That's a cute idea, kid. I'm sure senior management at MSFT is going to realize that a handful of geeks opted against buying their products specifically because of their patent strategy, and consider changing it.
Or maybe you have no idea what you're talking about.
Well, studies demonstrate that pleasurable experiences become less pleasurable the more times they happen and the more frequently they happen (ex: you get sick of your favorite food if you eat it every day). That's the basis of the wife comment. I know guys who work long hours just for time away from their wives, but obviously the biology of human relationships is complex.
As for kids changing my perspective... Well, yeah. I've always known that babies make people insane. A normal, rational person, after having a child, all of a sudden no longer cares about herself at all, only about the kid. They think the welfare of that one kid is more important than anything else in the universe. They don't care about human rights, society as a whole, their own friends, or all the things they used to enjoy--only the little brat matters.
I recognized this while volunteering in a church nursery as a child. I vowed not to let kids turn me completely stupid. We'll see what happens. Maybe it is inevitable.
When you pay someone $9/year, it isn't even worth their time to email one of their lawyers.
The cold hard reality is that no smart business is going to risk expensive litigation over a $9 account. The only way this sort of thing can be stopped is by government regulation, unfortunately.
I'm single, and I like to spend my free time either learning (to further my career and income) or at bars flirting with the single girls out there.
So, in my case, "fix it up, sell it after living..." is actually a HUGE opportunity cost. Fuck fixing shit! If you have a wife (who you have become inevitably sexually exhausted with--yeah i've studied human psychology) or worse, kids, then that may seem like a valuable use of your time. But for me, fixing and selling is significantly expensive time.
Once I have kids (as Darwin demands) my free time will be less valuable, and I'll probably buy something REASONABLE.
But I will still be much closer to (or past!) the $4M, than to the $2M (of the long-time big-home owner). [and I'll buzz his crappy little house with my helicopter:-) ]
Oh, and for now, my hedge fund is "move back in with mom+dad, apply for jobs in sunny California." Though, I seem quite qualified (well, it's just plain EASY) for my current job, so I don't see that happening. I may just move to CA anyway, if I get an offer of $10k more than I get in OH.
And if I move soon, mortgage fees shoot that potential 6% of real-estate return down to about 4%...
Yeah. And my landlord raised my rent 16% last year. But my stock market earnings (vs landowners expenses - oppertunity costs) still blow your land interest away.
1) I'm not your buddy. I have very few friends. 2) You beg the question (I used it correctly, you ignorant fucks!) of whether they tested it. I would be seriously surprised if they did no long-term tests of this tech on monkeys; yet, you assume they did none. Either you know much more about military contractors than me, or your you're a dumbass. [[incidentally, "dumbass" is not in the default firefox dictionary. YOU SUCK, Mozilla.org!]]
I don't deny that I'm an insensitive clod (as many of my failed dates will attest(but seriously, get a real job girls(and a real degree(damn, i'm drunk right now, and i work in the morning(count those perens, you lisp bitches(i'm going to die alone:-())))))), but ridiculing the severely-obese could, possibly, motivate the fatties to stop killing themselves, thus saving decades of their lives.
If your job doesn't afford you enough time to exercise (=1hr/night), QUIT because your life is worth more than an extra 20k/year!!!!!
No distractions or the like when you're on the john
No distractions? The disgusting stench of your severely-overweight coworkers digestive malfunctions isn't a distraction? Did you try to launch fireworks out of your nose as a child?
Governments can put a price on human life. For example, the average American will create about $1M in his lifetime. A third of that will go to the government in the form of taxes. So the price of a life (from a government perspective) is $333k.
Also, it is trivially easy to put a relative price on a human life. The geneticist who is developing technology to increase world food production by 20% is worth many times what the poor farmer who can barely feed his family is worth (to humanity as a whole).
If you quantify this "value to humanity" then you have numbers very much like dollar figures--the price of human life.
Here's another one: Suppose you are a charity that buys medical care for the poor. Your budget is $100k. You have one person who needs $100k heart surgery to live, and 10 people who need minor $10k surgeries to live. When you make the decision on who lives, you are putting a price on human life.
I can go on and on, but the point is, hearing "you can't put a price on human life" is a red flag that the speaker is thinking with his emotions, not with his mind; he should be discounted from the conversation.
What is so intellectual about learning foreign languages? It is a skill which will be almost completely useless as soon as computer translation matures.
Today, professional translators convert almost anything worth translating into English. If you want to learn something useful, your time is MUCH better spent learning about science or technology than memorizing the genders of all the nouns in French.
For the vast majority of native English speakers, foreign languages are really only of utility when going on vacation.
Yeah, if only there were human-like animals on which to test this device during the R&D phase? If such a thing existed, we could check if it causes permanent damage before subjecting it to the awful criticism of the internet nerds.
I realize I don't have the skill to beat the market picking stocks, or to time purchases. But the indexes? Anybody and his grandma can meet those thanks to index funds. With continuous buying, there is nothing to time.
I don't know how to do leveraged buying, either. But the mutual fund managers do, and they have been able to meet their goal (2X index fund performance) as long as they have been in business.
I do intend to buy property when it is socially convenient, only because property is a great hedge fund against the stock market (if I happen to need equity during a recession). But all the literature I've read has me convinced that primarily owning diversified stakes in business that actually make money (as opposed to something that just becomes scarce) is the most effective way to retire early and richly.
Well, the typical home purchasing decision these days is: "buy the biggest damn house with the biggest lot that will fit my monthly income."
I would argue that having empty rooms no one occupies does not really increase the standard of living. In fact, it decreases it because you have more to clean.
I mostly compare a comfortably-sized apartment to an oversize house, because that's what my friends have been buying. And this is in an area far enough from Mexico that we can't have our yard work done at slave-labor prices.
And I don't know for certain that buying a condo the same size as my apartment would be better. It would certainly be much closer, though. In a condo this size, I would pay less in maintenance than I do now in rent. But more of my money would be tied up in low-interest property instead of high interest securities. I would also be paying by sacrificing liquidity, and freedom from many responsibilities.
To add to that, I'm actually comparing to investments such as UDPSX, which uses leveraged investing to give returns closer to 18% than to 10% for something like the S&P. Put that number into the equation, and you almost certainly are better off renting--even with exactly identical properties.
And I do think of "quality of life" when my friends are taking off of work to wait for the appliance delivery guy, or cleaning mold out of their basements from a flood, or arguing with an insurance claims adjuster for a leaky pipe...
I have friends who spend about as much on maintenance (painting, mowing, sump pumps, insurance, dishwasher, etc.) as I pay in rent. This is NOT overly simplistic (unlike your contribution, which was simplistic way past being wrong). So they lose 100% of that money as I lose 100% of my rent. We are equal so far.
With the rest of the money:
Homeowner gets 6% on his equity vs. renter's 10% on the market. Renter wins.
Homeowner gets 6% on his borrowed amount, but ends up getting 0% after deducting his 6% mortgage interest. Renter has no borrowed amount. A wash.
Homeowner is required to pay into his equity, and gets 6% on that. With the same amount of money, a renter gets 10%. Renter wins by a lot.
The renter makes way more money in this scenario. And since compound interest is the most powerful force in the universe, the renter will one day laugh at the mortgage slave from his yacht.
If you don't think home maintenance can cost as much as renting, consider all these expenses renters don't have to pay:
insurance on flood, fire, tornado, etc.
HUGE gas and electric bills because most houses share no walls and have more rooms
payments and repairs on washer, dryer, dish washer, and other appliances included in rent for free
periodic painting, recarpeting, retiling,
yard maintenance
fixing plumbing and wiring failures
the list goes on.
After deducting maintenance vs. rent, suppose we each have $2k/month left over. In 30 years, homeowners would have about $2M, while stock investors would have $4.3M. BOOM! It's way better to rent.
One more thing: The risk of buying property is NOT less than that of buying stock. The volatility is less, sure. But not the risk (on a diversified portfolio over the long term).
Rent. I can move without much hassle, and when shit breaks, somebody else (who specializes in repair) fixes it. I also have much better landscaping than any of the homeowners I know.
And while the stock market appreciates on average 10%/year, the real estate market is only 6%/year. Equity in real estate is wasted money.
I've been trying to guess what type of information you think is being illegally collected but you don't want to mention on slashdot. The best guess I can come up with: Are you a registered sex offender?
Slashdot Mirror
If you need a loan to buy a car, you suck at finance.
Seriously. I have never seen anything on youtube that is well-synched. And much of the stuff on youtube can be SEVERAL SECONDS out of synch.
That's a cute idea, kid. I'm sure senior management at MSFT is going to realize that a handful of geeks opted against buying their products specifically because of their patent strategy, and consider changing it.
Or maybe you have no idea what you're talking about.
Brent is aware of this. It is still useful to know which networks have security so lax that they are regularly used as hacking proxies.
Yeah, like the aqueducts.
In other news, broad generalizations are always wrong.
9. Profit!
Well, studies demonstrate that pleasurable experiences become less pleasurable the more times they happen and the more frequently they happen (ex: you get sick of your favorite food if you eat it every day). That's the basis of the wife comment. I know guys who work long hours just for time away from their wives, but obviously the biology of human relationships is complex.
As for kids changing my perspective... Well, yeah. I've always known that babies make people insane. A normal, rational person, after having a child, all of a sudden no longer cares about herself at all, only about the kid. They think the welfare of that one kid is more important than anything else in the universe. They don't care about human rights, society as a whole, their own friends, or all the things they used to enjoy--only the little brat matters.
I recognized this while volunteering in a church nursery as a child. I vowed not to let kids turn me completely stupid. We'll see what happens. Maybe it is inevitable.
7. With a Passion: The way I hate your writing style.
GoDaddy isn't $10/month. It's $9/year.
When you pay someone $9/year, it isn't even worth their time to email one of their lawyers.
The cold hard reality is that no smart business is going to risk expensive litigation over a $9 account. The only way this sort of thing can be stopped is by government regulation, unfortunately.
Thanks.
:-) ]
I'm single, and I like to spend my free time either learning (to further my career and income) or at bars flirting with the single girls out there.
So, in my case, "fix it up, sell it after living..." is actually a HUGE opportunity cost. Fuck fixing shit! If you have a wife (who you have become inevitably sexually exhausted with--yeah i've studied human psychology) or worse, kids, then that may seem like a valuable use of your time. But for me, fixing and selling is significantly expensive time.
Once I have kids (as Darwin demands) my free time will be less valuable, and I'll probably buy something REASONABLE.
But I will still be much closer to (or past!) the $4M, than to the $2M (of the long-time big-home owner). [and I'll buzz his crappy little house with my helicopter
Oh, and for now, my hedge fund is "move back in with mom+dad, apply for jobs in sunny California." Though, I seem quite qualified (well, it's just plain EASY) for my current job, so I don't see that happening. I may just move to CA anyway, if I get an offer of $10k more than I get in OH.
And if I move soon, mortgage fees shoot that potential 6% of real-estate return down to about 4%...
Yeah. And my landlord raised my rent 16% last year. But my stock market earnings (vs landowners expenses - oppertunity costs) still blow your land interest away.
You lose.
1) I'm not your buddy. I have very few friends.
2) You beg the question (I used it correctly, you ignorant fucks!) of whether they tested it. I would be seriously surprised if they did no long-term tests of this tech on monkeys; yet, you assume they did none. Either you know much more about military contractors than me, or your you're a dumbass. [[incidentally, "dumbass" is not in the default firefox dictionary. YOU SUCK, Mozilla.org!]]
I don't deny that I'm an insensitive clod (as many of my failed dates will attest(but seriously, get a real job girls(and a real degree(damn, i'm drunk right now, and i work in the morning(count those perens, you lisp bitches(i'm going to die alone :-())))))), but ridiculing the severely-obese could, possibly, motivate the fatties to stop killing themselves, thus saving decades of their lives.
If your job doesn't afford you enough time to exercise (=1hr/night), QUIT because your life is worth more than an extra 20k/year!!!!!
Heh. You got me there. A 5% discount is certainly worth hundreds of hours work at rote memorization :-)
Governments can put a price on human life. For example, the average American will create about $1M in his lifetime. A third of that will go to the government in the form of taxes. So the price of a life (from a government perspective) is $333k.
Also, it is trivially easy to put a relative price on a human life. The geneticist who is developing technology to increase world food production by 20% is worth many times what the poor farmer who can barely feed his family is worth (to humanity as a whole).
If you quantify this "value to humanity" then you have numbers very much like dollar figures--the price of human life.
Here's another one: Suppose you are a charity that buys medical care for the poor. Your budget is $100k. You have one person who needs $100k heart surgery to live, and 10 people who need minor $10k surgeries to live. When you make the decision on who lives, you are putting a price on human life.
I can go on and on, but the point is, hearing "you can't put a price on human life" is a red flag that the speaker is thinking with his emotions, not with his mind; he should be discounted from the conversation.
What is so intellectual about learning foreign languages? It is a skill which will be almost completely useless as soon as computer translation matures.
Today, professional translators convert almost anything worth translating into English. If you want to learn something useful, your time is MUCH better spent learning about science or technology than memorizing the genders of all the nouns in French.
For the vast majority of native English speakers, foreign languages are really only of utility when going on vacation.
Yeah, if only there were human-like animals on which to test this device during the R&D phase? If such a thing existed, we could check if it causes permanent damage before subjecting it to the awful criticism of the internet nerds.
It's too bad.
If you rent from rental companies instead of individuals, you tend not to have those problems.
Where I live, I don't even have to change a lightbulb. I live in a huge luxury apartment complex will several full-time staff.
It is a bit simple (well, dumb) to generalize about all landlords from a few bad experiences.
I am jealous of your (relatively) good luck.
I realize I don't have the skill to beat the market picking stocks, or to time purchases. But the indexes? Anybody and his grandma can meet those thanks to index funds. With continuous buying, there is nothing to time.
I don't know how to do leveraged buying, either. But the mutual fund managers do, and they have been able to meet their goal (2X index fund performance) as long as they have been in business.
I do intend to buy property when it is socially convenient, only because property is a great hedge fund against the stock market (if I happen to need equity during a recession). But all the literature I've read has me convinced that primarily owning diversified stakes in business that actually make money (as opposed to something that just becomes scarce) is the most effective way to retire early and richly.
Anyway, thank you for your perspective.
Well, the typical home purchasing decision these days is: "buy the biggest damn house with the biggest lot that will fit my monthly income."
I would argue that having empty rooms no one occupies does not really increase the standard of living. In fact, it decreases it because you have more to clean.
I mostly compare a comfortably-sized apartment to an oversize house, because that's what my friends have been buying. And this is in an area far enough from Mexico that we can't have our yard work done at slave-labor prices.
And I don't know for certain that buying a condo the same size as my apartment would be better. It would certainly be much closer, though. In a condo this size, I would pay less in maintenance than I do now in rent. But more of my money would be tied up in low-interest property instead of high interest securities. I would also be paying by sacrificing liquidity, and freedom from many responsibilities.
To add to that, I'm actually comparing to investments such as UDPSX, which uses leveraged investing to give returns closer to 18% than to 10% for something like the S&P. Put that number into the equation, and you almost certainly are better off renting--even with exactly identical properties.
And I do think of "quality of life" when my friends are taking off of work to wait for the appliance delivery guy, or cleaning mold out of their basements from a flood, or arguing with an insurance claims adjuster for a leaky pipe...
I have friends who spend about as much on maintenance (painting, mowing, sump pumps, insurance, dishwasher, etc.) as I pay in rent. This is NOT overly simplistic (unlike your contribution, which was simplistic way past being wrong). So they lose 100% of that money as I lose 100% of my rent. We are equal so far.
With the rest of the money:
The renter makes way more money in this scenario. And since compound interest is the most powerful force in the universe, the renter will one day laugh at the mortgage slave from his yacht.
If you don't think home maintenance can cost as much as renting, consider all these expenses renters don't have to pay:
After deducting maintenance vs. rent, suppose we each have $2k/month left over. In 30 years, homeowners would have about $2M, while stock investors would have $4.3M. BOOM! It's way better to rent.
One more thing: The risk of buying property is NOT less than that of buying stock. The volatility is less, sure. But not the risk (on a diversified portfolio over the long term).
Rent. I can move without much hassle, and when shit breaks, somebody else (who specializes in repair) fixes it. I also have much better landscaping than any of the homeowners I know.
And while the stock market appreciates on average 10%/year, the real estate market is only 6%/year. Equity in real estate is wasted money.
Rent.
Happy people don't start revolutions. This is not an American trait. It is a human trait.
I've been trying to guess what type of information you think is being illegally collected but you don't want to mention on slashdot. The best guess I can come up with: Are you a registered sex offender?