany in particular, relies very heavily on exports to pay for its domestic economy and so, as the USA shops in China, Germany loses. As the USA devalues its currency and China maintains its pegs, that makes the EU very expensive and thus Europe will really get screwed. Even now, you see German car makers shuttering some production in Europe and relocating it to the USA. As the dollar continues to fall, you should expect to see more of this.
In fact, it just makes Venus' example more dramatic. If it wasn't for the massive greenhouse effect, Venus' night side should be freezing - which it isn't. It's pretty much the same hellhole as the day side.
Well, that's the point. IF we could go and get rid of all the CO2 on Venus, which is a pretty tall order, we would then have a planet that would bake on one side while freezing on the other. It would still be completely unlivable. The planet just sucks.
On the other hand, as much as Mars seems promising, we still don't know much gravity affects human development. It may be that we have to live on an earth sized gravity environment, so that, even if we could heat up the planet and keep the atmosphere up to pressure and mix, we may still not be able to live there.
Clearly, we need to research and then get experience in industrial processes to manage atmospheric mixtures.
What Microsoft could do is, start offering doses of opium free to the Chinese with purchases of Windows. Then, if the Chinese government tried to stop it, Microsoft could claim foul to our government, who would land troops and suppress the Chinese government enough to ensure that the opium was distributed so that people would turn to Microsoft for more opium.
SO um, if all these people are victims of globalization, then, who exactly in China is buying 1000 brand new cars a week in Beijing alone? Why is Kraft making money hand over fist selling Oreo cookies to the Chinese?
Let's face it. The only reason Americans are against globalization is because we perceive ourselves as losing at it.
Why is it reasonable to take away venus. In many respects, it's our twin. You couldn't ask for a much better model - 95% the size of earth, and it's the planet closest to us, half the distance of Mars. What more do you want?
A 24 hour day.
Go trap your self in a bubble and let someone pump CO2 in and then we can talk about if it is a pollutant.
I could stick your head in a bucket of water for 4 minutes and prove the same about water. I think we need to do something about the excess of water on the planet.
Ok, so, that brings me to a point. Pretty much, if you take away Venus, which, is reasonable, there's really no other comparative earth like planet out there, and with it goes the only real "other" CO2 study that there is.
The rest of your argument is really based on assumptions from backfitting data to computer models, and goes to how much faith you have in the validity of that sort of modelling. But climate warming is not a positive experiment in that there is a control we can examine to isolate variables with.
According to Wikipedia, the mass of Venus's atmosphere is roughly 93 times that of the earth, and Venus's atmosphere is 97% CO2 while the earth's atmosphere is 400ppm or 0.04% CO2. So, we're looking at 2250 times as much CO2 as on the earth.
Thus, the curious mind might be tempted to reasonably ask, why is Venus not 2250 times as hot as the earth? Or, conversely, if we examine the two knowns of CO2 planetary heating in the entire human experience, we could probably conclude that a doubling of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere would yield a fraction of a degree in heating, not the massive amounts of heating preached to us by the IPCC.
The thought of transvestites in spaceships singing some kind of opera put me off a little bit. I blinked and read it again. Oh, thank god!
That said, a 6-month temperature decrease isn't so much as a blip on the known history of the earth's climate, I'd wait for some more data before suggesting that global warming is magically reversing itself all the sudden.
It's not a magical thing at all. It's that, the idea is there's some subtle interaction between the sun and the space around the earth, of which, the lack of sunspots also for the last few months is a sign.
See, I'm betting on Little Ice Age.
I do understand your point about GW skepticism in general. A lot of people don't buy into GW because they don't want to believe it as changing is a pain in the rear. I think its reasonable to keep the blinders on and shields up when you are talking about something that changes that much. But, if someone is going to argue it, they need to have a better climate model. Right now, GW is an effect predicted by a bunch of computer models, the source code of which looks like crap, and, the genuinely useful thing to do would be to make a climate model software that does NOT show global warming, and explain why it is different. Then, as much as the idea of backfilling a computer program is actually science, we might test it.
I think you have to want to do it. If he wants to program, he's going to learn how to do it and if he's self directed he'll figure out what questions he needs to ask.
I recognize when someone is a genuine skeptic looking for answers and when they're an anti-science nutjob who can't live with reality.
Perhaps you can explain why the satellite data has the earth's temperature now dropping for six months straight then?
If the whole world sees American athletes dressed up with goofy masks, they will see the USA as a bunch of sissies, especially if the Chinese -don't-.
That's only if the radius from the centre of the objects is the same. Remember, gravity decreases as a function of the square of the distance.
Isn't the case, that, at least while you are on the planet, the math works out such that the gravity is consistent at whatever point you are on. If you modelled the earth as a bunch of tiny cubes, each with their own gravitational field, then, the resolution of the sum of all of those vectors is going to be pulling you to the center of the planet.
It's only once you start getting into space does the gravitational attraction begin to fall away.
Get off it... scientists stereotypically can't communicate with anyone
No, actually... I get this from that bastion of right wing journalism, National Public Radio. Scientists are not people whose job it is to communicate. On the other hand, salesman, preachers, etc are. So, if you have a CEO out there saying that he thinks global warming is a crock, or a preacher who argues against evolution, and stand him or her beside a scientist, in a debate, 9 times out of a 10 the guy that convince someone to part with their money is going to beat the scientist. I mean, don't take it personally, but, I guarantee you that if we put even you into a debate of any kind with a halfway decent salesman, you are going to lose. Your specialty, as you say, is prion proteins, not people, and you can only be as good as much as you practice.
Do we know whether or not FACTOR is a turing complete machine?
And the profit is $1 million, as you would have solved P=NP.
Actually, it's not been proven yet that FACTOR is np-complete. If I understand correctly (and please a real Phd in Comp Sci step in), you need to show that an NP-Complete program could use your program you are trying to show to be np-complete as a subroutine to calculate itself, and in the case of FACTOR, no one has actually done it.
Still, you're right in the larger sense that any polynomial time solution to FACTOR would be a breakthrough that should shed large insight into NP-Completeness problems.
I'm not to clear on what your getting at here? Should science be dumbed down for the masses?
Exactly opposite. What I'm saying is that organizing different kinds of knowledge for the purposes of communications is a discipline in and of itself and frankly, it's the job of writers and they've all bailed. Scientists famously can't communicate anything to anyone, even each other, that's why the emphasis is on experiment.
Look at what we have today : A drooling stinkoid shows up babbling about a ton of equations is nothing, but, then he shoots a dog, gives it a needle and it comes back to life. The scientist apologizes that you might have to change the brand of dog food because bringing them back from the dead alters some [insert physics here] and therefor, they must eat Alpo instead of Dog Chow.
Now, a good salesman will look at that, and say "you know, that's a decent piece of work but that Alpo issue is going to make it harder, but, if you can agree to say, 20%, I can sell it if I get to keep 80%. You know, I'll go and be in front of all the people and get them to give us money..." and the scientist says, "my god, people", and says, "you know, I feel bad about the Alpo thing and if you sell it I'll be happy with 17%"...
But I digress...the moral of the story is, the taxonomy of human scientific knowledge is so screwed up that not even scientists themselves can assess the value of their work.... it's just, the organization of our knowledge is draining everything, its not the job of scientists to do, its the job of writers.
1. Step 1 - FACTOR algorithm in polynomial time
2. Step 2 - SSL is obsolete, and certificates are pointless
3. Step 3- PROFIT!
I'm talking about modern American Leftist values; i.e., those of the people supporting what they hoped Obama would be all about, (until the FISA thing, anyway).
North Korea is communist. They are communist and have a dictatorship because under communism and even socialism, the government, acting as the agent of the people, ultimately decides what property should be disposed of and in what way. This is entirely what you believe and that you choose to ignore the consequence of your own failed ideology only proves how mind boggingly ignorant you really are. You know why Obama flipped on FISA, why Democrats don't -really- do anything to try and stop all of this government wiretapping you are so appalled by? It's because the core believers in that party want all the power for themselves and they want to end private property and to use the government to steal it, just like all good godless commies do. You really, really believe, that liberal leaders push the environment because they care about nature? They are doing it because its just another excuse to get their hands on more loot. That's why you see carbon taxes, government inspections, all on the plate - it's all about gathering up more power for themselves, and they've got sheeple like you believing that, if you give them power, you'll somehow get something back...
and, what is it that you've gotten back, in all of these years of supporting the American Left, what has anyone in the left wing gotten back in 1960? That's the most amazing part - year after year, african americans pull the lever for the left wing and to this day, all of the major african american population centers in the USA are ghettos, and will be ghettos, until they adopt Republican values of investment, capitalism, freedom and individual responsibility.
Nope, you're wrong again. I explained it a couple of times in a manner whic
Your explanation is worthless. Again, the guy steals the passwords, and you send in the police ruin his life, and make the victims suffer more. I send in a couple of goons, waterboard the guy, get the password, he walks, and the victims are up in rolling in a matter of minutes. You can't argue that my solution isn't worse, so you set up an easily refuted strawman of a slippery slope argument which flounders even in self contradiction before you even finish your own posts.
It used to target a readership of average citizens who were keen on the nitty-gritty of scientific developments
It's bad writing.
SciAM got political and that turned a lot of people off, the same way NYT or WashPost did. They tried to dumb things down while still pretending to be smart and all it did it was anger their core readership and they bailed.
Science has exploded beyond the ability of writers to manage... It used to be that 50 years ago, you could probably have a smattering of what's new in physics and a few other fields, but right now, what's new in physics is a highly specialized thing and it takes way too much to understand what's even old versus what's new. The baseline education of some high school teaches a mathematics based on a level of calculus that's 100 years old at best, physics that's basically newtonian mechanics and chemistry is just doing the old "let's make break up water trick" when right now scientists are looking at individual atoms.
All of this points to a colossal failure in writing. We have a body of technical knowledge that is so disorganized that it takes way too long for humans to really communicate it to each other in order to share the knowledge. Roger Penrose made a heck of a go at it in his book about how everything works, but even he falls into the horrible trap of using bad names for different mathematical constructs. At least biologists got it right when put a taxonomy on species ... but in math we have Fourier Transforms, Newton's Method, and it's just a disorganized mess, and on top of that horrible language, we stack everything we know about the basic laws of the universe.
What the world needs is a bank of good writers that also know math and physics to go in there and get rid of biographically named crap, and organize things in a more direct and intuitive fashion. For the love of god, you can't let a scientist in the field do it, because they are just terrible at naming and organizing.
Writers, step up, and take command!
Apple has seen these numbers before. They're currently on a crest, but they'll sink and rise again. They have an upper limit of around 10-15% market share. They've made it quite clear that they don't *want* any more than that, and aren't interested in meeting the needs of the rest of the market.
I've got my share of -1 postings from ripping Apple but on this you are off base. I think thi would have been true in 1992 but it is certainly not true today. It's a completely different world out there. Personal computers running Windows have become corporate computing appliances, not personal ones, where Apple has doggedly focused on being a personal computer and is imaginatively building a software, service, and shopping stack designed to build a premium consumer brand.
If they decoupled their anaemic hardware offerings from their OS, they could see double digit growth yearly, but failing that they'll stay right where they've always been.
Apple has double digit growth yearly. Apple stock is kicking total butt right now in a stock market that sucks. I wish I would have bought them a couple of years ago when Jobs first came back... I'd be retired!
Secondly, Apple hardware is hardly anemic. Apple's new PowerMac, for example, is the latest Harperton Xeon and while it might be a tad pricier than the equivalent from the likes of Dell, I guarantee you that the entire service experience, from Apple store to home, is very, very good.
Christ, I'm talking myself into buying a Macintosh... and that's the thing about Apple - you walk into the store, and it reflects the sort of perfection that Americans expect from products.. indeed, Apple has gone beyond even Japanese cars when it comes to the detail of their products...
Hey Todd, I recommend you take a vacation, relax, and stop listening to right wing radio. Its all crap anyway, and repeating this stuff makes you look like an idiot.
Well, there's a lot of people posting left wing blog talking points, that need a vacation, need to relax, and it is all crap anyway that makes them look like idiots, and well, I figured I'd just join them! :-)
If people want to stay focused on the issues, and discuss those, instead of ideology, I'd rather have that.
The Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac multi-billion dollar home loan mortgage fiasco just this week being the latest, with a federal bail out to pay for the result of corruption, (and no arrests; funny that). --Right on the heels of the Bear Sterns crisis, also with a federal bail out, and again no arrests. That's the Right Wing buddy system at work with billions in tax dollars. Yeah, unregulated banking and free trade
You contradict yourself. The bailouts are as a result of regulations. Had the true free marketers gotten what they wanted, Bear would have collapsed, there would not be a Fannie Mae. So... why are you complaining about the institutions that you liberals created?
Duh. Yes, trade makes money. And life will generally find a way. But you're arguing that successful countries have found success as a result of Machiavellian, greed-inspired and conscienceless American-based tactics
American tactics are not nearly what you say they were. You only say that because you are a loser, and you are bitter.
should emulate North Korea and its ultra right-wing ideals
North Korea is left wing, not right wing. I seem to recall that private property rights are a hallmark of the right wing, whereas your buddies in North Korea would prefer they do not, as you don't.
it's all just an elaborate series of dumb excuses to trick people into debasing the value of human life.
>You still have no answer to the fundamental point: waterboarding the network guy for 15 minutes to extract the passwords he stole is better for the network guy and his victim than your solution of life in prison. You argue to throw people in prison for the tiniest of offenses, and I fail to see how that improves the value of human life. Sounds rather North Korean to me.
Also, you'll note that this guy is attempting to side-step the leak of a fundamentally pathological ego through his little "Statue of worship"
I'm not trying to sidestep anything. I do have a pathological ego, and you would too, if you were as good as I am. So, why don't you get back to your statue?
I'm laughing in your face, and you know it
I really don't care what you are doing, any more than I would be concerned about a rabid dog that needs to be shot. But my original post to you, when you went off on your rabid anti-torture, posited the argument that liberal such as you are mentally ill, and diseased, and my goal has been to engage you long enough for you to prove it. After you cool off, you'll be wishing you could undo your posts.
You might find it relaxing, to be working on your statue to me.
Also, I'd say that it can be argued that the UN and the European community were founded on the principle of avoiding the situation that allowed Hitler to grab power in Germany with significant public support.
Well, no, the UN was envisioned by Roosevelt long before World War II even happened. Roosevelt served with the Wilson administration, and he took excellent notes on why Wilson's League of Nations failed first before the American people and then as an institution.