While not a TEA party member, I would think most of them would not be either if they actually felt their taxes were being used wisely. When you see your tax dollars going to so much government waste and needless spending and bureaucracy it's easy to fall into the TEA party mindset. When you fix Washington's wasteful spending, then I and many others will be up to considering more taxes.
...are quite likely to be the wealth creators rather than the fat cats doing nothing but sucking money out of the system.
I'm not sure I understand this. Say a obese fat cat wants caviar delivered by his private airplane to his second house in the Southwest. If he's spending money that goes into the hands of companies and people providing those services which is defined as "in the system". Sucking money out of the system, to me, means just sitting on the money letting it grow, without spending it. But even then it's getting used as loans and such to businesses and banks to help others create wealth. So explain to me how money gets sucked out of the system by the wealthy? If anything they should be wanting money coming into the system.
This doesn't matter atall, the purpose of tax is to fund the government spending. If the corporations evade taxes as opposed to passing them to the users of the services, the government doesn't get the revenue it needs.
Wow. Sounds like Netflix should've just stuck with DVD rentals . . . and then created a separate streaming brand in the first place. Would that have even helped?
Not sure that would have even helped.
http://www.netflix.com/NewWatchInstantlyRSS is what I have as a live bookmark and check it nearly daily for anything new. It only gets about 3-4 new movies/shows a day, if that, and most are ones I've never heard of, have no desire to see, or are so old as to create a negative reaction from me. Hey look, a couple of B rated movies that have been on Hulu forever!
I use Hulu (via PlayOn) for "current" episodes [or record it myself for things not online] and Netflix for streaming series or movies they have (few and far between) and kids shows. Redbox for DVD's. Sadly all that can't be under one roof or the studios would kill it based upon usage fees. Though for as much as we watch (less and less) it's really not too bad. Thank you studios for making me watch less tv!
This guy is spouting Republican talking points, saying the program is "creating too much bureaucracy" and "being wasteful government spending". Notice he doesn't actually care about the loss of privacy and rights. If he could contract a private company to strip search everyone and save money on the budget, he'd probably do it. Heck he might even be able to spin it off as "helping the job creators." Just because someone agrees with you an issue doesn't mean he agrees with you for the same reasons nor that you'd like the solutions he'd propose.
Frankly, who cares what the instigator thinks as long as the action is accomplished? Security was private before the TSA took over. The rest of the world uses private security. It's in their best interest as a private company to cut the costs and speed people through security checkpoints just doing the basic security check. It's all theatre anyway, just pay less for it. We all would win if we got rid of the TSA.
I guess it will depend on his definition of "life". Putting a bunch of "life like" cells together gets you...a bunch of "life like" cells together. Where is the forcing, where is the underlying, inbuilt "data" that will make these capable of doing anything beyond the initial chemical reaction?
As others have said, first we ought to try and make the "simple" organic cells from scratch that "live".
While a welcomed improvement to the 60 seconds or so that my current machine reboots in (I don't even know really), I'm not sure this even matters. Booting has never been one of the slow downs in my computer and shaving a few seconds off a boot, which is rarely done as my machine is hardly ever turned off, is not something I even care about them improving.
But will this give corporate IT directors a reason to upgrade since they can count those few seconds as "saved" x the number of workers = profit! Even though in reality it won't make any difference.
I don't disagree with that, but the parents statement makes it sound like this rich guy pays less taxes than his secretary. It's semantics. Should the system be changed? Possibly, just as you mentioned, but an understanding of the quote is needed.
They used these words as a propaganda tool. Just like the "American Dream" is used as a propaganda tool to keep the poor from rioting in the streets when they find out Buffet pays less taxes(percentage wise) than his secretary.
No, I'm pretty sure his secretary pays the same amount of taxes on her *capital gains* as does Buffet. He was being disingenuous. She pays her taxes on income which is taxed higher than what he makes his money off of (capital gains). Should investments be taxed higher or at the same amount as income? possibly, but that's a different topic.
Thank you for selecting Netflix. Along with our basic package would like to upgrade to the following?
Starz Package - $5.99/month
Fox Sports Live Streaming - $12.99/month
Nickelodeon Package - $4.99/month
Slashdot Channel - £2.99/day
NFL On Demand - $14.99/month
NHL Prime Time - $0.99/decade
Interestingly enough, a good sports package would actually put a huge dent in cable as that is mainly why a lot of people still have it. If ESPN was somehow available via another channel (PlayOn with ESPN3 live streaming for me), many more would be dropping cable. It might even be enough if like your example Fox Sports was offered.
ESPN could come up with their own "cable box" like a Roku type player and then really hurt cable, that or piggy back off things like Netflix or have an app for the ever growing number of net connected TV's/BR players.
Apple has "fans" for a reason, but fans aren't simply enough to keep a business profitable and growing unless it is doing great things and making more fans. Your theory fails this test.
The iPad succeeded by all accounts b/c it was a great piece of hardware (both aesthetically and functionally) coupled with a user friendly UI all at a reasonable price. No one has competed with that yet on all counts (though some have gotten 2 out of 3 with Android).
Should it become possible to 'pump' a cloud with some comparatively inexpensive apparatus(whether it be this laser widget or some other thing), reliable air currents flowing from regions of evaporation will become a new flavor of 'river', suddenly subject to rivalrous use, and the rivalries that stem from it. Happy times!
I believe it already is possible, at least partially (seems the jury is still out on effectiveness). Using lasers is just another way to do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding
Exactly, just like the SD cards when they came out. The original form of the SD card had sizes "up to" 32 GB. That was the theoretical at the time and under those standards at the time when 256MB up to 1GB was standard (back when new SD memory digital cameras came with cheapo 4MB cards in them). With the coming of other flavors of SD cards, I believe that went by the wayside but it was still a long time before anyone was seeing 32GB out of a SD card when initially introduced.
I don't doubt one day the avg consumer may in fact see a 2 TB flash drive, but given the cloud emergence and wireless data capabilities of many gadgets, I don't see that happening for a while.
While having a single in there posing as a bigger battery is a scam, many times the bigger batteries are just multiples of the smaller batteries (at least they appear to be and carry the same form factor, actual power may differ). See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3qPrlun45c&feature=related
HP should come out with a world class ultra lightweight laptop to compete with the MacBook Air, with a touch screen and very long battery life. They should come out with an innovative line of consumer and business PCs with touch screen monitors, tiny form factor similar to Mac Mini, remotely flashable, all the bells and whistles.
So instead of innovating, they should copy Apple. Got it. Seems other companies are in trouble for doing just that and getting trounced. They're not going to make any impact by continuing to play catch up with 2nd rate devices and services. Each of these big companies have a large budget for R&D, adding on obvious things is not the best use of those resources.
So what happens when you tap into this energy? Well, then the rubber would no longer make your foot bounce back. So you'd have to put more effort in your leg muscles to move your foot back up and forward. I imagine it would feel like walking on sand: easy to step into, but more effort to step out of.
Considering the linkage between geeks-that-would-use-these and obesity, I fail to see a problem here.
Hardly. Why does everyone that insists on using actual, falsifiable science suddenly become a denier or a "Big Oil, anti-science, right wing"? That the earth is currently in a warming trend is a fact that no one that knows the issues disputes on either side. How much is caused by humans? Are there any accurate models that predict the future (since none have been correct so far)? What, if anything, can we do about it anyway? Those are the questions for the scientific community, not this holy "the science is settled" and don't question it drivel.
Show me the computer model run from ten years ago that its creators published that accurately predicted the general climate of eight of the last ten years. If it existed the media would be trumpeting the 'conclusive evidence' of AGW even though the climate in the last ten years hasn't actually warmed all that much. But I'd agree it was significant because it would have demonstrated that climate modeling could predict the future with some skill and that we might want to look at what that model said about years 11-50 if it got 1-10 pretty accurate.
Small clarification though, if they were doing science, even if the model accurately predicted years 1-10, A) It doesn't show that it wasn't just luck and B) that it is able to model anything beyond those years.
Sure it would be a good starting point and a point of some possible evidence but would not be the end all evidence.
You mean like record high and low temperatures, freak storms, floods & droughts? Cause we got those now and we're still having to have this conversation.
Slashdot Mirror
While not a TEA party member, I would think most of them would not be either if they actually felt their taxes were being used wisely. When you see your tax dollars going to so much government waste and needless spending and bureaucracy it's easy to fall into the TEA party mindset. When you fix Washington's wasteful spending, then I and many others will be up to considering more taxes.
...are quite likely to be the wealth creators rather than the fat cats doing nothing but sucking money out of the system.
I'm not sure I understand this. Say a obese fat cat wants caviar delivered by his private airplane to his second house in the Southwest. If he's spending money that goes into the hands of companies and people providing those services which is defined as "in the system". Sucking money out of the system, to me, means just sitting on the money letting it grow, without spending it. But even then it's getting used as loans and such to businesses and banks to help others create wealth. So explain to me how money gets sucked out of the system by the wealthy? If anything they should be wanting money coming into the system.
This doesn't matter atall, the purpose of tax is to fund the government spending. If the corporations evade taxes as opposed to passing them to the users of the services, the government doesn't get the revenue it needs.
This "need" is where the whole argument is.
Wow. Sounds like Netflix should've just stuck with DVD rentals . . . and then created a separate streaming brand in the first place. Would that have even helped?
Not sure that would have even helped.
http://www.netflix.com/NewWatchInstantlyRSS is what I have as a live bookmark and check it nearly daily for anything new. It only gets about 3-4 new movies/shows a day, if that, and most are ones I've never heard of, have no desire to see, or are so old as to create a negative reaction from me. Hey look, a couple of B rated movies that have been on Hulu forever!
I use Hulu (via PlayOn) for "current" episodes [or record it myself for things not online] and Netflix for streaming series or movies they have (few and far between) and kids shows. Redbox for DVD's. Sadly all that can't be under one roof or the studios would kill it based upon usage fees. Though for as much as we watch (less and less) it's really not too bad. Thank you studios for making me watch less tv!
I went streaming only; the physical media via mail doesn't really appeal to me anyway.
Same. I've got Redbox or BB kiosks close that will fill any disc or current movie needs.
This guy is spouting Republican talking points, saying the program is "creating too much bureaucracy" and "being wasteful government spending". Notice he doesn't actually care about the loss of privacy and rights. If he could contract a private company to strip search everyone and save money on the budget, he'd probably do it. Heck he might even be able to spin it off as "helping the job creators." Just because someone agrees with you an issue doesn't mean he agrees with you for the same reasons nor that you'd like the solutions he'd propose.
Frankly, who cares what the instigator thinks as long as the action is accomplished? Security was private before the TSA took over. The rest of the world uses private security. It's in their best interest as a private company to cut the costs and speed people through security checkpoints just doing the basic security check. It's all theatre anyway, just pay less for it. We all would win if we got rid of the TSA.
I guess it will depend on his definition of "life". Putting a bunch of "life like" cells together gets you...a bunch of "life like" cells together. Where is the forcing, where is the underlying, inbuilt "data" that will make these capable of doing anything beyond the initial chemical reaction?
As others have said, first we ought to try and make the "simple" organic cells from scratch that "live".
While a welcomed improvement to the 60 seconds or so that my current machine reboots in (I don't even know really), I'm not sure this even matters. Booting has never been one of the slow downs in my computer and shaving a few seconds off a boot, which is rarely done as my machine is hardly ever turned off, is not something I even care about them improving.
But will this give corporate IT directors a reason to upgrade since they can count those few seconds as "saved" x the number of workers = profit! Even though in reality it won't make any difference.
I don't disagree with that, but the parents statement makes it sound like this rich guy pays less taxes than his secretary. It's semantics. Should the system be changed? Possibly, just as you mentioned, but an understanding of the quote is needed.
They used these words as a propaganda tool. Just like the "American Dream" is used as a propaganda tool to keep the poor from rioting in the streets when they find out Buffet pays less taxes(percentage wise) than his secretary.
No, I'm pretty sure his secretary pays the same amount of taxes on her *capital gains* as does Buffet. He was being disingenuous. She pays her taxes on income which is taxed higher than what he makes his money off of (capital gains). Should investments be taxed higher or at the same amount as income? possibly, but that's a different topic.
Thank you for selecting Netflix. Along with our basic package would like to upgrade to the following?
Starz Package - $5.99/month Fox Sports Live Streaming - $12.99/month Nickelodeon Package - $4.99/month Slashdot Channel - £2.99/day NFL On Demand - $14.99/month NHL Prime Time - $0.99/decade
Interestingly enough, a good sports package would actually put a huge dent in cable as that is mainly why a lot of people still have it. If ESPN was somehow available via another channel (PlayOn with ESPN3 live streaming for me), many more would be dropping cable. It might even be enough if like your example Fox Sports was offered.
ESPN could come up with their own "cable box" like a Roku type player and then really hurt cable, that or piggy back off things like Netflix or have an app for the ever growing number of net connected TV's/BR players.
The iPad succeeded by all accounts b/c it was a great piece of hardware (both aesthetically and functionally) coupled with a user friendly UI all at a reasonable price. No one has competed with that yet on all counts (though some have gotten 2 out of 3 with Android).
Should it become possible to 'pump' a cloud with some comparatively inexpensive apparatus(whether it be this laser widget or some other thing), reliable air currents flowing from regions of evaporation will become a new flavor of 'river', suddenly subject to rivalrous use, and the rivalries that stem from it. Happy times!
I believe it already is possible, at least partially (seems the jury is still out on effectiveness). Using lasers is just another way to do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding
Maybe you are in the minority. I am broke and millions of others are too and would be sweating bullets if I blew $100 so carelessly.
Billy Gates, did you give away all your money already?
Exactly, just like the SD cards when they came out. The original form of the SD card had sizes "up to" 32 GB. That was the theoretical at the time and under those standards at the time when 256MB up to 1GB was standard (back when new SD memory digital cameras came with cheapo 4MB cards in them). With the coming of other flavors of SD cards, I believe that went by the wayside but it was still a long time before anyone was seeing 32GB out of a SD card when initially introduced.
I don't doubt one day the avg consumer may in fact see a 2 TB flash drive, but given the cloud emergence and wireless data capabilities of many gadgets, I don't see that happening for a while.
While having a single in there posing as a bigger battery is a scam, many times the bigger batteries are just multiples of the smaller batteries (at least they appear to be and carry the same form factor, actual power may differ). See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3qPrlun45c&feature=related
HP should come out with a world class ultra lightweight laptop to compete with the MacBook Air, with a touch screen and very long battery life. They should come out with an innovative line of consumer and business PCs with touch screen monitors, tiny form factor similar to Mac Mini, remotely flashable, all the bells and whistles.
So instead of innovating, they should copy Apple. Got it. Seems other companies are in trouble for doing just that and getting trounced. They're not going to make any impact by continuing to play catch up with 2nd rate devices and services. Each of these big companies have a large budget for R&D, adding on obvious things is not the best use of those resources.
So what happens when you tap into this energy? Well, then the rubber would no longer make your foot bounce back. So you'd have to put more effort in your leg muscles to move your foot back up and forward. I imagine it would feel like walking on sand: easy to step into, but more effort to step out of.
Considering the linkage between geeks-that-would-use-these and obesity, I fail to see a problem here.
And it was submitted by an AC no less, so not even blank trusted they editors to push through. Timothy, do you check anything?
is this news?
It's more history than news, considering this article is from 2009 . But lately that time scale seems par for the course. /. quality is declining.
Hardly. Why does everyone that insists on using actual, falsifiable science suddenly become a denier or a "Big Oil, anti-science, right wing"? That the earth is currently in a warming trend is a fact that no one that knows the issues disputes on either side. How much is caused by humans? Are there any accurate models that predict the future (since none have been correct so far)? What, if anything, can we do about it anyway? Those are the questions for the scientific community, not this holy "the science is settled" and don't question it drivel.
Show me the computer model run from ten years ago that its creators published that accurately predicted the general climate of eight of the last ten years. If it existed the media would be trumpeting the 'conclusive evidence' of AGW even though the climate in the last ten years hasn't actually warmed all that much. But I'd agree it was significant because it would have demonstrated that climate modeling could predict the future with some skill and that we might want to look at what that model said about years 11-50 if it got 1-10 pretty accurate.
Small clarification though, if they were doing science, even if the model accurately predicted years 1-10, A) It doesn't show that it wasn't just luck and B) that it is able to model anything beyond those years.
Sure it would be a good starting point and a point of some possible evidence but would not be the end all evidence.
You mean like record high and low temperatures, freak storms, floods & droughts? Cause we got those now and we're still having to have this conversation.
When have we not had those?
No future plans. Not as much flair as Steve Jobs. Lame.