Maybe that had something to do with the West being a mostly open society, with free access to information about it (true and untrue). While the East was a mostly closed society, where access to information about it was mostly controlled. The Soviets were unable to stop information flow about everything but their own government, though their government required that control, so they eventually lost control. The West has become ever more awash in information about itself, though its own control is threatened by its more recently increasing secrecy about its governments.
Your post reminds me of the Cold War joke: An American brags to a Russian that "My country is the greatest. I can go up to the steps of the White House, raise my fist, and scream 'the president of the United States sucks!', and I won't get in any trouble". The Russian smiles and says "My country is greater. I can go up to the Kremlin, raise my fist, and scream 'the president of the United States sucks!', and I could be awarded a medal".
It's both. In the US, the people who are made fun of for being dumb turn into bad people with low self esteem. Everyone who's alienated and put down for being different from some imaginary average are kept from becoming well adjusted and achieving high performance as who they are.
In 2009 private health insurance expenses were already $801.2B. It was growing anywhere from 1.3-11.6% each year in the decade leading up to it, typically in the 7-10% range. It's close enough to a $TRILLION right now that quibbling is just acknowledging that your real point was wrong.
Which it was. There's a huge and growing profit in running a health insurance corp, despite your saying the opposite. I haven't "railed against profits". I've railed against spending more into a cartel - that, as I pointed out, keeps competitors out, largely by keeping the costs of entry in the $billions. The profits + the waste amount to probably close to 10% of insurance costs to consumers. You might not want to keep 10% of your insurance expenses, but I do, and I expect most Americans do.
Look, it's obvious that you don't have any facts, or any real familiarity with the insurance business. You're not even bothering to cite or specify your arguments, while I give exact facts and citations. You're the one engaged in "partisan talking points", and nothing more. You're wrong, and refuse to even acknowledge what you're talking about because it's wrong. Facts and logic aren't changing you, and I'm learning nothing from you except to dislike you.
Based on the draft RFC for HLS, there is no spec for an M3U standard format. "What WinAmp does" is not a spec for a standard format.
Apple's HLS draft RFC specifies the definitions of new tags in the Extended M3U format to make an Apple HLS format. But M3U itself is not standardized.
I'd love American Sign Language to become the universal hand gesture library for interacting with computers. People who are deaf already fluent in ASL would become much more productive than they might be now. Many more people who aren't already communicating with people who are deaf would learn ASL and become fluent in communicating with people who are deaf.
There's already quite a lot of infrastructure for ASL right now, both in communicating with it and in learning it. There's a whole literature, a whole culture, a whole lingo with consumable artifacts.
What would be really cool would be software translating between ASL gestures, English and Chinese. Everyone should get into the whole handwaving party.
You just described why the USD bonds are currently considered a much better investment than BRL bonds. You have supported my argument against the statement "Real bonds are currently considered almost as good an investment as US Treasuries.", which is demonstrably (and now both demonstrated and supported by reasons) false.
There's a lot more propping up the USD and its dominance of international trade than the infra-BRICS loans now denominated in their own currencies. In fact, there's a good argument that this BRICS move demonstrates the strength and independence of the global US economy that recovered and grew the global economy from its 1930s depression and 1940s destruction. But that argument, won or lost, says nothing about the current quality of USD vs BRL. The actual interest rates are so different that it's irrefutable that USD bonds are considered a much better investment than are BRL bonds.
If the US could use economics, diplomacy, culture and politics to reduce the actual threats and abuses in the world that underlie actual threats to US security, we could probably reduce down below $300B. I'd like to see that, even if we had to invest $TRILLIONS in those efforts.
But keep in mind that the dollar figures you mention aren't really accurate, nor can they be compared directly. For example, China's "$110B" doesn't include income from the many businesses owned by China's military. It's spent in China on much cheaper labor and capital, all of which is subsidized by the rest of the society, so really much more than $110B is spent. China doesn't spend money on the defense of other countries, but the US spends a lot. Which includes money France, and especially Canada and Mexico, don't have to spend to be defended.
I would like to see the US spend less, or even net a profit, on our security operations that defend those foreign countries. But that would of course raise those foreign expenses. So the current US expenses would have to be compared to the foreign expenses required to actually defend themselves. I'm all for rearranging the expenses to assign the costs to the actual countries defended, but comparisons among them must take the current incompatibilities into account.
Energia and the Soviet space shuttle were designed to build and service an orbital solar power generation platform. I hope we continue to get to that goal.
Frederick Douglass' Republican Party was the party that had recently freed the slaves and defeated the traitorous Confederacy. That is the opposite of today's Republican Party. If you're a "Frederick Douglass Republican", you're either long dead or insane to keep your Party membership.
A 130 ton payload would be useful for launching nuclear subs into orbit:).
In seriousness, launching bigger clusters of nukes in a single mission is a good way to saturate a missile defense system. Turning its "shield holes percentage" into a warhead count large enough to deter your target. It's also a good vehicle for launching large masses and machinery to manipulate them that, when dropped back to Earth, don't even require a nuke to cause megatons of damage. And without the residual radiation that makes such bad propaganda and devalues the territory you've captured by striking it.
Google caches all kinds of content across the Internet, including media files, regardless of the frequency with which they're downloaded. I don't think the relative unpopularity of GV content determined its value in keeping. Especially since the primary factor in its unpopularity was being locked up in GV instead of in YouTube.
The truth is that the Democrats who voted for the war were the minority of Democrats. While every single Republican (with a couple of notable exceptions) voted for the war. While the people who lied us into it were all Republicans, who first lied congressional Republicans into it and then congressional Democrats.
Even morally there is a difference between actively doing wrong and just failing to prevent it. Politically there is an even bigger difference.
But the point here is that none who actually practice those principles enumerated in the comment to which I replied are Republicans. Whether or not some Democrats practice them is irrelevant to their point about "Frederick Douglass Republicans", which is a purely imaginary category. Part of the ethics Republicans actually practice: hypocrisy and denial.
The people who believe 2012 is the beginning of anything except the regularly scheduled events and surprises are even dumber than simple racists. I look forward to competing with them:).
As long as "all" means anyone physically (and mentally/etc) qualified to go to space gets there if they want. If losing to China meant space was now as open as SCUBA diving (even if more expensive). But I expect that losing a space race to China would ensure human access to space was locked up in whatever politics/cronyism mattered to China's mafia government. I prefer SpaceX winning, or at least among the winners, or any other launcher that treats all paid fare equally.
This guy is a clown. I think whatever money they have is from association with a Russian gang, or possibly their own direct theft. Their wild handwaving over conspiracy theories and other purely theoretical jibberjabber is always dashed to pieces whenever compared to actual historical fact.
Thanks for documenting their worthlessness with your specific examples.
1. You wouldn't collect SS if you were a committed Randian because your principles would stop you. Like every one of her fictional characters would refuse to collect.
2. SS doesn't steal your money. It forces you to invest it in the safest available investment, US debt, that returns about 50% interest. That also invests in running your country, which keeps all your investments safe.
If you're really just committed to grabbing as much money as you can, without any actual consistent principles, then you can do as Ayn Rand did. If you're willing to leave the majority of old people with losses instead of gains in their retirement investments, then you can get rid of Social Security. Congratulations! You're a reckless greedmonger, the kind that steered our country and its millions of old people into the grinding poverty of the Great Depression. AKA "Randian". Even if Ayn Rand herself was not. She was merely a hypocrite and a fiction writer.
Yes, replacing the USD in infra-BRICS transactions does leave more USD in circulation with less demand, thereby lowering the price of USD. But USD is still far more valued as an investment than BRL. Especially in the role for which the Fed controls USD value: global inflation control. The USD is far more stable than the BRL, even if that 3-6-12% BRL swing within the last decade is an opportunity for some (informed/skilled/lucky) investors to make profits against the low end if that's when they buy.
It must be nice to have a job on the basis of your famous father instead of your own competence. From which you can attack the people who have more productive jobs they created or just earned, which are keeping the US at the forefront of the economy instead of a derelict museum of your father's generation.
If the US standard workweek were 4 days instead of 5, there would be at least 20% more work to do in the 4 days. That would keep labor demand ahead of supply for a while.
Slashdot Mirror
Welcome to the Teabagger Republic of Sim City, and its mayor, Grafty Crackton.
Animal Farm, 1984 and Brave New World were all required reading in my NY public school. As were Slaughterhouse Five and Siddhartha.
Maybe that had something to do with the West being a mostly open society, with free access to information about it (true and untrue). While the East was a mostly closed society, where access to information about it was mostly controlled. The Soviets were unable to stop information flow about everything but their own government, though their government required that control, so they eventually lost control. The West has become ever more awash in information about itself, though its own control is threatened by its more recently increasing secrecy about its governments.
Your post reminds me of the Cold War joke: An American brags to a Russian that "My country is the greatest. I can go up to the steps of the White House, raise my fist, and scream 'the president of the United States sucks!', and I won't get in any trouble". The Russian smiles and says "My country is greater. I can go up to the Kremlin, raise my fist, and scream 'the president of the United States sucks!', and I could be awarded a medal".
It's both. In the US, the people who are made fun of for being dumb turn into bad people with low self esteem. Everyone who's alienated and put down for being different from some imaginary average are kept from becoming well adjusted and achieving high performance as who they are.
In 2009 private health insurance expenses were already $801.2B. It was growing anywhere from 1.3-11.6% each year in the decade leading up to it, typically in the 7-10% range. It's close enough to a $TRILLION right now that quibbling is just acknowledging that your real point was wrong.
Which it was. There's a huge and growing profit in running a health insurance corp, despite your saying the opposite. I haven't "railed against profits". I've railed against spending more into a cartel - that, as I pointed out, keeps competitors out, largely by keeping the costs of entry in the $billions. The profits + the waste amount to probably close to 10% of insurance costs to consumers. You might not want to keep 10% of your insurance expenses, but I do, and I expect most Americans do.
Look, it's obvious that you don't have any facts, or any real familiarity with the insurance business. You're not even bothering to cite or specify your arguments, while I give exact facts and citations. You're the one engaged in "partisan talking points", and nothing more. You're wrong, and refuse to even acknowledge what you're talking about because it's wrong. Facts and logic aren't changing you, and I'm learning nothing from you except to dislike you.
Goodbye.
Based on the draft RFC for HLS, there is no spec for an M3U standard format. "What WinAmp does" is not a spec for a standard format.
Apple's HLS draft RFC specifies the definitions of new tags in the Extended M3U format to make an Apple HLS format. But M3U itself is not standardized.
Yeah and a "fag" is a cigarette or a bundle of sticks. A "nigger" is just a person from Niger. Right.
You're a child playing word games. Probably gay, as in homosexual, too, but won't admit it. Hence the word games.
Only a person who's gay but can't admit it would find a statement like that "too gay", because it's not gay at all. You are. Learn to enjoy it.
I'd love American Sign Language to become the universal hand gesture library for interacting with computers. People who are deaf already fluent in ASL would become much more productive than they might be now. Many more people who aren't already communicating with people who are deaf would learn ASL and become fluent in communicating with people who are deaf.
There's already quite a lot of infrastructure for ASL right now, both in communicating with it and in learning it. There's a whole literature, a whole culture, a whole lingo with consumable artifacts.
What would be really cool would be software translating between ASL gestures, English and Chinese. Everyone should get into the whole handwaving party.
You just described why the USD bonds are currently considered a much better investment than BRL bonds. You have supported my argument against the statement "Real bonds are currently considered almost as good an investment as US Treasuries.", which is demonstrably (and now both demonstrated and supported by reasons) false.
There's a lot more propping up the USD and its dominance of international trade than the infra-BRICS loans now denominated in their own currencies. In fact, there's a good argument that this BRICS move demonstrates the strength and independence of the global US economy that recovered and grew the global economy from its 1930s depression and 1940s destruction. But that argument, won or lost, says nothing about the current quality of USD vs BRL. The actual interest rates are so different that it's irrefutable that USD bonds are considered a much better investment than are BRL bonds.
If the US could use economics, diplomacy, culture and politics to reduce the actual threats and abuses in the world that underlie actual threats to US security, we could probably reduce down below $300B. I'd like to see that, even if we had to invest $TRILLIONS in those efforts.
But keep in mind that the dollar figures you mention aren't really accurate, nor can they be compared directly. For example, China's "$110B" doesn't include income from the many businesses owned by China's military. It's spent in China on much cheaper labor and capital, all of which is subsidized by the rest of the society, so really much more than $110B is spent. China doesn't spend money on the defense of other countries, but the US spends a lot. Which includes money France, and especially Canada and Mexico, don't have to spend to be defended.
I would like to see the US spend less, or even net a profit, on our security operations that defend those foreign countries. But that would of course raise those foreign expenses. So the current US expenses would have to be compared to the foreign expenses required to actually defend themselves. I'm all for rearranging the expenses to assign the costs to the actual countries defended, but comparisons among them must take the current incompatibilities into account.
Yes I am.
Energia and the Soviet space shuttle were designed to build and service an orbital solar power generation platform. I hope we continue to get to that goal.
Frederick Douglass' Republican Party was the party that had recently freed the slaves and defeated the traitorous Confederacy. That is the opposite of today's Republican Party. If you're a "Frederick Douglass Republican", you're either long dead or insane to keep your Party membership.
A 130 ton payload would be useful for launching nuclear subs into orbit :).
In seriousness, launching bigger clusters of nukes in a single mission is a good way to saturate a missile defense system. Turning its "shield holes percentage" into a warhead count large enough to deter your target. It's also a good vehicle for launching large masses and machinery to manipulate them that, when dropped back to Earth, don't even require a nuke to cause megatons of damage. And without the residual radiation that makes such bad propaganda and devalues the territory you've captured by striking it.
Google caches all kinds of content across the Internet, including media files, regardless of the frequency with which they're downloaded. I don't think the relative unpopularity of GV content determined its value in keeping. Especially since the primary factor in its unpopularity was being locked up in GV instead of in YouTube.
Moving the video content to YouTube, as I said, would make your risk disappear.
The truth is that the Democrats who voted for the war were the minority of Democrats. While every single Republican (with a couple of notable exceptions) voted for the war. While the people who lied us into it were all Republicans, who first lied congressional Republicans into it and then congressional Democrats.
Even morally there is a difference between actively doing wrong and just failing to prevent it. Politically there is an even bigger difference.
But the point here is that none who actually practice those principles enumerated in the comment to which I replied are Republicans. Whether or not some Democrats practice them is irrelevant to their point about "Frederick Douglass Republicans", which is a purely imaginary category. Part of the ethics Republicans actually practice: hypocrisy and denial.
The people who believe 2012 is the beginning of anything except the regularly scheduled events and surprises are even dumber than simple racists. I look forward to competing with them :).
As long as "all" means anyone physically (and mentally/etc) qualified to go to space gets there if they want. If losing to China meant space was now as open as SCUBA diving (even if more expensive). But I expect that losing a space race to China would ensure human access to space was locked up in whatever politics/cronyism mattered to China's mafia government. I prefer SpaceX winning, or at least among the winners, or any other launcher that treats all paid fare equally.
This guy is a clown. I think whatever money they have is from association with a Russian gang, or possibly their own direct theft. Their wild handwaving over conspiracy theories and other purely theoretical jibberjabber is always dashed to pieces whenever compared to actual historical fact.
Thanks for documenting their worthlessness with your specific examples.
1. You wouldn't collect SS if you were a committed Randian because your principles would stop you. Like every one of her fictional characters would refuse to collect.
2. SS doesn't steal your money. It forces you to invest it in the safest available investment, US debt, that returns about 50% interest. That also invests in running your country, which keeps all your investments safe.
If you're really just committed to grabbing as much money as you can, without any actual consistent principles, then you can do as Ayn Rand did. If you're willing to leave the majority of old people with losses instead of gains in their retirement investments, then you can get rid of Social Security. Congratulations! You're a reckless greedmonger, the kind that steered our country and its millions of old people into the grinding poverty of the Great Depression. AKA "Randian". Even if Ayn Rand herself was not. She was merely a hypocrite and a fiction writer.
No they're not. BRL bonds have to offer about 12% interest to sell in today's market. Those 2-year BRL bonds compete with 2-year US Treasuries that have to offer only under 1% interest, yet still sell more than BRL bonds do.
Yes, replacing the USD in infra-BRICS transactions does leave more USD in circulation with less demand, thereby lowering the price of USD. But USD is still far more valued as an investment than BRL. Especially in the role for which the Fed controls USD value: global inflation control. The USD is far more stable than the BRL, even if that 3-6-12% BRL swing within the last decade is an opportunity for some (informed/skilled/lucky) investors to make profits against the low end if that's when they buy.
Where is the spec for an M3U format standard published?
It must be nice to have a job on the basis of your famous father instead of your own competence. From which you can attack the people who have more productive jobs they created or just earned, which are keeping the US at the forefront of the economy instead of a derelict museum of your father's generation.
If the US standard workweek were 4 days instead of 5, there would be at least 20% more work to do in the 4 days. That would keep labor demand ahead of supply for a while.