There's no practical way to pull off a "progressive tax" on consumption
Sure there is. Average car purchase or rental: X% tax. Below average: X-factor%. Above average: X+factor%. Jewelry? Always a high %. Watercraft? Never a low percent and grows in portion with the cost of the craft. Milk and staple vegetables? Always a low percent. Junk food? Always a high percent tax.
Designing a progressive consumption tax isn't even particularly hard.
Hey, overseas purchases are excluded, right?
Why would you presume that? Just because that's how we've done it for an income tax?
Piketty's solution is crazy but to my surprise I find myself nodding at Bill Gates' comments. Consumption taxes, not labor or capital taxes.
Re:That works fine if you manage to nip it in the
on
How Nigeria Stopped Ebola
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
The basic problem with Ebola in the US is that everybody in the US who knows what to do about Ebola is over in Africa right now trying to stop it at the source. The folks still stateside are the B team.
If it didn't meet the requirement to be fully compatible with C, it wouldn't be C++.
Like the man says, you're welcome to fork a new language that's C++ without C compatibility. Frankly I don't see the point. If you don't need C compatibility there are far better OO languages than C++.
How much obligation do you believe a free Internet site has to maintain the security of the data you store with them? Even banks don't promise that hackers won't breach your account... only that if they do breach your account despite reasonable and prudent security measures, the bank will replace your money.
Why did you run the red light? Were you drunk? Rushing to beat a yellow? Distracted by a conversation with your passenger? Burnt out traffic light? Brakes failed? Criminal law determines culpability with two measures: actus rea (you ran the red light) and mens rea (why you ran the red light). Both have to be proven for there to be a crime. So depending on why you ran the red light, there could be anything from murder to manslaughter to just a tragic accident.
Was I outside the crosswalk? Jaywalking? Maybe I dashed into the street as the light changed offering drivers no chance to react. That may well mitigate your culpability, dropping the matter from murder to manslaughter or even from manslaughter to civil wrongful death. No matter how badly behaved you were, if my behavior foreclosed reasonable opportunities for you to avoid the tragedy then I share culpability.
My answer is: belligerent invasions of privacy hurt me and people I care about just as shoplifting hurts me and people I care about. And both are common enough forms of petty disorder to merit attention by the police.
Sex crime? That's over the top. But bad guys here should be pursued at least as diligently as shoplifters are.
Just so. And this is, in fact, one of the circumstances in which your bank *will not* restore the funds to your account.
If your account is hacked despite reasonable and prudent measures to maintain its security, the bank is on the hook. If your account is hacked because you were an irresponsible idiot, you are.
It escapes me how in the digital age anyone could believe that storing nude pictures of themselves online was anything other than the height of irresponsibility. If you don't want it known, it can never leave your control. Yes the thief is wrong, but like the guy in UHF said: "You so stupid!"
Pretty sure, yeah. Producers of G-Rated shows prefer that the kids not find porn when they search google for their favorite actress. There's often a morality clause in the contract, and your nude photos' presence on the Internet tends to run afoul of it.
First - Bennett should have said the "probability of them being leaked," not the "risk." Risk has a specific meaning: it's the probability of something happening TIMES the damage that occurs if it does happen.
Celebrities taking nude photos is a HIGH risk. They have a moderate (not low) probability of leaking and a HIGH damage should they leak.
If you write your pin number on your ATM card are you not at least partially to blame when a thief finds the card and cleans out your account? Of course the thief is wrong, but wow you were stupid!
The answer is: no, this can not be done with current protocols.
In theory with new protocols that your game doesn't support, sure. But only the end-to-end machines understand latency and jitter (your problem is jitter) so a middlebox won't help you.
The key caps pop off. The little plastic overlays, not the depressable keys themselves. Send them through the dishwasher in the small-items tray. With detergent. Viola! Fresh clean keyboard.
I wonder less whether religions are ready for ET and more whether science is ready for the discovery of inorganic life. Nearly everything I read on the subject carries a stated or more often unstated assumption that evolved alien life will have the same carbon-and-water basis that we do.
If it still doesn't adequately support the "kill -1" functionality of initd (which kills and resets all processes init manages, especially the getty processes on the terminals), I still don't want it.
The USG has many secrets. No laws are among them. The occasional secret executive orders tend to run intro trouble when they run afoul of the commercial sector. Presidents get spanked.
Then you hire a lawyer because no court in the U.S. has the authority to order a specific change to a product. The most they can do is declare a product to be unlawful as shipped, and that is done very publicly.
Of course that's not expected of you. But you know, TV notwithstanding it's actually kind of hard to come on U.S. soil and take hostages. So it's only a problem if something makes you unusually susceptible to blackmail.
Perhaps more importantly, Uncle Sam has to be able to trust that as soon as you're out of the way of imminent harm, your next call will be to him ready to assist in catching the bad guys. No matter what you did in the moment.
If your behavior suggests you'll keep quiet, keep your head down and hope nobody discovers you were blackmailed then you're most emphatically unclearable. Know what's worse than a lost secret? A secret you mistakenly think is still secret.
Slashdot Mirror
One can easily be heard and still be professional if he wants to.
Have you had much luck with that approach in a major open source software project?
There's no practical way to pull off a "progressive tax" on consumption
Sure there is. Average car purchase or rental: X% tax. Below average: X-factor%. Above average: X+factor%. Jewelry? Always a high %. Watercraft? Never a low percent and grows in portion with the cost of the craft. Milk and staple vegetables? Always a low percent. Junk food? Always a high percent tax.
Designing a progressive consumption tax isn't even particularly hard.
Hey, overseas purchases are excluded, right?
Why would you presume that? Just because that's how we've done it for an income tax?
That's going in my quotes file.
Piketty's solution is crazy but to my surprise I find myself nodding at Bill Gates' comments. Consumption taxes, not labor or capital taxes.
The basic problem with Ebola in the US is that everybody in the US who knows what to do about Ebola is over in Africa right now trying to stop it at the source. The folks still stateside are the B team.
I'm not whining. But until and unless "classic compact" catches up with the nasty new interface, I'm not upgrading either.
And D's "broad adoption" should tell you what value folks place on removing C from C++.
All versions of Netscape had a menu bar. Firefox long since passed Netscape's degree of awfulness.
If it didn't meet the requirement to be fully compatible with C, it wouldn't be C++.
Like the man says, you're welcome to fork a new language that's C++ without C compatibility. Frankly I don't see the point. If you don't need C compatibility there are far better OO languages than C++.
How much obligation do you believe a free Internet site has to maintain the security of the data you store with them? Even banks don't promise that hackers won't breach your account... only that if they do breach your account despite reasonable and prudent security measures, the bank will replace your money.
Why did you run the red light? Were you drunk? Rushing to beat a yellow? Distracted by a conversation with your passenger? Burnt out traffic light? Brakes failed? Criminal law determines culpability with two measures: actus rea (you ran the red light) and mens rea (why you ran the red light). Both have to be proven for there to be a crime. So depending on why you ran the red light, there could be anything from murder to manslaughter to just a tragic accident.
Was I outside the crosswalk? Jaywalking? Maybe I dashed into the street as the light changed offering drivers no chance to react. That may well mitigate your culpability, dropping the matter from murder to manslaughter or even from manslaughter to civil wrongful death. No matter how badly behaved you were, if my behavior foreclosed reasonable opportunities for you to avoid the tragedy then I share culpability.
Great questions!
My answer is: belligerent invasions of privacy hurt me and people I care about just as shoplifting hurts me and people I care about. And both are common enough forms of petty disorder to merit attention by the police.
Sex crime? That's over the top. But bad guys here should be pursued at least as diligently as shoplifters are.
Just so. And this is, in fact, one of the circumstances in which your bank *will not* restore the funds to your account.
If your account is hacked despite reasonable and prudent measures to maintain its security, the bank is on the hook. If your account is hacked because you were an irresponsible idiot, you are.
It escapes me how in the digital age anyone could believe that storing nude pictures of themselves online was anything other than the height of irresponsibility. If you don't want it known, it can never leave your control. Yes the thief is wrong, but like the guy in UHF said: "You so stupid!"
Pretty sure, yeah. Producers of G-Rated shows prefer that the kids not find porn when they search google for their favorite actress. There's often a morality clause in the contract, and your nude photos' presence on the Internet tends to run afoul of it.
First - Bennett should have said the "probability of them being leaked," not the "risk." Risk has a specific meaning: it's the probability of something happening TIMES the damage that occurs if it does happen.
Celebrities taking nude photos is a HIGH risk. They have a moderate (not low) probability of leaking and a HIGH damage should they leak.
If you write your pin number on your ATM card are you not at least partially to blame when a thief finds the card and cleans out your account? Of course the thief is wrong, but wow you were stupid!
The answer is: no, this can not be done with current protocols.
In theory with new protocols that your game doesn't support, sure. But only the end-to-end machines understand latency and jitter (your problem is jitter) so a middlebox won't help you.
Loved my omnikeys. Till they broke. Both of them. After 3 or 4 years. My model M's are nearly indestructable.
The key caps pop off. The little plastic overlays, not the depressable keys themselves. Send them through the dishwasher in the small-items tray. With detergent. Viola! Fresh clean keyboard.
I wonder less whether religions are ready for ET and more whether science is ready for the discovery of inorganic life. Nearly everything I read on the subject carries a stated or more often unstated assumption that evolved alien life will have the same carbon-and-water basis that we do.
Actually, I miswrote it. I meant "kill -HUP 1", i.e. sent the HUP signal to process id #1.
Yes, it was trivial to achieve. With sysvinit. Lots of stuff is trivial with sysvinit and overly complicated with systemd.
If it still doesn't adequately support the "kill -1" functionality of initd (which kills and resets all processes init manages, especially the getty processes on the terminals), I still don't want it.
The USG has many secrets. No laws are among them. The occasional secret executive orders tend to run intro trouble when they run afoul of the commercial sector. Presidents get spanked.
Then you hire a lawyer because no court in the U.S. has the authority to order a specific change to a product. The most they can do is declare a product to be unlawful as shipped, and that is done very publicly.
Key escrow laws have been attempted before. And failed.
Of course that's not expected of you. But you know, TV notwithstanding it's actually kind of hard to come on U.S. soil and take hostages. So it's only a problem if something makes you unusually susceptible to blackmail.
Perhaps more importantly, Uncle Sam has to be able to trust that as soon as you're out of the way of imminent harm, your next call will be to him ready to assist in catching the bad guys. No matter what you did in the moment.
If your behavior suggests you'll keep quiet, keep your head down and hope nobody discovers you were blackmailed then you're most emphatically unclearable. Know what's worse than a lost secret? A secret you mistakenly think is still secret.