Really?? What exactly is 'behind'?? Phones?? No one has a land line anymore, of course there is no reason to improve it. DSL?? Requires too many costly substations. Cable?? US was one of the first to install in many locations because people here had money and time to spend on entertainment. Now it costs more money to upgrade the technology. And there are a LOT of lines to upgrade. OK.. I don't have fiber. But I can still stream NetFlix and get acceptable speed on everything I do. Just because it's not as fast as it could be doesn't mean it's not 'good enough'.
And really.. WTF?? Anyone can search google and do most web browsing just fine with a 3Mb/s line. OK ..they can't get video. Tough shit. I'm not willing to subsidize their internet access so they can watch Jersey Shore on their PC. YouTube videos are mostly crap. TED is elitist/visionary crap.
If it was that important to these folks, they could band together and get service. But.. they would have to pay for it. I know of places in Tempe, AZ where cable isn't present, but people can get DSL. Cable isn't there because it used to be mostly business, and the cable company didn't think it was necessary to run lines. Now that it has some residents in it, they are all up-in-arms about no cable. But Cox cable has told them that if they are willing to pay thousands of dollars, they will run the cables. Otherwise, use DSL and DirectTV. Now that sounds like competition to me....
Just more socialist propaganda. They spout all the 'good' that could come of it, but the reality is most people use their internet service to use facebook, post opinions on things that very few will read (like Slashdot) and other meaningless drivel. Many libraries now have free Internet, so kids can get access to do research if they need to. And 3Mb/s is more than enough to do research.
So really.. WTF? Give me just one reason why millions should have their taxes or cable bills increased so a few can have better service.
You forgot hospitals and doctors. Why should a three day/two night stay in a US hospital be billed at $42K, even though the insurance only has to pay $12K (actual values from my bills). I could get a luxury room in a hotel and a 24x7 private nurse for $42K. And probably have enough left over for the ambulance ride once or twice a day for the tests they ran.
And how about specialists making $500K or more a year?
Seems like there are plenty of places to reduce costs. If only there was some type of system so that people could get estimates for services to be rendered, shop around and compare costs, and find the place that suits them best?? Just like we do for cars???
Here is an example of what is wrong. My son got hurt and didn't have any money, so he called a hospital to find out what it would cost to xray his ankle to see if it was broken. Because he knew if it was just sprained, there was very little anyone could do other than tell him to 'stay off it'. They hospital refused to quote a price, because there was no way they knew how much it could cost because they didn't know what was wrong. In other words, if all he wanted to get was an xray and have a doctor tell him if the ankle was broken, they wouldn't do it. So he told them 'never mind.. I'll try somewhere else'. The next day, he got a call back. They had arranged to have the exact service he wanted at a price he could afford as long as he was willing to accept the that the treatment was purely diagnostic in nature, and that no other services would be rendered. (As he thought, his ankle was just sprained and there was nothing they could have done for it anyway.)
Second example: I have glaucoma and get pressure checks ever 4-6 months. I asked the doctor why his tech did a check, then he did. He said she did a screening check, while his was more accurate. I said that didn't make sense, if he always did it, why bother with the screening? His reply.. don't worry, your insurance covers it. When I explained that I had a high deductible plan and I had to pay for it, the screening stopped. I wonder how many tests are done 'because insurance covers it'.
Funny how competition and questions can force hospitals to do what we want in the price range we want. Too bad all politicians want to do is demonize the one force that is actually helping to keep costs down by forcing hospitals to reduce their prices (i.e. insurance companies) instead of tackling the larger industry that is the problem.
During the telegraph/telephone era, people were afraid the poles were going to fall down and kill people. By your logic we should have set back the deployment of telephones simply because people were afraid.
What a moron. "Don't allow any scientific breakthrough unless it has been proven for 50 years to be safe" is more about you being ignorant and afraid than protecting others.
So do you want a label on all apples 'contains cyanide'?? How about organic celery that contains celery psoralen?? (Had to be taken off the market in the 80s because the levels were so high as to be hazardous.) How about a label on lettuce that it might contain listeria? How about one on organic foods that states 'nutritional superiority claims are unsubstantiated and any difference in nutritional value is related to the the area that they are grown rather than the method'.
But.. to be fair, it was recently noted that it was traditional methods of cross breeding that sapped all of the flavor out of tomatoes. Seems that even the more traditional methods have issues. Maybe we should put that label on tomatoes.. 'Warning: decades of making this red have removed all flavor'
I'll agree it isn't against science. It's about a small group of people who want to introduce fear into the population. Those that don't want GMO can always buy organic, there seems to be plenty of it around. They can also raise their own. So this isn't about their rights.
Instead, they want to scare the vast majority of people who don't really give a crap into thinking that the food they are eating is bad for them, when there is very little science behind it their claims. Just the FUD the eco-nuts want to spread for their own self-serving benefits.
So you are saying that if someone steals a car and gives it to me, and I drive it knowing it's stolen, I haven't broken any laws??? Seems that similar to what Assange did.. he knowingly received information that was stolen, and then published that information.
I have no sympathy for someone who is willing to attack others and then whines and moans when he becomes the object of attacks. He isn't a whistle blower as much as he is an attention whore. He is just as bad as Anonymous, a coward who hides behind others pushing his own personal agenda because of an overblown ego and overdeveloped sense that he, and only he, knows what is right.
Baby wasn't a good term to use. Spoiled brat is more appropriate.
US will stop this one witch hunt when Assange and Wikileaks stops all of theirs. Or stops breaking laws.
Oh wait... if he stops breaking laws, then the witch hunts will stop on both sides. Seems Assange has control of what happens and his decisions in the past have led to the current situation.
What a freakin' baby.....it's always somebody's fault other than his. He was probably the kind of kid that poked a wasp nest with a stick, and then blamed the wasp when he got stung.
It's terrifying to people who don't trade. I trade about 5-10 times a month and once you get used to it, you can spot these behaviors and adapt to them. I don't have enough money to be a day trader and the transaction fees will kill you if you aren't doing very large trades. Yet I still am able to play on the volatility of stocks and make money. I'll never get rich doing it, but I continue to outperform just about any other investment on a regular basis and recovered from the crash a couple of years ago. Without any analytics engine, just my own intuition and research. People who do HFT have to do extremely large amounts in order to recover the trading fees.
Trading has never been about balance sheets, it's always been about outguessing what the other guy is going to do. Thinking otherwise is naive. In every trade, there is a guy who thinks the stock is going to up more, and another who either thinks it's going to go down or he has a better place to invest. The only people who only use balance sheets and company reports are newbies. I stopped using them 3 or 4 years ago when I realized they were useless. Today's newspaper is far more valuable.
Yawn. Most smart people are pretty well diversified, so any single dump of a stock isn't really going to affect them. Dumps in stable companies like Apple rarely last long, look how fast it recovered from the panic around it's earnings. A few months ago Ruger took a huge dump, and then recovered. This story plays out over and over again. Right now, a great method to make money is to play off of other people's panic, or unrealistic expectations. Ride the rise and sell before reality hits, buy on the downside when the same people panic sell. It has nothing to do with profit or loss, just trying to figure out what other people will do. It's all about human behavior. And always has been.
Yawn. nothing really pertinent here. Soothsayers and naysayers that want attention. Trading programs need constant attention because of human behavior and trying to stay one step ahead. It's probably not sustainable in the long run, too much overhead to come up with new rules ahead of the next guy.
If I had touched my dad's guns, he would have killed me. I guess I was raised to leave things alone that weren't mine.
BTW -- my dad was a police officer for 25 years. Had more than one gun in the house. I knew where they all were. But I wasn't allowed to go into their room.
The real tragedy is that more and more parents want to be their kid's friend instead of their parent and don't know how to raise them
It's an ADULT toy you moron. I suppose we should also ban all guns from homes because a few poor excuses for parents let their kids play with those too. Or cars because a few kids found the keys and went for joy rides.
I have no clue?? My wife and I raised two kids. Two kids who were taught at an early age to not put things in their mouth. We didn't have to go through and 'child proof' our house, because our kids were 'raised', and not allowed the run of the house. They were watched, we didn't sit in front of the boob tube watching soaps while they did whatever they wanted to do. We did this thing called 'interaction' where we watched the same insipid shows they did, or went outside and played with them when they were very young and not old enough to be left alone. They learned early on to not get into things they weren't supposed to.
My daughter once called me to come and get her from a birthday party because they were watching an 'inappropriate' movie. I forget what it was, but she knew that she was not allowed to watch it. Maybe your parents didn't teach you moral values, but we did.
Now she is getting her degree in molecular biology, splicing DNA, and contributing to the betterment of society. She is married and owns a home at 24 years of age. All without student loans also. Sounds like she is a lot smarter than a bunch of people on this site.
My son didn't like the 'establishment' route, but is equally smart and moral. He is a musician and tours the country and doesn't live off the state. He has taken apprenticeships and can build and repair violins and boats and is a pretty damn good carpenter. And has a ton of common sense and knows right from wrong.
I did do something, I raised my kids to be independent. I let them discover who they wanted to be encouraged id, and taught them good values. I let them make mistakes, but only ones they could learn lessons from and grow from. I didn't hover over them and act like I was protecting them by simply removing everything dangerous from the house. In reality, parents that do this are just to fucking lazy to watch them.
You are the one with no clue. You believe the BS the world tosses your way about raising kids. Your kids will probably also grow up dependent upon their parents, with asthma and a dozen allergies and no sense because you won't raise them.
You will put them in a cocoon from which they will one day never want to leave because they aren't prepared for the world. You, and others like you, are what creates the moronic Occupy movement and Anonymous.. people who think they deserve everything and have the right to press their opinions on everyone else. Because they were raised to think they are the center of the universe, and everyone needs to take care of them.
I hear more and more of this garbage from young kids. 'I don't want this kind of job'. Well.. tough. Go out and try to find something magical and important and ethical and 'make a difference' type of job. Then, when the majority of you fail, find a real job that pays the bills like 95% of us do. Surprising, the older you get and the more experience you gain, the easier it is to find your magical job. I'm not saying don't try, but at some point people just have to suck it up and face facts that only a very small percentage of lucky people get those jobs.
I've been sitting behind a desk for 30 years. I get to get up and move around all I want. I get to talk with people. I get to interact. Sure, I've had some projects that drove me insane because I thought they were boring or useless. Then one day it hit me.. I'm getting paid gobs of money to do whatever my boss wants. What do I care if he is wasting my time, I still get paid.
I was once loaned out to another company for a month. My company got $150/hour for my work, which was more than I was getting paid. When I got to the new company, I discovered all they wanted me to do was take meeting minutes. Yep.. that was it. So I did. Of course, I can't keep my mouth shut and did offer a few suggestions during the meetings. Which prompted the boss lady to ask me for a copy of my resume. She asked me if I wasn't a bit overqualified to do this work. And I told her that it didn't matter, if her company was willing to pay my company $150/hour for me to take minutes, they were going to be the best god damned meeting minutes they ever had. And they were... because I knew how to spell SQL! Now, I could have sat there all down in the dumps because it was beneath me. Instead, I did the best job I could knowing that in 4 weeks it would all be over. The end result.. they offered me a 'real' job at a higher salary than I was making (which I turned down because it was too far to drive.)
Your job is whatever you make of it. If you think it's boring and depressing... SURPRISE!!!! It is. But I have yet to have a boring and depressing job because I always strive to do the best I can no matter what the circumstances. And if a job is somewhat less challenging that I had hoped, I find ways to make it more challenging. Or leave.
I've talked with other long-time IT people and seen the same thing over and over.. those that were in 'bad jobs' were always in 'bad jobs', no matter where they worked. Others made the best of it and took control of whatever they did the best they could and to excel. They had the occasional bad job, but put it behind them, learned, and moved on when they could.
Find a job that meets your needs, you can always quit and find another one. Then find ways to make it work. I've never said no to a job unless I already had one because it's easier to get a job if you have a job.
I was thinking the very same thing. How sad that Apple continues to want to keep an iron fist over their product instead of admitting others may have better ideas. Of course, they didn't really 'invent' anything other than a style. Everything they have done has only incorporated incremental improvements over existing tech. I have yet to see anything truly innovative come out of Apple, other than innovative ways to convince people they have a product worthty the Apple tax and lack of options.
It's also because, for developers, it means not having to deal with Google's open, flexible approach in Android to everything the Apple controls with an iron fist in iOS (especially when it comes to the App Store vs. the Android Marketplace).
1. Didn't even notice until I saw it in the news 2. My bill for DirectTV is $64/mo. When I had cable (Phoenix, AZ), it was $120/mo for cable and internet. Now it's $60/mo for upgraded internet. So for the same amount, I got more/better choices, more HD channels, fewer outages, and no increases for several years.
I really didn't care about any of the Viacom channels. I rarely watch Comedy Central, MTV and VH1 are a waste, don't have kids, and the only CMT show I watched was Redneck Island. Funny show, but not funny enough that I cared I couldn't watch it anymore.
I watch maybe 1-2 hours of TV a day, sometimes 3. And an hour of that is reruns of Big Bang Theory. If nothing is on I want to watch, I go play Diablo III. Or, heaven forbid, go outside and do yard work. Some nights I just sit outside with my wife on the patio and... talk. It's a lot more interesting than TV most of the time, sometimes between her liberal leanings and my libertarian leanings we do get into some great discussions.
If DirectTV, Cox Cable and Dish all went out of business tomorrow.. I really wouldn't care.
And what makes anyone think rates would significantly change if it went ala-carte??? I would be surprised if most people don't watch more than a few channels. If most only want 10 channels, then the cost for 10 channels will be the same as it is for 200 now. Except they will need a new receiver with the ability to block channels they don't want since the satellites don't do the blocking.
Ala-carte cable down to the station level will not result in significantly lower rates, since people won't change their viewing habits much. Or.. it might result in popular channels costing more because the demand his higher, meaning those that are mainstream might actually see an increase. Or it might result in less popular channels costing more to justify keeping them.
The end result is DirectTV has to pay transmission facilities which really aren't based on how many people are watching and what channels, it's based on how many and the quality of the channels. DirectTV pays for rebroadcast rights based on the number of subscribers, so not only does DirectTV have to change their pricing model, so would ViaCom and every other provider. At least for those items that are to be ala-carte.
I do think ala-carte is a good idea, just not at the channel level. What if DirectTV provides ala-carte at the provider level like they do now for HBO and the other premium channels?? In other words, provide the ala-carte choices closer to what the contractual providers are. Now, when ViaCom and DirectTV can't come to an agreement, the charge for ViaCom comes off my bill. I'd support that level of choice.
Change DirectTV to a model similar to the electric bill. A flat fee just for having the wire connected, and maybe a few very basic choices. Then give me each provider, or maybe even multiple options within providers.
But I doubt if it would make too much of an impact on the bill. If adding HBO only costs $15/month, I can't imagine dropping the crap Viacom provides would be worth more than a couple of bucks.
I buy products based on price and usability, not 'cool'. Unlike all the iDrones out there that rush out when the newest and 'coolest' item shows up. Sure, they spend more and keep Apple in business.
Meanwhile, Samsung (and other Android devices) continues to grow their user base creating several different devices that just work. Between the wife and I we have Samsung SII, a Samsung Note, and a Samsung tablet. All have worked great and provided us more choices than 'black or white' or 'how much non-upgradable memory do you want with that'.
In fact, my daughter just switched to an HTC android phone after having an Apple phone for years, and likes it better.
Keep your 'cool', it might attract a few customers that can afford it. I'll take basic usability for a lower overall cost.
All languages come with compromises, and it's still a matter of selecting the one that gets a particular task done in an optimal manner given all the parameters of getting the specific task done with whatever compromises are allowed, the skills available, using the program, and maintaining it going forward.
And that's not something to be settled by a popularity contest.
That's right... animated icons are so fresh and distinctive. Only a genius would have thought that animating and making buttons bigger and taking up more room so you can have fewer icons on a screen would be a such a great idea. Who in their right mind would prefer to have several easily accessible icons available that are static and use a notification area for alerts over fewer, larger icons.
I didn't realize making something less useful was fresh. and distinctive. I just thought it was stupid.
Yawn... no story here. Nothing other than vague insinuations without any substantiations. I suppose people like to get worked up over stuff like this to bring other people down a notch or two. At least in their simple minds.
When there is some real proof, let us know. 'Cuz I can see a different viewpoint...
Doctor: Nice place you have here Steve
Steve:Thanks
Doctor: If you ever decide to get rid of it, let me know. I might be interested in it.
Steve: You know doc, you've been real good to me. Tell you what, I'll sell it to you for a song to show my appreciation. It's a tough market out there now, and it would be nice to get rid of it.
Doctor: Wow.. what a great guy you are. Thanks
I find it interesting that people who always look for the bad in people always seem to find it. Must be a tough life, going around seeing the evil in every little thing while the beauty around you goes unnoticed.
You are absolutely right, you don't have to carry ID, and no one can ask you for it.
As long as you don't break the law, or are suspected of breaking the law.
Then, if you don't have any ID, you are royally screwed. Even before this law. If you can't prove who you are, no matter if you are white, black, brown, yellow, red, or any other skin color, you get a little ride in a police care back to the station to figure out who you are and to see if there are any other outstanding warrants against you. It's ALWAYS been this way.
And nothing has really changed. If you are pulled over because you are speeding, don't have car registration or driver's license, and they can't find you in the computer, you aren't going anywhere anyway.
What a bunch of whiny babies. I lost my wallet a couple of weeks ago. Fortunately, I had a scanned copy of my driver's license on my computer, printed it out, and kept it with me in the car. Just in case I got pulled over for speeding or got into a crash or something.
I have no sympathy for someone not willing to do a simple thing to keep from getting into even more trouble if they get into some trouble. They deserve all the hassle brought down on them in my opinion.
I expect them when they turn 18 to do what hundreds of other people have done in the same situation. Go back to their home country and follow the law.
The only excuse people for this can dredge up is "it's too hard". Well tough.. I prefer to accept as citizens people who are willing to do the right thing, even if it means leaving the country for a year or two instead of someone that is willing to live in the shadows and use false documents and lie to get a job.
... to then sue these idiots if they win and cause economic collapse, bringing all the things they feared to fruition because there will no longer be a profit in making anything and we can't get food to market because electric trucks run solely on wind and solar and hydro won't be around for decades?? Or that the taxes needed to make these things happen sooner will also ruin the economy because I won't be able to buy anything. Which means we won't need all of those power stations any longer since we will be living in adobe huts without air conditioning and walking because factories won't even be able to make bicycles. And we won't be able to even use horses because of the methane produced.
... an ergonomic keyboard and dual monitors, I'm fine with it. Good luck in getting that into a small form factor for a reasonable amount of money.
Until then, I'll stick with my desktop at work and a second at home (that I use to remote desktop into work with.) I really don't want to sit at the kitchen table or on the couch and work for long periods. For short periods and support while I'm on vacation, I use my Samsung tablet and Pocket Cloud software to connect to my desktop at work.
... it takes that long to figure out they don't have many skills. The good ones can always get jobs. I'm 53 and am in demand since I know many different programming languages and databases, understand network and phone systems, have significant operations experience (so I write code that if it has a problem actually tells someone what the problem and fails in a controlled manner instead of aborting). I am willing to tackle any task instead of shrugging and saying "I don't know how to do that". I know several people my age that are in similar situations.
We just got rid of a 40 year old programmer that was one of the worst I'd ever seen. Talked a great story, but when it came time to producing just couldn't do it. I would be amazed if this person will be able to continue in the IT profession, she doesn't have current skills, does everything she can to avoid having to learn them, and isn't honest about what she is capable of.
Slashdot Mirror
Really?? What exactly is 'behind'?? Phones?? No one has a land line anymore, of course there is no reason to improve it. DSL?? Requires too many costly substations. Cable?? US was one of the first to install in many locations because people here had money and time to spend on entertainment. Now it costs more money to upgrade the technology. And there are a LOT of lines to upgrade. OK .. I don't have fiber. But I can still stream NetFlix and get acceptable speed on everything I do. Just because it's not as fast as it could be doesn't mean it's not 'good enough'.
.. WTF?? Anyone can search google and do most web browsing just fine with a 3Mb/s line. OK . .they can't get video. Tough shit. I'm not willing to subsidize their internet access so they can watch Jersey Shore on their PC. YouTube videos are mostly crap. TED is elitist/visionary crap.
.. they would have to pay for it. I know of places in Tempe, AZ where cable isn't present, but people can get DSL. Cable isn't there because it used to be mostly business, and the cable company didn't think it was necessary to run lines. Now that it has some residents in it, they are all up-in-arms about no cable. But Cox cable has told them that if they are willing to pay thousands of dollars, they will run the cables. Otherwise, use DSL and DirectTV. Now that sounds like competition to me....
.. WTF? Give me just one reason why millions should have their taxes or cable bills increased so a few can have better service.
And really
If it was that important to these folks, they could band together and get service. But
Just more socialist propaganda. They spout all the 'good' that could come of it, but the reality is most people use their internet service to use facebook, post opinions on things that very few will read (like Slashdot) and other meaningless drivel. Many libraries now have free Internet, so kids can get access to do research if they need to. And 3Mb/s is more than enough to do research.
So really
You forgot hospitals and doctors. Why should a three day/two night stay in a US hospital be billed at $42K, even though the insurance only has to pay $12K (actual values from my bills). I could get a luxury room in a hotel and a 24x7 private nurse for $42K. And probably have enough left over for the ambulance ride once or twice a day for the tests they ran.
.. I'll try somewhere else'. The next day, he got a call back. They had arranged to have the exact service he wanted at a price he could afford as long as he was willing to accept the that the treatment was purely diagnostic in nature, and that no other services would be rendered. (As he thought, his ankle was just sprained and there was nothing they could have done for it anyway.)
.. don't worry, your insurance covers it. When I explained that I had a high deductible plan and I had to pay for it, the screening stopped. I wonder how many tests are done 'because insurance covers it'.
And how about specialists making $500K or more a year?
Seems like there are plenty of places to reduce costs. If only there was some type of system so that people could get estimates for services to be rendered, shop around and compare costs, and find the place that suits them best?? Just like we do for cars???
Here is an example of what is wrong. My son got hurt and didn't have any money, so he called a hospital to find out what it would cost to xray his ankle to see if it was broken. Because he knew if it was just sprained, there was very little anyone could do other than tell him to 'stay off it'. They hospital refused to quote a price, because there was no way they knew how much it could cost because they didn't know what was wrong. In other words, if all he wanted to get was an xray and have a doctor tell him if the ankle was broken, they wouldn't do it. So he told them 'never mind
Second example: I have glaucoma and get pressure checks ever 4-6 months. I asked the doctor why his tech did a check, then he did. He said she did a screening check, while his was more accurate. I said that didn't make sense, if he always did it, why bother with the screening? His reply
Funny how competition and questions can force hospitals to do what we want in the price range we want. Too bad all politicians want to do is demonize the one force that is actually helping to keep costs down by forcing hospitals to reduce their prices (i.e. insurance companies) instead of tackling the larger industry that is the problem.
During the telegraph/telephone era, people were afraid the poles were going to fall down and kill people. By your logic we should have set back the deployment of telephones simply because people were afraid.
What a moron. "Don't allow any scientific breakthrough unless it has been proven for 50 years to be safe" is more about you being ignorant and afraid than protecting others.
So do you want a label on all apples 'contains cyanide'?? How about organic celery that contains celery psoralen?? (Had to be taken off the market in the 80s because the levels were so high as to be hazardous.) How about a label on lettuce that it might contain listeria? How about one on organic foods that states 'nutritional superiority claims are unsubstantiated and any difference in nutritional value is related to the the area that they are grown rather than the method'.
.. to be fair, it was recently noted that it was traditional methods of cross breeding that sapped all of the flavor out of tomatoes. Seems that even the more traditional methods have issues. Maybe we should put that label on tomatoes .. 'Warning: decades of making this red have removed all flavor'
But
I'll agree it isn't against science. It's about a small group of people who want to introduce fear into the population. Those that don't want GMO can always buy organic, there seems to be plenty of it around. They can also raise their own. So this isn't about their rights.
Instead, they want to scare the vast majority of people who don't really give a crap into thinking that the food they are eating is bad for them, when there is very little science behind it their claims. Just the FUD the eco-nuts want to spread for their own self-serving benefits.
So you are saying that if someone steals a car and gives it to me, and I drive it knowing it's stolen, I haven't broken any laws??? Seems that similar to what Assange did .. he knowingly received information that was stolen, and then published that information.
I have no sympathy for someone who is willing to attack others and then whines and moans when he becomes the object of attacks. He isn't a whistle blower as much as he is an attention whore. He is just as bad as Anonymous, a coward who hides behind others pushing his own personal agenda because of an overblown ego and overdeveloped sense that he, and only he, knows what is right.
Baby wasn't a good term to use. Spoiled brat is more appropriate.
US will stop this one witch hunt when Assange and Wikileaks stops all of theirs. Or stops breaking laws.
... if he stops breaking laws, then the witch hunts will stop on both sides. Seems Assange has control of what happens and his decisions in the past have led to the current situation.
Oh wait
What a freakin' baby.....it's always somebody's fault other than his. He was probably the kind of kid that poked a wasp nest with a stick, and then blamed the wasp when he got stung.
It's terrifying to people who don't trade. I trade about 5-10 times a month and once you get used to it, you can spot these behaviors and adapt to them. I don't have enough money to be a day trader and the transaction fees will kill you if you aren't doing very large trades. Yet I still am able to play on the volatility of stocks and make money. I'll never get rich doing it, but I continue to outperform just about any other investment on a regular basis and recovered from the crash a couple of years ago. Without any analytics engine, just my own intuition and research. People who do HFT have to do extremely large amounts in order to recover the trading fees.
Trading has never been about balance sheets, it's always been about outguessing what the other guy is going to do. Thinking otherwise is naive. In every trade, there is a guy who thinks the stock is going to up more, and another who either thinks it's going to go down or he has a better place to invest. The only people who only use balance sheets and company reports are newbies. I stopped using them 3 or 4 years ago when I realized they were useless. Today's newspaper is far more valuable.
Yawn. Most smart people are pretty well diversified, so any single dump of a stock isn't really going to affect them. Dumps in stable companies like Apple rarely last long, look how fast it recovered from the panic around it's earnings. A few months ago Ruger took a huge dump, and then recovered. This story plays out over and over again. Right now, a great method to make money is to play off of other people's panic, or unrealistic expectations. Ride the rise and sell before reality hits, buy on the downside when the same people panic sell. It has nothing to do with profit or loss, just trying to figure out what other people will do. It's all about human behavior. And always has been.
Yawn. nothing really pertinent here. Soothsayers and naysayers that want attention. Trading programs need constant attention because of human behavior and trying to stay one step ahead. It's probably not sustainable in the long run, too much overhead to come up with new rules ahead of the next guy.
If I had touched my dad's guns, he would have killed me. I guess I was raised to leave things alone that weren't mine.
BTW -- my dad was a police officer for 25 years. Had more than one gun in the house. I knew where they all were. But I wasn't allowed to go into their room.
The real tragedy is that more and more parents want to be their kid's friend instead of their parent and don't know how to raise them
It's an ADULT toy you moron. I suppose we should also ban all guns from homes because a few poor excuses for parents let their kids play with those too. Or cars because a few kids found the keys and went for joy rides.
.. people who think they deserve everything and have the right to press their opinions on everyone else. Because they were raised to think they are the center of the universe, and everyone needs to take care of them.
I have no clue?? My wife and I raised two kids. Two kids who were taught at an early age to not put things in their mouth. We didn't have to go through and 'child proof' our house, because our kids were 'raised', and not allowed the run of the house. They were watched, we didn't sit in front of the boob tube watching soaps while they did whatever they wanted to do. We did this thing called 'interaction' where we watched the same insipid shows they did, or went outside and played with them when they were very young and not old enough to be left alone. They learned early on to not get into things they weren't supposed to.
My daughter once called me to come and get her from a birthday party because they were watching an 'inappropriate' movie. I forget what it was, but she knew that she was not allowed to watch it. Maybe your parents didn't teach you moral values, but we did.
Now she is getting her degree in molecular biology, splicing DNA, and contributing to the betterment of society. She is married and owns a home at 24 years of age. All without student loans also. Sounds like she is a lot smarter than a bunch of people on this site.
My son didn't like the 'establishment' route, but is equally smart and moral. He is a musician and tours the country and doesn't live off the state. He has taken apprenticeships and can build and repair violins and boats and is a pretty damn good carpenter. And has a ton of common sense and knows right from wrong.
I did do something, I raised my kids to be independent. I let them discover who they wanted to be encouraged id, and taught them good values. I let them make mistakes, but only ones they could learn lessons from and grow from. I didn't hover over them and act like I was protecting them by simply removing everything dangerous from the house. In reality, parents that do this are just to fucking lazy to watch them.
You are the one with no clue. You believe the BS the world tosses your way about raising kids. Your kids will probably also grow up dependent upon their parents, with asthma and a dozen allergies and no sense because you won't raise them.
You will put them in a cocoon from which they will one day never want to leave because they aren't prepared for the world. You, and others like you, are what creates the moronic Occupy movement and Anonymous
I hear more and more of this garbage from young kids. 'I don't want this kind of job'. Well .. tough. Go out and try to find something magical and important and ethical and 'make a difference' type of job. Then, when the majority of you fail, find a real job that pays the bills like 95% of us do. Surprising, the older you get and the more experience you gain, the easier it is to find your magical job. I'm not saying don't try, but at some point people just have to suck it up and face facts that only a very small percentage of lucky people get those jobs.
.. I'm getting paid gobs of money to do whatever my boss wants. What do I care if he is wasting my time, I still get paid.
.. that was it. So I did. Of course, I can't keep my mouth shut and did offer a few suggestions during the meetings. Which prompted the boss lady to ask me for a copy of my resume. She asked me if I wasn't a bit overqualified to do this work. And I told her that it didn't matter, if her company was willing to pay my company $150/hour for me to take minutes, they were going to be the best god damned meeting minutes they ever had. And they were ... because I knew how to spell SQL! Now, I could have sat there all down in the dumps because it was beneath me. Instead, I did the best job I could knowing that in 4 weeks it would all be over. The end result .. they offered me a 'real' job at a higher salary than I was making (which I turned down because it was too far to drive.)
... SURPRISE!!!! It is. But I have yet to have a boring and depressing job because I always strive to do the best I can no matter what the circumstances. And if a job is somewhat less challenging that I had hoped, I find ways to make it more challenging. Or leave.
.. those that were in 'bad jobs' were always in 'bad jobs', no matter where they worked. Others made the best of it and took control of whatever they did the best they could and to excel. They had the occasional bad job, but put it behind them, learned, and moved on when they could.
I've been sitting behind a desk for 30 years. I get to get up and move around all I want. I get to talk with people. I get to interact. Sure, I've had some projects that drove me insane because I thought they were boring or useless. Then one day it hit me
I was once loaned out to another company for a month. My company got $150/hour for my work, which was more than I was getting paid. When I got to the new company, I discovered all they wanted me to do was take meeting minutes. Yep
Your job is whatever you make of it. If you think it's boring and depressing
I've talked with other long-time IT people and seen the same thing over and over
Find a job that meets your needs, you can always quit and find another one. Then find ways to make it work. I've never said no to a job unless I already had one because it's easier to get a job if you have a job.
And why is it my problem that some other parent can't keep an eye on their kids??
Freakin' moronic parents....Think Geek has already pulled them from their site.
I was thinking the very same thing. How sad that Apple continues to want to keep an iron fist over their product instead of admitting others may have better ideas. Of course, they didn't really 'invent' anything other than a style. Everything they have done has only incorporated incremental improvements over existing tech. I have yet to see anything truly innovative come out of Apple, other than innovative ways to convince people they have a product worthty the Apple tax and lack of options.
It's also because, for developers, it means not having to deal with Google's open, flexible approach in Android to everything the Apple controls with an iron fist in iOS (especially when it comes to the App Store vs. the Android Marketplace).
There .. fixed that for you.
1. Didn't even notice until I saw it in the news 2. My bill for DirectTV is $64/mo. When I had cable (Phoenix, AZ), it was $120/mo for cable and internet. Now it's $60/mo for upgraded internet. So for the same amount, I got more/better choices, more HD channels, fewer outages, and no increases for several years.
... talk. It's a lot more interesting than TV most of the time, sometimes between her liberal leanings and my libertarian leanings we do get into some great discussions.
.. I really wouldn't care.
I really didn't care about any of the Viacom channels. I rarely watch Comedy Central, MTV and VH1 are a waste, don't have kids, and the only CMT show I watched was Redneck Island. Funny show, but not funny enough that I cared I couldn't watch it anymore.
I watch maybe 1-2 hours of TV a day, sometimes 3. And an hour of that is reruns of Big Bang Theory. If nothing is on I want to watch, I go play Diablo III. Or, heaven forbid, go outside and do yard work. Some nights I just sit outside with my wife on the patio and
If DirectTV, Cox Cable and Dish all went out of business tomorrow
People always change the laws for themselves
Here, fixed for you.
And what makes anyone think rates would significantly change if it went ala-carte??? I would be surprised if most people don't watch more than a few channels. If most only want 10 channels, then the cost for 10 channels will be the same as it is for 200 now. Except they will need a new receiver with the ability to block channels they don't want since the satellites don't do the blocking.
.. it might result in popular channels costing more because the demand his higher, meaning those that are mainstream might actually see an increase. Or it might result in less popular channels costing more to justify keeping them.
Ala-carte cable down to the station level will not result in significantly lower rates, since people won't change their viewing habits much. Or
The end result is DirectTV has to pay transmission facilities which really aren't based on how many people are watching and what channels, it's based on how many and the quality of the channels. DirectTV pays for rebroadcast rights based on the number of subscribers, so not only does DirectTV have to change their pricing model, so would ViaCom and every other provider. At least for those items that are to be ala-carte.
I do think ala-carte is a good idea, just not at the channel level. What if DirectTV provides ala-carte at the provider level like they do now for HBO and the other premium channels?? In other words, provide the ala-carte choices closer to what the contractual providers are. Now, when ViaCom and DirectTV can't come to an agreement, the charge for ViaCom comes off my bill. I'd support that level of choice.
Change DirectTV to a model similar to the electric bill. A flat fee just for having the wire connected, and maybe a few very basic choices. Then give me each provider, or maybe even multiple options within providers.
But I doubt if it would make too much of an impact on the bill. If adding HBO only costs $15/month, I can't imagine dropping the crap Viacom provides would be worth more than a couple of bucks.
I buy products based on price and usability, not 'cool'. Unlike all the iDrones out there that rush out when the newest and 'coolest' item shows up. Sure, they spend more and keep Apple in business.
Meanwhile, Samsung (and other Android devices) continues to grow their user base creating several different devices that just work. Between the wife and I we have Samsung SII, a Samsung Note, and a Samsung tablet. All have worked great and provided us more choices than 'black or white' or 'how much non-upgradable memory do you want with that'.
In fact, my daughter just switched to an HTC android phone after having an Apple phone for years, and likes it better.
Keep your 'cool', it might attract a few customers that can afford it. I'll take basic usability for a lower overall cost.
All languages come with compromises, and it's still a matter of selecting the one that gets a particular task done in an optimal manner given all the parameters of getting the specific task done with whatever compromises are allowed, the skills available, using the program, and maintaining it going forward.
And that's not something to be settled by a popularity contest.
That's right ... animated icons are so fresh and distinctive. Only a genius would have thought that animating and making buttons bigger and taking up more room so you can have fewer icons on a screen would be a such a great idea. Who in their right mind would prefer to have several easily accessible icons available that are static and use a notification area for alerts over fewer, larger icons.
I didn't realize making something less useful was fresh. and distinctive. I just thought it was stupid.
Yawn ... no story here. Nothing other than vague insinuations without any substantiations. I suppose people like to get worked up over stuff like this to bring other people down a notch or two. At least in their simple minds.
.. what a great guy you are. Thanks
When there is some real proof, let us know. 'Cuz I can see a different viewpoint...
Doctor: Nice place you have here Steve
Steve:Thanks
Doctor: If you ever decide to get rid of it, let me know. I might be interested in it.
Steve: You know doc, you've been real good to me. Tell you what, I'll sell it to you for a song to show my appreciation. It's a tough market out there now, and it would be nice to get rid of it.
Doctor: Wow
I find it interesting that people who always look for the bad in people always seem to find it. Must be a tough life, going around seeing the evil in every little thing while the beauty around you goes unnoticed.
You are absolutely right, you don't have to carry ID, and no one can ask you for it.
As long as you don't break the law, or are suspected of breaking the law.
Then, if you don't have any ID, you are royally screwed. Even before this law. If you can't prove who you are, no matter if you are white, black, brown, yellow, red, or any other skin color, you get a little ride in a police care back to the station to figure out who you are and to see if there are any other outstanding warrants against you. It's ALWAYS been this way.
And nothing has really changed. If you are pulled over because you are speeding, don't have car registration or driver's license, and they can't find you in the computer, you aren't going anywhere anyway.
What a bunch of whiny babies. I lost my wallet a couple of weeks ago. Fortunately, I had a scanned copy of my driver's license on my computer, printed it out, and kept it with me in the car. Just in case I got pulled over for speeding or got into a crash or something.
I have no sympathy for someone not willing to do a simple thing to keep from getting into even more trouble if they get into some trouble. They deserve all the hassle brought down on them in my opinion.
I expect them when they turn 18 to do what hundreds of other people have done in the same situation. Go back to their home country and follow the law.
.. I prefer to accept as citizens people who are willing to do the right thing, even if it means leaving the country for a year or two instead of someone that is willing to live in the shadows and use false documents and lie to get a job.
The only excuse people for this can dredge up is "it's too hard". Well tough
... to then sue these idiots if they win and cause economic collapse, bringing all the things they feared to fruition because there will no longer be a profit in making anything and we can't get food to market because electric trucks run solely on wind and solar and hydro won't be around for decades?? Or that the taxes needed to make these things happen sooner will also ruin the economy because I won't be able to buy anything. Which means we won't need all of those power stations any longer since we will be living in adobe huts without air conditioning and walking because factories won't even be able to make bicycles. And we won't be able to even use horses because of the methane produced.
... an ergonomic keyboard and dual monitors, I'm fine with it. Good luck in getting that into a small form factor for a reasonable amount of money.
Until then, I'll stick with my desktop at work and a second at home (that I use to remote desktop into work with.) I really don't want to sit at the kitchen table or on the couch and work for long periods. For short periods and support while I'm on vacation, I use my Samsung tablet and Pocket Cloud software to connect to my desktop at work.
... it takes that long to figure out they don't have many skills. The good ones can always get jobs. I'm 53 and am in demand since I know many different programming languages and databases, understand network and phone systems, have significant operations experience (so I write code that if it has a problem actually tells someone what the problem and fails in a controlled manner instead of aborting). I am willing to tackle any task instead of shrugging and saying "I don't know how to do that". I know several people my age that are in similar situations.
We just got rid of a 40 year old programmer that was one of the worst I'd ever seen. Talked a great story, but when it came time to producing just couldn't do it. I would be amazed if this person will be able to continue in the IT profession, she doesn't have current skills, does everything she can to avoid having to learn them, and isn't honest about what she is capable of.