Maybe in the immediate area (size of antenna plus 1 to 2 wavelengths) there will be some signal disruption. But it won't have any affect at a distance. It isn't going to overload the transmitter.
... figure out a way to force people to pay them money for this ambient background radio power? And how are they going to keep freeloaders from stealing it?
China Airlines Flight 140 is an example of a pilot COMPETING with autopilot. Apparently EITHER scenario... let the computer fly the plane by itself... or... let the pilot fly the plane by himself... could have kept the plane in the air. The pilot should have been able to take control entirely. There should never be a "pilot fought the autopilot" scenario. And the pilot always must be the final decision maker.
I removed floppy drives from my computers years ago. CD/DVD drives are next. I can do emergency rescue boots, and installation boots, from an SDHC card (now available as large as 32GB or more). Oh, and there are also those minnepinne things. As for music, are they still trying to sell it on those over sized low capacity plastic circles that are larger than players?
Most of the problems Linux has is due to it having such a small user base. Too many hardware manufacturers don't play well with Linux. Drivers tend to be the biggest problem. If Linux were to become the primary OS used by government, military, business, and people, manufacturers would have to work with it or die. Then those problems you have seen would disappear. Given the circumstances, it's actually quite amazing that Linux works as well as it does. I've used Linux from nearly its beginning, and Unix before that, right after using mainframes. Windows is around for the things that require it (some things do). For example, Visio still beats anything the open source community has come up with. I look forward to when that changes so I can do my diagrams on a machine that's also safely able to do other stuff like be connected to the internet. Right now, my Windows machine isn't even connected to my LAN and I transfer files via a USB memory stick.
I'm not one of those people that wants to destroy Microsoft or Windows. I just prefer to use Linux. But to the extent that problems exist because Windows is so dominant, then I'm happy to see it knocked off just so Linux will work better... not because I want other people to use Linux (that's not a fundamental desire). I'd rather that everyone could just use what they want to use and all hardware works right with all operating systems (standard interfaces between hardware and drivers would help a lot).
But, given the current situations, if Microsoft wants to move to Dublin or Bengaluru, then I say good ridance.
You are correct. When viewed in terms of individuals, there is no such right.
But, a shift to this approach is fundamentally destructive. The national society suffers when this method is used. And, yes, fixing it IS socialism. Socialism is the direction we are ultimately headed in as the corrective measure to the economic destructiveness of pitting people against each other where there is no benefit to that competition. Some countries have less of that (e.g. USA) and some have more (e.g. Sweden).
BTW, Ballmer won't pay less by staying in the USA and hiring Americans under a plan to eliminate corporate taxes. If the tax structure is shifted so people pay all the taxes, then the cost of workers in the USA goes up. They won't be as competitive if they have the burden of being the exclusive tax base. To make workers more competitive, their tax burdens, both sales and income taxes, need to be removed. But that just shifts the burden over to corporations and there's still no real benefit.
Taxing sales could be called a regressive tax since poorer people spend more on food relative to their income.
It encourages hard work. The government gets the same amount of money that they get today. Reuse is encouraged. The IRS is gone. Your spending determines you taxation, so saving is encouraged. Really wealthy people spend more, so they are taxed at a much higher rate.
So which is it... do the poor pay more or do the rich pay more? The fact is, under this system, the RATE (percentage of sale value) is flat. What we would be replacing is a system which is NOT flat. The current system puts a greater burden on the rich with a higher percentage. While many of the rich do find ways to avoid the taxes and reduce their effective rate, many of these ways are methods by which the government can encourage desired behavior in the corporations. By not having any tax rate on income at all, this option is lost. The government would have to create a new method to encourage desired behavior, such as direct grants and subsidies.
To solve that issue, everyone who is a citizen and registers their family would get a "food tax rebate" monthly to cover the taxes on food. This is an estimated amount, not based on income or location. If you live where food is cheaper, then this rebate gives you more money, relatively. If you choose to live in more expensive food locations, it helps less.
Or just don't tax food? This would likely have to be a broader program covering more than just food.
Most importantly, with corporate taxation gone, many, many jobs would flock to the USA. Offshore work would still exist, but it would need to be even more competitive.
However, with the tax burden flowing through people, they will have a need for a higher pay rate. The jobs would not flock to the USA in any great numbers because of this. And the more the program is adjusted to become proportionally fair on the poor, increases the taxes on the rich and even middle class. Then you are back to where you started.
The fundamental problem is that the rich don't want to pay for the poor. The rich want to spread the income levels so they get a higher proportion. Any method that subsidizes the poor will tax the rich. Any method that fails to subsidize the poor will result in a voter rebellion.
What we ultimately need is a system that ensures a zero trade balance. That is, there must be as much product value sold (exported) as bought (imported). A tax to do this is too messy. A system of trade credits might work better. Those who export more than import get trade credits which can be sold on a market and bought by those who import more than export. With this system in place, then the shift from income tax to sales tax makes more sense.
... and it's NOT BS. The correlation simply doesn't say one way or the other what the cause is. If you want to support an assertion of cause, you cannot use correlation for that. It could be that higher revenues cause lower taxation rates, too. In fact, this also happens... when a government has sufficient tax revenues, it lowers tax rates.
The real issue here is the tax pressure pushing corporations to go to other countries. The "multi-nationals" can do this easily. The tax system itself is where the fundamental flaw is. It wants to tax a corporation on its entire worldly profits just because of where it is headquartered, registered, etc. The tax structure needs to be based on the amount of business being done within the taxing country. One option is to drop corporate income tax entirely, and apply a form of VAT tax as the exclusive tax (applied equally to both imported and domestic products).
There is in fact much competition within the USA for corporate relocations based on various tax rates. Corporations shop for "desperate" jurisdictions willing to provide reduced tax rates for X years (where X might be as high as 99).
Approach them for a DIFFERENT domain name (if you can find another one or two they also have). Make the approach seem like some teenager wanting a vanity name for his pr0n or r1pz site. Offer a lower amount and see if they will sell it. If you get their interest in selling, try "changing your mind" and switch to another domain name (still not the one you are really interested in, yet) and see how they respond to that (since you'll eventually have to do that to get the interest you want). You'll need to make a special Google, Hotmail, or Yahoo email address for the communication. If they seem interested in selling at a reasonably low price, switch (again) to the desired name and cross your fingers.
They should not be trying to "optimize" it to any specific platform whatsoever, neither for a demo nor for final production. They should present it in strict standards compliant HTML 5. Whatever HTML 5 and other standards in use cannot do, they should not be attempting to do. Attempting to optimize to specific browsers is what makes too many things work poorly when transitions happen in the future. Also, new browsers end up having to pretend to be a browser they are not just to get sites to work at all. If their site is refusing to deliver a video tag at all to an Opera browser, which supports it, then Opera might have to pretend to be Firefox (a little tweaking can make it do that). Once we have too many browsers pretending to be other browsers, then the whole world is in a mess. If anything, there never should have been a header like "User-Agent:". Where does it get used in any non-abusive way?
I like being able to read the many stories from all over the country that people link to. Having to pay each one $1 makes this utterly impractical. The population will just end up going to the TV station sites, instead. At least the business model they are accustomed to is the one that the web uses. Too bad the newspaper execs are so utterly clueless (especially those at the Dallas Morning News).
... by painting all the solar cells on my roof white. But I'm gonna have to do this all over again because these solar cells aren't making any electricity.
Home automation, and especially security, is not something I would want to put on radio waves. That makes it way too open to a denial of service attack. The electrical parts needed to build a device to trash the 2.4 GHz band are readily available (e.g. no security checks to buy a microwave oven) so a person competent in electronics could easily build something that can jam 2.4 GHz.
I do have a home LAN on 2.4 GHz for convenience. But I've also tested most of it directly connected in case that is needed.
Remote controls are nice to have so you don't have to run over to, or reach up to, a switch. But that's just basic convenience. I want everything to also work without remotes when I'm not using remotes 9or when the remotes fail). For example, automated timers to shut things off as scheduled should not use RF, or even open air IR, to do that. It should be "wired" (preferably fiber optic). Critical facilities should not even have a remote option unless that can be made secure.
If Japan wants to end the discrimination, they need to make it clearly illegal, and do the investigations to dig it up and expose it where it happens, with punishment for those doing it. Hiding it doesn't accomplish that as many other cultures that also have discrimination history have found out.
They don't have to. This is the OEM pricing contract for each specific computer model. The manufacturer provides the model specs and has to sign off that it is truthful. If Microsoft later finds the model did not meet specs (by someone that works for Microsoft buying one and testing it, some day) then Microsoft comes back to the manufacturer and demands payment for the pricing difference multiplied by the number of models sold.
You might not be able to buy a standalone full install copy of Starter Edition. It will probably be OEM only, for pre-installation on a PC meeting the specifications.
Those things can be abstracted, and the component code plugged in as part of the collection of source files during the build (not to be confused with a run time plug-in). All the rest of the code is then made multi-context safe.
Maybe I don't believe you. How do I know that the Chromium source code is what really gos into the Chrome binary, no more no less?
Porting software from one platform to another is simply the wrong approach. It is wrong to start with any ONE platform and then try to rig it to fit on another (what most porting efforts end up doing). The correct approach is to plan for every major OS (BSD, Linux, Mac, Solaris, Windows, etc... in alphabetical order to avoid any perception of bias), and isolate as much of the development into common components as possible. You don't need to write different CSS/HTML/XHTML/XML parsers for each different OS.
The security models in the OSes are for protecting the OS itself, and other programs, from any bad programs. That means preventing the browser from messing with other processes or the kernel, or files it isn't allowed access to. Managing the security of things like Javascript (for example, making sure JS code from site A can't mess around with the DOM of a page from site B, when both are loaded at the same time) isn't something to be handed off to the OS. The OS has no concept of site A vs. site B, nor should it. This is something for the browser itself to manage, and it should do it exactly the same way on each different OS.
If they had coded it with portable methods, the Linux and Mac versions would be ready now. I guess they didn't do that. But for something is important as a browser, I want it in source code, anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
Right. Those were definitely electrical conduits, likely with a substantial amperage available if you shorted them.
Maybe in the immediate area (size of antenna plus 1 to 2 wavelengths) there will be some signal disruption. But it won't have any affect at a distance. It isn't going to overload the transmitter.
... figure out a way to force people to pay them money for this ambient background radio power? And how are they going to keep freeloaders from stealing it?
China Airlines Flight 140 is an example of a pilot COMPETING with autopilot. Apparently EITHER scenario ... let the computer fly the plane by itself ... or ... let the pilot fly the plane by himself ... could have kept the plane in the air. The pilot should have been able to take control entirely. There should never be a "pilot fought the autopilot" scenario. And the pilot always must be the final decision maker.
I removed floppy drives from my computers years ago. CD/DVD drives are next. I can do emergency rescue boots, and installation boots, from an SDHC card (now available as large as 32GB or more). Oh, and there are also those minnepinne things. As for music, are they still trying to sell it on those over sized low capacity plastic circles that are larger than players?
These are corporations that would just move everything offshore if that happened. But then, maybe that would be a good thing.
Most of the problems Linux has is due to it having such a small user base. Too many hardware manufacturers don't play well with Linux. Drivers tend to be the biggest problem. If Linux were to become the primary OS used by government, military, business, and people, manufacturers would have to work with it or die. Then those problems you have seen would disappear. Given the circumstances, it's actually quite amazing that Linux works as well as it does. I've used Linux from nearly its beginning, and Unix before that, right after using mainframes. Windows is around for the things that require it (some things do). For example, Visio still beats anything the open source community has come up with. I look forward to when that changes so I can do my diagrams on a machine that's also safely able to do other stuff like be connected to the internet. Right now, my Windows machine isn't even connected to my LAN and I transfer files via a USB memory stick.
I'm not one of those people that wants to destroy Microsoft or Windows. I just prefer to use Linux. But to the extent that problems exist because Windows is so dominant, then I'm happy to see it knocked off just so Linux will work better ... not because I want other people to use Linux (that's not a fundamental desire). I'd rather that everyone could just use what they want to use and all hardware works right with all operating systems (standard interfaces between hardware and drivers would help a lot).
But, given the current situations, if Microsoft wants to move to Dublin or Bengaluru, then I say good ridance.
You are correct. When viewed in terms of individuals, there is no such right.
But, a shift to this approach is fundamentally destructive. The national society suffers when this method is used. And, yes, fixing it IS socialism. Socialism is the direction we are ultimately headed in as the corrective measure to the economic destructiveness of pitting people against each other where there is no benefit to that competition. Some countries have less of that (e.g. USA) and some have more (e.g. Sweden).
BTW, Ballmer won't pay less by staying in the USA and hiring Americans under a plan to eliminate corporate taxes. If the tax structure is shifted so people pay all the taxes, then the cost of workers in the USA goes up. They won't be as competitive if they have the burden of being the exclusive tax base. To make workers more competitive, their tax burdens, both sales and income taxes, need to be removed. But that just shifts the burden over to corporations and there's still no real benefit.
Taxing sales could be called a regressive tax since poorer people spend more on food relative to their income.
It encourages hard work. The government gets the same amount of money that they get today. Reuse is encouraged. The IRS is gone. Your spending determines you taxation, so saving is encouraged. Really wealthy people spend more, so they are taxed at a much higher rate.
So which is it ... do the poor pay more or do the rich pay more? The fact is, under this system, the RATE (percentage of sale value) is flat. What we would be replacing is a system which is NOT flat. The current system puts a greater burden on the rich with a higher percentage. While many of the rich do find ways to avoid the taxes and reduce their effective rate, many of these ways are methods by which the government can encourage desired behavior in the corporations. By not having any tax rate on income at all, this option is lost. The government would have to create a new method to encourage desired behavior, such as direct grants and subsidies.
To solve that issue, everyone who is a citizen and registers their family would get a "food tax rebate" monthly to cover the taxes on food. This is an estimated amount, not based on income or location. If you live where food is cheaper, then this rebate gives you more money, relatively. If you choose to live in more expensive food locations, it helps less.
Or just don't tax food? This would likely have to be a broader program covering more than just food.
Most importantly, with corporate taxation gone, many, many jobs would flock to the USA. Offshore work would still exist, but it would need to be even more competitive.
However, with the tax burden flowing through people, they will have a need for a higher pay rate. The jobs would not flock to the USA in any great numbers because of this. And the more the program is adjusted to become proportionally fair on the poor, increases the taxes on the rich and even middle class. Then you are back to where you started.
The fundamental problem is that the rich don't want to pay for the poor. The rich want to spread the income levels so they get a higher proportion. Any method that subsidizes the poor will tax the rich. Any method that fails to subsidize the poor will result in a voter rebellion.
What we ultimately need is a system that ensures a zero trade balance. That is, there must be as much product value sold (exported) as bought (imported). A tax to do this is too messy. A system of trade credits might work better. Those who export more than import get trade credits which can be sold on a market and bought by those who import more than export. With this system in place, then the shift from income tax to sales tax makes more sense.
... and it's NOT BS. The correlation simply doesn't say one way or the other what the cause is. If you want to support an assertion of cause, you cannot use correlation for that. It could be that higher revenues cause lower taxation rates, too. In fact, this also happens ... when a government has sufficient tax revenues, it lowers tax rates.
The real issue here is the tax pressure pushing corporations to go to other countries. The "multi-nationals" can do this easily. The tax system itself is where the fundamental flaw is. It wants to tax a corporation on its entire worldly profits just because of where it is headquartered, registered, etc. The tax structure needs to be based on the amount of business being done within the taxing country. One option is to drop corporate income tax entirely, and apply a form of VAT tax as the exclusive tax (applied equally to both imported and domestic products).
There is in fact much competition within the USA for corporate relocations based on various tax rates. Corporations shop for "desperate" jurisdictions willing to provide reduced tax rates for X years (where X might be as high as 99).
.. have been warned to keep on the lookout for flying chairs?
Or drive them to Intel CPUs.
Approach them for a DIFFERENT domain name (if you can find another one or two they also have). Make the approach seem like some teenager wanting a vanity name for his pr0n or r1pz site. Offer a lower amount and see if they will sell it. If you get their interest in selling, try "changing your mind" and switch to another domain name (still not the one you are really interested in, yet) and see how they respond to that (since you'll eventually have to do that to get the interest you want). You'll need to make a special Google, Hotmail, or Yahoo email address for the communication. If they seem interested in selling at a reasonably low price, switch (again) to the desired name and cross your fingers.
There's nothing wrong with this. Just ask the Borg.
They should not be trying to "optimize" it to any specific platform whatsoever, neither for a demo nor for final production. They should present it in strict standards compliant HTML 5. Whatever HTML 5 and other standards in use cannot do, they should not be attempting to do. Attempting to optimize to specific browsers is what makes too many things work poorly when transitions happen in the future. Also, new browsers end up having to pretend to be a browser they are not just to get sites to work at all. If their site is refusing to deliver a video tag at all to an Opera browser, which supports it, then Opera might have to pretend to be Firefox (a little tweaking can make it do that). Once we have too many browsers pretending to be other browsers, then the whole world is in a mess. If anything, there never should have been a header like "User-Agent:". Where does it get used in any non-abusive way?
I like being able to read the many stories from all over the country that people link to. Having to pay each one $1 makes this utterly impractical. The population will just end up going to the TV station sites, instead. At least the business model they are accustomed to is the one that the web uses. Too bad the newspaper execs are so utterly clueless (especially those at the Dallas Morning News).
... by painting all the solar cells on my roof white. But I'm gonna have to do this all over again because these solar cells aren't making any electricity.
So you want industrial grade products for your home? How many millions of dollars did you plan to spend?
So why not make your own? Put the appropriate open licensing on it (GDL?). Publish it.
Home automation, and especially security, is not something I would want to put on radio waves. That makes it way too open to a denial of service attack. The electrical parts needed to build a device to trash the 2.4 GHz band are readily available (e.g. no security checks to buy a microwave oven) so a person competent in electronics could easily build something that can jam 2.4 GHz.
I do have a home LAN on 2.4 GHz for convenience. But I've also tested most of it directly connected in case that is needed.
Remote controls are nice to have so you don't have to run over to, or reach up to, a switch. But that's just basic convenience. I want everything to also work without remotes when I'm not using remotes 9or when the remotes fail). For example, automated timers to shut things off as scheduled should not use RF, or even open air IR, to do that. It should be "wired" (preferably fiber optic). Critical facilities should not even have a remote option unless that can be made secure.
If Japan wants to end the discrimination, they need to make it clearly illegal, and do the investigations to dig it up and expose it where it happens, with punishment for those doing it. Hiding it doesn't accomplish that as many other cultures that also have discrimination history have found out.
That means my new 2.2 GHz netbook with 128 GB SSD and 10.25 inch screen that dissipates 16 watts is going to run that Linux stuff.
They don't have to. This is the OEM pricing contract for each specific computer model. The manufacturer provides the model specs and has to sign off that it is truthful. If Microsoft later finds the model did not meet specs (by someone that works for Microsoft buying one and testing it, some day) then Microsoft comes back to the manufacturer and demands payment for the pricing difference multiplied by the number of models sold.
You might not be able to buy a standalone full install copy of Starter Edition. It will probably be OEM only, for pre-installation on a PC meeting the specifications.
Those things can be abstracted, and the component code plugged in as part of the collection of source files during the build (not to be confused with a run time plug-in). All the rest of the code is then made multi-context safe.
Maybe I don't believe you. How do I know that the Chromium source code is what really gos into the Chrome binary, no more no less?
Porting software from one platform to another is simply the wrong approach. It is wrong to start with any ONE platform and then try to rig it to fit on another (what most porting efforts end up doing). The correct approach is to plan for every major OS (BSD, Linux, Mac, Solaris, Windows, etc ... in alphabetical order to avoid any perception of bias), and isolate as much of the development into common components as possible. You don't need to write different CSS/HTML/XHTML/XML parsers for each different OS.
The security models in the OSes are for protecting the OS itself, and other programs, from any bad programs. That means preventing the browser from messing with other processes or the kernel, or files it isn't allowed access to. Managing the security of things like Javascript (for example, making sure JS code from site A can't mess around with the DOM of a page from site B, when both are loaded at the same time) isn't something to be handed off to the OS. The OS has no concept of site A vs. site B, nor should it. This is something for the browser itself to manage, and it should do it exactly the same way on each different OS.
If they had coded it with portable methods, the Linux and Mac versions would be ready now. I guess they didn't do that. But for something is important as a browser, I want it in source code, anyway.