I don't think it is every useful to presume abilities based on race. For instance, American laboratories are full of scientists of every ethnicity doing creative work, and American shops are full of americans that have never had a creative thought. It depends on the person.
What is clear that many countries, particularly in Asia, are really good at teaching children to pass tests, while other countries, such as the US, tended to have a much less goal oriented, less standardized, curriculum which could be argued to foster creativity. A reasonable intelligent and creative person could get through the social hazing project we called school, perhaps get through college, and then get on with the American past time or creating wealth. of course this left some people without an education, which is why we are now obsessed with tests. Make sure that every students is educated to same remedial level, just like the rest of the world. And before commenting on who smart the immigrants you meet on the street are, remember that those are the best of the best.
In any case, the issue with american car makers is not one of intelligence or creativity, but one of arrogance. It was basically assumed that chauvinism would prevail and that people, in a free market that uses competition to fuel innovation no less, choose an inferior more expensive product. The arrogance cost the automakers thier bussinesses, and the American Taxpayers untold millions in a bailout.
The sad thing is that much of what the japanese did, at least to some degree, was to apply US technology. The US auto manufacturers would not invest in applying the technology. The US manufacturers would not plan for the rainy day. They felt the US government would take care of them with protectionist measures and bailouts, just like now. Back in 2000 it was written that oil prices were going to plummet due to oversupply, even though growth in India and Japan made it clear that the competition for the commodity was at best going to keep prices stable, and more than likely cause modest growth. So they continued to count on legislative loopholes and other sweetheart deals and continued to produce cars that now has us with only two, and perhaps one, viable auto maker.
Which is to nothing is simple. In the US we turn out all sorts of people, many who are innovative and creative. If one limits the sample to college prep school, we produce test takers to rival anyone in the world. We are a vibrant enough country with the best integration skills so we can attract the best talent. Which is good, because after about the third generation, it seems taht the ability of an US person to be innovative in the marketplace sags. Which is why our car industry is kaput. The hungry bugger nipping at our toes simply has more to gain, so works harder to get it. Most of us eat and have a reasonable place to stay no matter how lazy we are.
Solar makes no sense because they are receiving subsidies electricity prices. As the article mentions, it is unknown how much the american taxpayer foots to keep Las Vegas running.
OTOH, Nevada only uses a fraction of the damn, which means that if Las Vegas starts using more power, it might mean that other regions, which are growing also, might be without power. Likewise, the entire region essentially shares the same water, including mexico, and the area is already on the verge of a water war. This at a time when food prices are astronomical heights.
This is the excuse that the mortgage industry uses. It is why friends of mine, with six figure incomes, could not secure housing until they went to their proper part of town. It is why lawsuits were filed against financial officers at auto dealers for engaging in a pattern of offering loans at higher rates than equally qualified person who were of a more desirable color. The excuse still works, but is getting old given the median income in all racial groups is enough to own at least a modest home.
In any case, I don't think loaning to minorities is causing the current issues. For one thing, I don't think that so-called minorities are the primary people who speculated on property in florida, and other places, assuming that the price would go up by the time that development was finished and they could flip for a quick profit. Why banks would lend to such speculators, often with no obvious source of income, is beyond me. Furthermore, the NYT published a graphic on the largest foreclosures, and the cities are not those one associates with urban minority populations. Place like Merced, minneapolis, fort myers. Though these do have the minority population, and everyone has to take blame, the finance industry blaming it on government regulation is just weak.
This is why. Many years ago, Texas has a good regulation. The regulation was based on the idea that a persons home was not a liquid asset, but a vital possession. As such, texas allowed a person a great deal of protection to keep the home. The taxes would be fixed after 65. Your home could not be easily foreclosed or taken in a bankruptcy. In many jurisdictions taxes are easily disputed so people would not lose their houses due to excessive taxes. In exchange for these protections, Texans did not have the right to home equity loans.
That is until the financial industry bought out the Administration of George Bush and won his support to change the law. We now have a state of speculators instead of home owners. Prices went through the roof(tripled in 8 years) because the financial speculators wanted them to. Homeowner lost their house to due high taxes. Speculators moved in, borrowed against the house, and then moved out when they could not borrow leaving a blighted block. this was not due to government regulation forcing mortgage companies to loan to minorities. This was a calculated attack on the home owner back bone of america.
The sad thing is that the financial industry has made it bag of gold, and now is crying foul. Many of the mortgage holders are walking away, which they should, and the financial industry doesn't like it. Instead of renegotiating loans, they are begging the government for a bailout. It is sad. Those of us with eyes saw what was happening all those years ago, but all anyone else could see is free money. Now, as always, they are blaming it on regulation and minorities. The fact that the mortgage brokers were greedy bastards had nothing to do with it.
If we reflect back on the floppy disks days, we see that it was not only cost, but density, that killed the floppy oh so many years ago. A floppy was no longer useful for installing apps. MS often needed upward of 10 disks to ship an app. While 3 MB was big enough to hold most files, we were entering a period in which one could no longer survive with a single 3.5" disk. The CD-R, then the DVD-RW, made sense as they could replace the floppy, though in many ways at a higher costs, due to their higher density. The fact that CD was cheaper than other optical solutions made it a good choice. What did finally kill the floppy was the available of USB drives for the sneaker net. Though expensive, they too had a density benefit, as well as not requiring additional hardware, other than a USB port which initially were scarce on MS Windows machines, and the drivers buggy.
I think that density, not price, is going to drive the SSD market as well. We need space on our small computers, and the mechanical solution is not keeping up. I believe this is why Apple went to flash memory for the iPods, although initially they were dedicated to hard drives. My iPhod mini only has 4 gb, the same as the nano that replaced it. The new nanos have more memory than even the EOL minis. The microdrive, though a good tech, were not scaling. The larger physical size hard disks are now up to 160GB, but that is small for modern times in which many of us have a terabyte sitting on our home machine.
So I think we will pay for SDD prices if they give us more space. The problem right now is that we have more for a SSD drive, and get less space. We pay $1000 to Apple or practically anyone else for 64GB SSD. That is paying money for nothing. Wait until we can buy a Macbook Pro with a terrabyte SSD for $4000, or a Mac Book air with a 250GB SSD for $2000. Then we will be seeing the SSD laptops flying off the shelf.
Of course for low end machines many will stick with HDD for many years, just like people entered the 21st century still storing things on floppy. Of course this will hasten the downfall of HDD, as the cheap unreliable HDD will take an even bigger share of the market than they have today, and, just like today, users will attribute a high failure rate to a problem with the technology, and not that they chose to buy a cheap hard drive. With the last major mechanical part gone, computer will become much more reliable, just like when the stereos, for better or worse, left vacuum tubes behind.
I also hope that DVD drive as a standard goes away soon, and applaud Apple for making the Mac book air drive free. The main reason for a dvd drive, other than installing software, is because we cannot rip out DVDs to a more convinent format. I would much rather carry around a couple Flash Drives than a bag of DVDs. It would seem that in not too many years shipping software on USB dongles would be just as cost effective. Already 4GB flash cost less than $10.
Is the day the earth stood still. There are no significant special effects that need to be made better. There was nothing wrong with the story. The husband lost at war is as relevant at this moment as at the previous moment. The man who is in love with war and fear mongering and his money at the expense of his country is as relevant.
Ok, so an argument could be made that this is the right time to remake this movie, even if it guaranteed to be worse given the Mr. Revees has trouble acting his way out of a paper bag, and it just gets worse when he is acting across from someone that is truly competent(see A Walk in the Clouds).
The fact remains that there are any number of sci-fi horror movies that are more suited to his abilities, could benefit from better special effects, and are screaming for remakes. Simplying going through the MST3K list would net a treasure trove of easy money films.
I agree. Tactics like this seems to support the idea that many religions are just thinly veiled hate groups. For instance, most mainstream churches fight for their continued right to discriminate and hate based on superficial issues or arbitrary cultural issues. In mainstream america at least we don't officially say that one person is inferior simply because they think differently, although, according to a BBC interview the other day, some people in west viginia do in fact choose who they like based on such superficial issues.
It would be good for the church to hide this document. Some gems are
To avoid implicating the Church in legal matters to which it is not a party, leaders should avoid
testifying in civil or criminal cases or other proceedings involving abuse. For specific
guidelines, see "Legal Matters," page 151.
Which we can interpret to say that it is better to cover up than help people
Although HIV and AIDS can afflict innocent victims, the principal safeguards are chastity
before marriage, total fidelity in marriage, abstinence from any homosexual relations, avoidance
of illegal drugs, and reverence and care for the body.
Which can be interpreted to say that many people have HIV are innocent, but most are guilty of a sin and so may deserve it.
Only brethren who hold the necessary priesthood and are worthy may perform an ordinance or
blessing or stand in the circle. Those who participate are usually limited to priesthood leaders,
close family members, and close associates such as home teachers.
Which can be interpreted to mean that even though we are all equal in the eyes of god, some of us are more equal than others.
I believe it would be a mistake to single out the mormon church as unique case in this hate mongering. Most structures that seek to promote power of some have this characteristic. At the very least we should not promote such hate by giving such organization tacit government approval.
No one thought there was a problem building a living room car that every one can afford. Many people still do not. To many people, the living room car is a reasonable and necessary item. Many even invest in tricking out their living room car with full entertainment centers. The benefits are clear. So much time is spent in a car, wouldn't it be great to have all the comforts of a living room. A beer, a tv, a phone. Room to spread out, get conformable, even made engage in intimate relations. And there is little to show that this is a bad thing. The drive is more conformable. Oil prices are up, which is good thing unless one is stupid enough to live in an oil poor region. General safety is up, unless one is stupid enough to drive a car that is not a living room.
Reading through the summary and responses there seems to be this same air of uncertainty that existed when the auto manufacturers were using a loophole in a law so that farmers could continue to farm to provide cheap inefficient cars to the masses. There is nothing particularly wrong with it. There is no reason why a person who can afford it should not have a aircar, or a land yacht, or anything else they think they need to be happy. However, such things do have long term effect on the human condition. Speaking personally, there are already severe safety issues on my street dealing with land yachts that they streets are too narrow to accommodate, especially at the speeds that these drivers like to travel. I can imagine somebody buying one of these, and trying to land. At the very least, i would expect a lawsuit demanding that we cut down the trees and pave the front yards to accommodate such planes. And don't laugh. Similar lawsuits have been filed as people wish to reclaim overgrown land for their big houses and big cars.
From a business point of view, this is competition, something we have not seen in a while. For the past several years two things have been driving computer prices and computer use. First, MS sets the base price of OEM computers by fixing the price of the OS and the minimum requirements. IN exchange for accepting the MS guidance, MS prices retail versions of the OS at prices that encourage consumers to buy a new computer instead of upgrading. Since machines have become very cheap, MS was forced to have two levels of MS Windows.
Second is the incompatibility of MS software combined with the widespread piracy. This has been going for 20 years. Everyone I know who moved to a MS platform moved because they pirate software. MS has knows this is a critical path to their success, so has created constructs under which they can maintain sales but still encourage a level of piracy.
And this is why Linux will have a hard time competing, because MS will compete when it has to. We see this with Vista and the version zoo. MS should have just one version for $100, but that would kill the façade that MS has premium software, and would violate the cartel relationship with the OEMs. So we have a zoo of versions that allows the $100 entry point, but still maintains the arbitrary premium price point. Some complain that Apple obsesses over fashion, but at least Apple sells significant product at the asking price, something that MS does not do, making it much more the fashion disaster.
So MS can and will compete with free. The TCO arguments have been proven fraudulent, so all that can happen now is create more levels, as they are doing with Vista. Artificially restrict use by geography, system, and type of user, so they can compete with free. And since most of the US see the Internet as IE, mail as Outlook, writing as Word, and programming as moving little widgets on the screen, MS will likely succeed for a while longer, because whatever anyone might think, MS provides a better value for the freetards than Linux.
One of the compromises Apple users make is the willingness to pushed into to sometimes immature technologies. Ultimately USB was a good choice to replace the RS-422 and ADB. Yes it did mean that older keyboards and mice would not work. Yes it did mean that printers would not connect, and the choice of printers were few, but many Apple users were used to that. Apple has never had a parallel port. I recall having to hack together an adapter so I could print from my old Apple Computer. In any case, when I bought a new computer that has the new fangled ports, I also bought a little box that allowed me to connect all my old SCSI, RS-422, etc stuff through the USB. Used it for a year or two.
The real breakaway, to me, was the move from SCSI to firewire. Clearly a good choice, but for those with significant investment in old gear, and no way to use it except through a slow USB 1.0 port. Again, apple users are used to upgrading peripherals with the computer to gain maximum advantage, so this was not so bad.
About the only sad thing about the whole shift is Apples choice to abandon firewire in most devices. This is clearly a good choice if one is trying to product the cheapest component, but Firewire has some advantages that USB does not. In particular charging a device from a power hub on the desktop was nice.
If we believe the stock market, and assumes that, at least in the mid term, reflects the prospect of future profit, then the reason Yahoo turned down the offer was because it was a dumb thing to do. Though it would have meant short term gains for Yahoo investors, the MSFT stock price indicates that it would have a dumb thing to do, at least in the mid term. Though a executive might have the requirement to maximize profits for investors, one can hardly argue that an executive should sell simply to maximize short term gains when a company still has long term profits. At the very least one can argue that a firm has a duty to the employees that generate a long term profit and not discard these employees simply to gain an immediate pay day for a few greedy investors.
IMHO, The interesting thing is that this was such a dumb idea that even greedy investors did not seem to want it. As soon as the buyout was proposed, MSFT stock tanked well over 10%. It regained some in the weeks after, but the biggest gain occurred when it looked like the deal would go bad, and when it became clear that Balmer was going to do the damn fool thing, the stock tanked again. Not a rousing endorsement that this deal would do anything positive. On the Yahoo side, the stock briefly spiked as some investors were looking for a quick payday, and others were looking to get rid of an investment they perhaps paid too much for, but no on really seemed to think it was a good deal as even when it seemed like MSFT might raise the bid to $37, the stock never went above $29, which seemed to indicate that investors seemed to think of this as a windfall and not a long term thing. Of course, the most interesting thing, is that while MSFT stock has not recovered, yahoo has not fallen back anywhere near the january lows.
As I see it, Microsoft was simply willing to burn some money to get some experience in a field that they are flailing in, and to knock out the competition. It was not a growth strategy, simply a way to tread water. Given that MSFT is still perhpas 20% down on the year, while yahoo is somewhat in positive territory, i imagine that this act of desperation has done more harm than good.
Apple does not have these machines because there is really no money to be made in these machines. There is no computer OEM manufacturer who is doing well. HP, for example, as well as most other manufacturers, do well because they have products other than computers. Del stock, for instance, is 30% below the 52 week high. Selling cut rate MS machines is not and has not been profitable for many years.
Buying cut rate machines, OTOH, is, and due to the willingness of MS and the OEMs to subsidize these machine(why does a Linux box cost more when MS Windows is theoretically 10% of the cost of the box?) companies would be a fool not to buy these boxes for the cooperate widgets/workers, and as MS is hostile to all other OS, there is little choice but to buy the more expensive and generally inferior ancillary products. In this way, MS profits handsomely, and the OEM box people eek out a living.
Of course now things are different and the computer maker stocks are proving it. It is now possible to buy the cheap PC for the worker bee, the Linux box for the centralized IT, and the pretty Apple for the executive or other lucky worker, and have all of it work together. The cheap PC works for production because nothing is really supposed to stored on the cheap PC, and if the box breaks it is easy to bring in the old box, image it, and have the widget working within a few hours.
Apple products work for the highly paid professionals because Apple products generally do not break. They may get confused, but as an Apple user, and an Apple users that is not a gentle Apple user, I can say that Apple products are tough. I have never had an PC, and I had some expensive PCs, that were as useful for as long as the Macs.
As far as repairs, towers are fairly straightforward, even easier than the PC. One latch exposes the innards. The memory slots are accessible. The HD is accessible. Last time I replaced a HD it took me less than 10 minutes, 2 minutes to add memory. It is so easy to remove the components that I always use the Apple built in lock to protect them. OTOH, I recall replacing a HD and memory on a PC at it took me 10 minutes just to get the components removed.
Laptops and all in one's are another matter. They last long enough so that if you buy a laptop every 18-24 months, you will end up with spares. In this age of the Time machines, with daily or hourly backups, a spare compute can be reimaged and work began a few hours. Old laptops can become desktop machines if the hard disk or screen or DVD goes out. Just add external components. An Apple motherboard is generally good for 5 years without upgrades.
So the machine depends on who is going to use it. I prefer to have a machine that I can use for three years because it is never clear that I will have the money and time to upgrade. In many cases, it is better to swap out a machine in a few hours rather than wait for a repair, which may require the additional time of reimaging anyway. I can't imagine asking anyone to stop working while the machine is being reparied, reimaged, and returned.
As far as monitors are concerned, this has been the controversy for many years. Even with PCs, many years ago, many corporate users preferred the all in one because the were cheaper, and the monitor was, after all, more reliable than the other components. I myself have never had a computer replaced without also replacing the monitor, for instance to an LCD or bigger LCD. I know that if a computer breaks, it is easy to just unhook the computer from the monitor and replace it, just a few plugs. But in a highly networked place, it seems that it would be even easier just to unplug the computer and the network cable and the keyboard(mouse connects to the keyboard), and replace the whole shebang. It may cost $1200 instead of $700, but imagine how much would be saved by outsourcing repairs to Apple rather than continuing to pay in house repair people that generally just run around the office anyway?
When things like this come out, it is hard to know how much of it is real. We can recall that the old USSR was masters of such public relations, convincing every organization on earth that they remained a player, costing the US taxpayer trillions in unneeded expenditures. In an older example the british empire managed to continue the façade of a world power well into the 20th century using such tactics.
I believe they are taking a page out of the N. Korean playbook, taunting the world with images and tests, and then laughing when the world, particularly the US, can do nothing about it. Of course nothing can be done about it because they probably do have something, and any force would be risky. Compare this to Iraq where there was little risk as iRaq has little, and unlike the some other countries in the region, apparently had relatively little influence in global events.
Of course if the US like, like the British empire in it's waning day, had not deployed it's forces so willy nilly, and has not spent itself to the brink of bankruptcy, there might be something we could do with Iran and N. Korea. As it is we can't even take care of the real and present threat, Afghanistan and Pakistan, so little else matters.
In the end though I think it is just PR. Just because you have the toys does not mean you know how to use them. And, unlike the end of WWII, two or three big bombs, with threats of more to follow, it not enough to win a confrontation. In any case, one can hardly argue that fanatical religious states with nuclear weapons are inherently dangerous. Israel, which ranks very low in freedoms granted by the modern state, and appears to be controlled by fundamentalism as any country in the region, has had nuclear weapons for years with little negatve effect.
This has a lot to do with maturity, as well as writing for publicity or for the joy of writing. It is an issue in all writing endeavors. The sign of a mature effective writer is the ability to throw away a months worth of work due to the fact it is crap.
Some would say that market research would eliminate such waste, but there are two issue. First, I would not always label such work as waste. It might be proof of concept code, and now the concept is proved invalid. If nothing else, the coding skills might be improved, and other lesson learned. Second, related to the first, it is not obvious that an idea is not so good. It may seem like a wonderful idea. Many seemingly good ideas make it into production, but they ultimately don't meet the needs of the consumer or the manufacturer. The high fuel consumption cars of the late 70's that lead to the government bailout of the 80's. HD DVD. The 20th anniversary mac. PlayforSure.
I find the cost of solid ink to be about the same as the cost of third party toner. For instance, my color laser cost about 50% more per page to run. If I refill the toner myself, the cost per page, on average, might be a little cheaper. As a result, I have never had the desire to use third party solid ink.
What I have found is a problem is that the ink will clog if it is not used enough, and quite a bit of ink will be used to clean the printer, it if can be cleaned at all. I have gone through a stick on ink, almost $30, cleaning the printer. Then it can't be turned off unless one is willing to consume a several dollars worth of ink. All in all, though, I have found the printer to be a better value than the color laser printers.
The Battlestar Galatica remake was not great, and not better than the original. What makes it interesting is that the remake is updated so it fits with current norms, most notably that the protagonists are fight their own creations. However, in both shows most of the tension came from whatever immediate threat existed, which means that the show can continue as long as immediate threats are created. Problems are solved with guns, and at the end of the day, one person is in charge.
In Blakes 7, however, while there are monsters of the week, and problems are solved with guns, The drama depended upon the characters and the actors ability to convey tension. At first this was Blake and Avalon, and then we were lucky and go Servalan. A magical ship flying around the universe would not be as interesting if it were a simple military order. I suspect there are few females who can look dangerous in an evening gown. The show had it's reprieve when it was allowed to continued after series two. It was given a honorable end when all major characters that were not dead died in the correct fashion and in the correct order, most critically by the death of Blake at the hands of you know who. I know that deaths were left ambiguous in case the show continued, but for me it was the end, as poignant as Black Adder Goes Forth.
There must be a new idea somewhere in TV land. I fear this will ruin a perfectly happy, though corny, idea, just like the Bionic Women is now ruined. And it will be the same reason. Trying to send in a child to do an adult's job.
typical capitalist pig. Trying to force the government to subsidize private enterprise so these firms do not actually have to hire people to innovate new products to compete with cheaper alternatives. Not that I have a problem with the corporate dole, to the contrary, I like the fact that executives become extremely wealthy at the expense of the average taxpayer, I am just mocking evangelicals that love the dole but hate paying taxes.
I concur. The high level languages change, often depending on the high level interfaces. It makes little sense to write high level interfaces in straight C. At most, you might use a something based on C.
OTOH, I do not think there are many people writing low level code in assembly, which was not all that uncommon many years ago. On needed to interface to a external device, well sit down and write the glue code in assembly. It is the only way to work. Now, such code would be written in C or C++. Does that make assembly any less important? Does that make C any less? Well, sort of. One might be more likely to get a job writing in Python or Java, but I think it is kind of like a car mechanic who rely's on fancy diagnostic rather than intimate knowledge of how the car operates. Such a mechanic might provide cheaper service in the short term, but at some point needless parts will be replaced and things will remain unfixed.
It is also interesting to note that both of these are relatively closed, proprietary, single source integrated systems. The cheap GPC was supposed to be the death knell of such systems. In fact, it might have if the cheap GPC was not based on the single source proprietary MS Windows OS. As it is the choice is a highly integrated reliable, but costly, computer system either integrated by Apple based on Mac OS X, or a slightly less costly PC integrated by Dell or the like, using an OS they really do not understand and have no control to insure customer needs are met. It is true that one can get a rock bottom price PC, but then there is no way to know if any real integration has been done, or if random cheap parts have been thrown together.
it certainly seems to me that people are willing to pay for products that are well designed and well integrated. The switch to Intel, possible because of competition in the x86 market and the convergence of CISC and RISC, appears to be working. It may work so well that MS is having trouble getting Vista out the door, and is having trouble EOL XP.
This is just indicative of the paranoid world some wackos live in. Only those that gain their power from deceiving the masses are afraid of open discussion. Otherwise, we are free to discuss whatever we like.
BTW, the reason that evolution can be talked about in school and ID should not is that evolution is science, and can change as new information is acquired. Evolution is not based on any traditional truth. It is based on observation, and it's connection to the holy, if any, is only incidental. OTOH, ID is based on a specific group creation myth, and promoting ID is like promoting religion, something the US government should not do. If we want a survey of creation myths, that is such a large topic that it needs a course all of it's own, and many would support such course, except, I suspect, those that want to teach ID, as such seem often afraid of competing knowledge, perhaps because the truth will set you free,
Most person becomes that which they most rail against. More often than not, these people realize that those they railed against, for instance the PHB, were just doing things that they could not at that point understand. It has been interesting to see Scott Adams descend into the PHB. The PHB that is continuously coming up with new ways to make a profit, and has little concern with quality or application. Be it outsourcing to unqualified labour or redesigning a web site, the PHB is interested in earning, not customers or quality. This is why engineers have such trouble dealing with them. Engineers are taught that their job is to make the world better, and it is unethical to cut corners primarily to increase profits.
SO, this website redesign proves that Dilbert has become the PHB. A design not help the customers or users, but to help the bottom line. How does it hep. Well, for one, it put Dilbert on the front page of/. after I don't know how long. It is an marketing gimmick, nothing more. Dilbert is irrelevant, and when one is irrelevent, there is little else to do but employ gimmicks. OTOH, I am sure it will work. Admas will sell some of his collected blog entries, people will reminisce about the good old days, and many will complain simply because they cannot understand that a business must generate a good profit.
Part of professional training is training students to be professionals. While a good argument can be made that post graduate students who do not already have sufficient self control to stay on task should simply fail, this ignores that sometimes good habits are learned and must be enforced before they become habits.
I used to think that going to a certain school was only important to an athlete due to the fact that some schools have historical been more likely to have students move to the pros. If one goes to the wrong school, the chances of making it to the pros goes from about 1% to nil.
Then I heard an interview with Bill Gates in which he implied MS hired all the top graduates from certain colleges. They were trying to establish relationships with other schools, but these were the only ones that had acceptable candidates. This was in conjunction with his assertion that there not enough CS majors in America, so MS had to import workers from other countries.
From informal observations, I also note that in certain parts of the country there are preferential schools for certain disciplines. For instance, if one wanted to be an engineer or a lawyer or an artist or writer, it is beneficial to choose the right school.
So yea, when you graduate it might matter. It depends if one plans to stay local or engage in a nation wide search. It depends if one can get into a big name college, or a state school is all that is available. It depends if one goes corporate or small business. But, above all else, choose a school that matches you personality. Choose a school that gives a renaissance education, if that is what you want, a technical education, if that is what you want, or a party education, though that is risky. If you wish the later, do not believe the surveys. Check the beer consumption statistics, and make sure to include the bible belt in your search. You will be surprised.
I don't mind tax cut, but as fiscal conservative I do mind spending money we do not have. McCain budget, recently unveiled, cuts taxes but also involves a deficit of 200 billion per year. Given that our gross debt is is now almost 80% of GDP, I don't know how we can allow a continuation of the borrow and spend economy promoted by the conservative GOP. As a reference, the evil tax and spend democrats left us with a gross debt of between 40-60% in 1980 and 2000.
Pretty much, as a fiscal conservative I understand the need to not spend more money that you make, or can reasonably pay back. I certainly do not understand people paying, for example, half a trillion dollars in a discretionary war with no plans on how repay the debt. It has crossed my mind that these so-called conservative, mostly christian, persons do not feel they have a moral obligation to pay debts that they can paw off to other people, but that, frankly, makes more sense. Any responsible moral person knows the first rule to keep your word and pay off debts.
At the end of the day, taxes pay for things we use and need in this great country. I have no problem paying taxes, because the United States has given me an education, opportunities, and freedom. None of those, especially the last, are free. Why would I want to use things that I don't pay for,a nd perhaps even be charitable. For instance, everyone complains about gas taxes, and they suck. I mostly use about 30-40 miles of road, mostly in crap shape. Outside of town we have a beautiful 6 lane road through cow pasture, built so that developers could make money building and selling houses, and used by by a few commuters who do not even come close to cover the costs of the road. I could complain, but what good does it do. I pay taxes to pay for what we need in America, not for what I need.
OTOH, I do order for amazon, and the lack of taxes is a consideration in my purchase. But it is my states decision to base their income primarily on a sales tax, a tax which is both regressive and extremely difficult and expensive to collect. They could do payroll taxes, or investment taxes, but they don't. Everyone, even those would make barely enough to live on, have to pay the tax. Well, i am sorry. I don't think sales taxes work, and the lesson they should be taking from the internet is and globalization is to create a tax based on ability. Remember, as many conservatives know, a penny from a pauper is worth much more than a dollar from a millionaire.
Mac OS X is may the best consumer OS on the market, but that in no way implies tha Apple has to supply i so that everyone can use it. I think that solid ink printers are the best printers on the market, but that does not mean that Xerox has to allow their manufacture so that consumers who prefer a cheap inkjet can afford it. Likewise, MS Office was the best office app, but it was so expensive that most people had to steal it.
Fundamentally, one buys a Mac not because of the OS, but because of the system. Mac OS works, and is affordable, in the way that MS products are not because it only has to work on a small range of hardware, hardware that meets certain standards. Such hardware is expensive. Such expense is not justified for all persons. If the hardware limits were not there, there would be much less different from the GPC.
In reality the MS PC is only a year or two behind the mac. There is very little that can't be done on the PC. If one wants a machine that costs less than a Mac, if one wants expansion, if one wants cheap memory and cheap processors, then a PC may be a better choice. It is no different than anything else. One may want the fancy stuff, but one can't always afford it.
I have a Mac because I like the machines. The expansion through SCSI or Firewire or USB is quite good. They last a very long time. They are well built. They are durable. There has only occasionally been a huge superiority over competing OS. The OS alone has never justified my purchase, and i would be suspec of anyone who thought i was. It is the total package.
If I were a major government I would have much more sophisticated methods of acquiring stolen property than ebay. Ebay has not privacy guarantees, and has no incentives to keep any particular customer or seller happy. If one goes another will take the place.
It is fear mongering. If the Iranian government can get machinery to refine nuclear materials, then why not an plane. And what are they going to do with one plane, other than use it create other planes, in which case they need a whole plane to begin with, not bit and pieces.
To put it plainly, Ebay may be where someone like the Eric Rudolf and the Army of God might buy stuff to kill women and children. And while a group like that could use an F-16, I do not see the US administration monitoring radical US traditional churches, just people whose beliefs disagree with their own.
Slashdot Mirror
What is clear that many countries, particularly in Asia, are really good at teaching children to pass tests, while other countries, such as the US, tended to have a much less goal oriented, less standardized, curriculum which could be argued to foster creativity. A reasonable intelligent and creative person could get through the social hazing project we called school, perhaps get through college, and then get on with the American past time or creating wealth. of course this left some people without an education, which is why we are now obsessed with tests. Make sure that every students is educated to same remedial level, just like the rest of the world. And before commenting on who smart the immigrants you meet on the street are, remember that those are the best of the best.
In any case, the issue with american car makers is not one of intelligence or creativity, but one of arrogance. It was basically assumed that chauvinism would prevail and that people, in a free market that uses competition to fuel innovation no less, choose an inferior more expensive product. The arrogance cost the automakers thier bussinesses, and the American Taxpayers untold millions in a bailout.
The sad thing is that much of what the japanese did, at least to some degree, was to apply US technology. The US auto manufacturers would not invest in applying the technology. The US manufacturers would not plan for the rainy day. They felt the US government would take care of them with protectionist measures and bailouts, just like now. Back in 2000 it was written that oil prices were going to plummet due to oversupply, even though growth in India and Japan made it clear that the competition for the commodity was at best going to keep prices stable, and more than likely cause modest growth. So they continued to count on legislative loopholes and other sweetheart deals and continued to produce cars that now has us with only two, and perhaps one, viable auto maker.
Which is to nothing is simple. In the US we turn out all sorts of people, many who are innovative and creative. If one limits the sample to college prep school, we produce test takers to rival anyone in the world. We are a vibrant enough country with the best integration skills so we can attract the best talent. Which is good, because after about the third generation, it seems taht the ability of an US person to be innovative in the marketplace sags. Which is why our car industry is kaput. The hungry bugger nipping at our toes simply has more to gain, so works harder to get it. Most of us eat and have a reasonable place to stay no matter how lazy we are.
OTOH, Nevada only uses a fraction of the damn, which means that if Las Vegas starts using more power, it might mean that other regions, which are growing also, might be without power. Likewise, the entire region essentially shares the same water, including mexico, and the area is already on the verge of a water war. This at a time when food prices are astronomical heights.
In any case, I don't think loaning to minorities is causing the current issues. For one thing, I don't think that so-called minorities are the primary people who speculated on property in florida, and other places, assuming that the price would go up by the time that development was finished and they could flip for a quick profit. Why banks would lend to such speculators, often with no obvious source of income, is beyond me. Furthermore, the NYT published a graphic on the largest foreclosures, and the cities are not those one associates with urban minority populations. Place like Merced, minneapolis, fort myers. Though these do have the minority population, and everyone has to take blame, the finance industry blaming it on government regulation is just weak.
This is why. Many years ago, Texas has a good regulation. The regulation was based on the idea that a persons home was not a liquid asset, but a vital possession. As such, texas allowed a person a great deal of protection to keep the home. The taxes would be fixed after 65. Your home could not be easily foreclosed or taken in a bankruptcy. In many jurisdictions taxes are easily disputed so people would not lose their houses due to excessive taxes. In exchange for these protections, Texans did not have the right to home equity loans.
That is until the financial industry bought out the Administration of George Bush and won his support to change the law. We now have a state of speculators instead of home owners. Prices went through the roof(tripled in 8 years) because the financial speculators wanted them to. Homeowner lost their house to due high taxes. Speculators moved in, borrowed against the house, and then moved out when they could not borrow leaving a blighted block. this was not due to government regulation forcing mortgage companies to loan to minorities. This was a calculated attack on the home owner back bone of america.
The sad thing is that the financial industry has made it bag of gold, and now is crying foul. Many of the mortgage holders are walking away, which they should, and the financial industry doesn't like it. Instead of renegotiating loans, they are begging the government for a bailout. It is sad. Those of us with eyes saw what was happening all those years ago, but all anyone else could see is free money. Now, as always, they are blaming it on regulation and minorities. The fact that the mortgage brokers were greedy bastards had nothing to do with it.
I think that density, not price, is going to drive the SSD market as well. We need space on our small computers, and the mechanical solution is not keeping up. I believe this is why Apple went to flash memory for the iPods, although initially they were dedicated to hard drives. My iPhod mini only has 4 gb, the same as the nano that replaced it. The new nanos have more memory than even the EOL minis. The microdrive, though a good tech, were not scaling. The larger physical size hard disks are now up to 160GB, but that is small for modern times in which many of us have a terabyte sitting on our home machine.
So I think we will pay for SDD prices if they give us more space. The problem right now is that we have more for a SSD drive, and get less space. We pay $1000 to Apple or practically anyone else for 64GB SSD. That is paying money for nothing. Wait until we can buy a Macbook Pro with a terrabyte SSD for $4000, or a Mac Book air with a 250GB SSD for $2000. Then we will be seeing the SSD laptops flying off the shelf.
Of course for low end machines many will stick with HDD for many years, just like people entered the 21st century still storing things on floppy. Of course this will hasten the downfall of HDD, as the cheap unreliable HDD will take an even bigger share of the market than they have today, and, just like today, users will attribute a high failure rate to a problem with the technology, and not that they chose to buy a cheap hard drive. With the last major mechanical part gone, computer will become much more reliable, just like when the stereos, for better or worse, left vacuum tubes behind.
I also hope that DVD drive as a standard goes away soon, and applaud Apple for making the Mac book air drive free. The main reason for a dvd drive, other than installing software, is because we cannot rip out DVDs to a more convinent format. I would much rather carry around a couple Flash Drives than a bag of DVDs. It would seem that in not too many years shipping software on USB dongles would be just as cost effective. Already 4GB flash cost less than $10.
Ok, so an argument could be made that this is the right time to remake this movie, even if it guaranteed to be worse given the Mr. Revees has trouble acting his way out of a paper bag, and it just gets worse when he is acting across from someone that is truly competent(see A Walk in the Clouds).
The fact remains that there are any number of sci-fi horror movies that are more suited to his abilities, could benefit from better special effects, and are screaming for remakes. Simplying going through the MST3K list would net a treasure trove of easy money films.
It would be good for the church to hide this document. Some gems are
To avoid implicating the Church in legal matters to which it is not a party, leaders should avoid testifying in civil or criminal cases or other proceedings involving abuse. For specific guidelines, see "Legal Matters," page 151. Which we can interpret to say that it is better to cover up than help people Although HIV and AIDS can afflict innocent victims, the principal safeguards are chastity before marriage, total fidelity in marriage, abstinence from any homosexual relations, avoidance of illegal drugs, and reverence and care for the body. Which can be interpreted to say that many people have HIV are innocent, but most are guilty of a sin and so may deserve it. Only brethren who hold the necessary priesthood and are worthy may perform an ordinance or blessing or stand in the circle. Those who participate are usually limited to priesthood leaders, close family members, and close associates such as home teachers. Which can be interpreted to mean that even though we are all equal in the eyes of god, some of us are more equal than others.
I believe it would be a mistake to single out the mormon church as unique case in this hate mongering. Most structures that seek to promote power of some have this characteristic. At the very least we should not promote such hate by giving such organization tacit government approval.
No one thought there was a problem building a living room car that every one can afford. Many people still do not. To many people, the living room car is a reasonable and necessary item. Many even invest in tricking out their living room car with full entertainment centers. The benefits are clear. So much time is spent in a car, wouldn't it be great to have all the comforts of a living room. A beer, a tv, a phone. Room to spread out, get conformable, even made engage in intimate relations. And there is little to show that this is a bad thing. The drive is more conformable. Oil prices are up, which is good thing unless one is stupid enough to live in an oil poor region. General safety is up, unless one is stupid enough to drive a car that is not a living room.
Reading through the summary and responses there seems to be this same air of uncertainty that existed when the auto manufacturers were using a loophole in a law so that farmers could continue to farm to provide cheap inefficient cars to the masses. There is nothing particularly wrong with it. There is no reason why a person who can afford it should not have a aircar, or a land yacht, or anything else they think they need to be happy. However, such things do have long term effect on the human condition. Speaking personally, there are already severe safety issues on my street dealing with land yachts that they streets are too narrow to accommodate, especially at the speeds that these drivers like to travel. I can imagine somebody buying one of these, and trying to land. At the very least, i would expect a lawsuit demanding that we cut down the trees and pave the front yards to accommodate such planes. And don't laugh. Similar lawsuits have been filed as people wish to reclaim overgrown land for their big houses and big cars.
Second is the incompatibility of MS software combined with the widespread piracy. This has been going for 20 years. Everyone I know who moved to a MS platform moved because they pirate software. MS has knows this is a critical path to their success, so has created constructs under which they can maintain sales but still encourage a level of piracy.
And this is why Linux will have a hard time competing, because MS will compete when it has to. We see this with Vista and the version zoo. MS should have just one version for $100, but that would kill the façade that MS has premium software, and would violate the cartel relationship with the OEMs. So we have a zoo of versions that allows the $100 entry point, but still maintains the arbitrary premium price point. Some complain that Apple obsesses over fashion, but at least Apple sells significant product at the asking price, something that MS does not do, making it much more the fashion disaster.
So MS can and will compete with free. The TCO arguments have been proven fraudulent, so all that can happen now is create more levels, as they are doing with Vista. Artificially restrict use by geography, system, and type of user, so they can compete with free. And since most of the US see the Internet as IE, mail as Outlook, writing as Word, and programming as moving little widgets on the screen, MS will likely succeed for a while longer, because whatever anyone might think, MS provides a better value for the freetards than Linux.
The real breakaway, to me, was the move from SCSI to firewire. Clearly a good choice, but for those with significant investment in old gear, and no way to use it except through a slow USB 1.0 port. Again, apple users are used to upgrading peripherals with the computer to gain maximum advantage, so this was not so bad.
About the only sad thing about the whole shift is Apples choice to abandon firewire in most devices. This is clearly a good choice if one is trying to product the cheapest component, but Firewire has some advantages that USB does not. In particular charging a device from a power hub on the desktop was nice.
IMHO, The interesting thing is that this was such a dumb idea that even greedy investors did not seem to want it. As soon as the buyout was proposed, MSFT stock tanked well over 10%. It regained some in the weeks after, but the biggest gain occurred when it looked like the deal would go bad, and when it became clear that Balmer was going to do the damn fool thing, the stock tanked again. Not a rousing endorsement that this deal would do anything positive. On the Yahoo side, the stock briefly spiked as some investors were looking for a quick payday, and others were looking to get rid of an investment they perhaps paid too much for, but no on really seemed to think it was a good deal as even when it seemed like MSFT might raise the bid to $37, the stock never went above $29, which seemed to indicate that investors seemed to think of this as a windfall and not a long term thing. Of course, the most interesting thing, is that while MSFT stock has not recovered, yahoo has not fallen back anywhere near the january lows.
As I see it, Microsoft was simply willing to burn some money to get some experience in a field that they are flailing in, and to knock out the competition. It was not a growth strategy, simply a way to tread water. Given that MSFT is still perhpas 20% down on the year, while yahoo is somewhat in positive territory, i imagine that this act of desperation has done more harm than good.
Buying cut rate machines, OTOH, is, and due to the willingness of MS and the OEMs to subsidize these machine(why does a Linux box cost more when MS Windows is theoretically 10% of the cost of the box?) companies would be a fool not to buy these boxes for the cooperate widgets/workers, and as MS is hostile to all other OS, there is little choice but to buy the more expensive and generally inferior ancillary products. In this way, MS profits handsomely, and the OEM box people eek out a living.
Of course now things are different and the computer maker stocks are proving it. It is now possible to buy the cheap PC for the worker bee, the Linux box for the centralized IT, and the pretty Apple for the executive or other lucky worker, and have all of it work together. The cheap PC works for production because nothing is really supposed to stored on the cheap PC, and if the box breaks it is easy to bring in the old box, image it, and have the widget working within a few hours.
Apple products work for the highly paid professionals because Apple products generally do not break. They may get confused, but as an Apple user, and an Apple users that is not a gentle Apple user, I can say that Apple products are tough. I have never had an PC, and I had some expensive PCs, that were as useful for as long as the Macs.
As far as repairs, towers are fairly straightforward, even easier than the PC. One latch exposes the innards. The memory slots are accessible. The HD is accessible. Last time I replaced a HD it took me less than 10 minutes, 2 minutes to add memory. It is so easy to remove the components that I always use the Apple built in lock to protect them. OTOH, I recall replacing a HD and memory on a PC at it took me 10 minutes just to get the components removed.
Laptops and all in one's are another matter. They last long enough so that if you buy a laptop every 18-24 months, you will end up with spares. In this age of the Time machines, with daily or hourly backups, a spare compute can be reimaged and work began a few hours. Old laptops can become desktop machines if the hard disk or screen or DVD goes out. Just add external components. An Apple motherboard is generally good for 5 years without upgrades.
So the machine depends on who is going to use it. I prefer to have a machine that I can use for three years because it is never clear that I will have the money and time to upgrade. In many cases, it is better to swap out a machine in a few hours rather than wait for a repair, which may require the additional time of reimaging anyway. I can't imagine asking anyone to stop working while the machine is being reparied, reimaged, and returned.
As far as monitors are concerned, this has been the controversy for many years. Even with PCs, many years ago, many corporate users preferred the all in one because the were cheaper, and the monitor was, after all, more reliable than the other components. I myself have never had a computer replaced without also replacing the monitor, for instance to an LCD or bigger LCD. I know that if a computer breaks, it is easy to just unhook the computer from the monitor and replace it, just a few plugs. But in a highly networked place, it seems that it would be even easier just to unplug the computer and the network cable and the keyboard(mouse connects to the keyboard), and replace the whole shebang. It may cost $1200 instead of $700, but imagine how much would be saved by outsourcing repairs to Apple rather than continuing to pay in house repair people that generally just run around the office anyway?
I believe they are taking a page out of the N. Korean playbook, taunting the world with images and tests, and then laughing when the world, particularly the US, can do nothing about it. Of course nothing can be done about it because they probably do have something, and any force would be risky. Compare this to Iraq where there was little risk as iRaq has little, and unlike the some other countries in the region, apparently had relatively little influence in global events.
Of course if the US like, like the British empire in it's waning day, had not deployed it's forces so willy nilly, and has not spent itself to the brink of bankruptcy, there might be something we could do with Iran and N. Korea. As it is we can't even take care of the real and present threat, Afghanistan and Pakistan, so little else matters.
In the end though I think it is just PR. Just because you have the toys does not mean you know how to use them. And, unlike the end of WWII, two or three big bombs, with threats of more to follow, it not enough to win a confrontation. In any case, one can hardly argue that fanatical religious states with nuclear weapons are inherently dangerous. Israel, which ranks very low in freedoms granted by the modern state, and appears to be controlled by fundamentalism as any country in the region, has had nuclear weapons for years with little negatve effect.
Some would say that market research would eliminate such waste, but there are two issue. First, I would not always label such work as waste. It might be proof of concept code, and now the concept is proved invalid. If nothing else, the coding skills might be improved, and other lesson learned. Second, related to the first, it is not obvious that an idea is not so good. It may seem like a wonderful idea. Many seemingly good ideas make it into production, but they ultimately don't meet the needs of the consumer or the manufacturer. The high fuel consumption cars of the late 70's that lead to the government bailout of the 80's. HD DVD. The 20th anniversary mac. PlayforSure.
What I have found is a problem is that the ink will clog if it is not used enough, and quite a bit of ink will be used to clean the printer, it if can be cleaned at all. I have gone through a stick on ink, almost $30, cleaning the printer. Then it can't be turned off unless one is willing to consume a several dollars worth of ink. All in all, though, I have found the printer to be a better value than the color laser printers.
In Blakes 7, however, while there are monsters of the week, and problems are solved with guns, The drama depended upon the characters and the actors ability to convey tension. At first this was Blake and Avalon, and then we were lucky and go Servalan. A magical ship flying around the universe would not be as interesting if it were a simple military order. I suspect there are few females who can look dangerous in an evening gown. The show had it's reprieve when it was allowed to continued after series two. It was given a honorable end when all major characters that were not dead died in the correct fashion and in the correct order, most critically by the death of Blake at the hands of you know who. I know that deaths were left ambiguous in case the show continued, but for me it was the end, as poignant as Black Adder Goes Forth.
There must be a new idea somewhere in TV land. I fear this will ruin a perfectly happy, though corny, idea, just like the Bionic Women is now ruined. And it will be the same reason. Trying to send in a child to do an adult's job.
typical capitalist pig. Trying to force the government to subsidize private enterprise so these firms do not actually have to hire people to innovate new products to compete with cheaper alternatives. Not that I have a problem with the corporate dole, to the contrary, I like the fact that executives become extremely wealthy at the expense of the average taxpayer, I am just mocking evangelicals that love the dole but hate paying taxes.
OTOH, I do not think there are many people writing low level code in assembly, which was not all that uncommon many years ago. On needed to interface to a external device, well sit down and write the glue code in assembly. It is the only way to work. Now, such code would be written in C or C++. Does that make assembly any less important? Does that make C any less? Well, sort of. One might be more likely to get a job writing in Python or Java, but I think it is kind of like a car mechanic who rely's on fancy diagnostic rather than intimate knowledge of how the car operates. Such a mechanic might provide cheaper service in the short term, but at some point needless parts will be replaced and things will remain unfixed.
it certainly seems to me that people are willing to pay for products that are well designed and well integrated. The switch to Intel, possible because of competition in the x86 market and the convergence of CISC and RISC, appears to be working. It may work so well that MS is having trouble getting Vista out the door, and is having trouble EOL XP.
BTW, the reason that evolution can be talked about in school and ID should not is that evolution is science, and can change as new information is acquired. Evolution is not based on any traditional truth. It is based on observation, and it's connection to the holy, if any, is only incidental. OTOH, ID is based on a specific group creation myth, and promoting ID is like promoting religion, something the US government should not do. If we want a survey of creation myths, that is such a large topic that it needs a course all of it's own, and many would support such course, except, I suspect, those that want to teach ID, as such seem often afraid of competing knowledge, perhaps because the truth will set you free,
SO, this website redesign proves that Dilbert has become the PHB. A design not help the customers or users, but to help the bottom line. How does it hep. Well, for one, it put Dilbert on the front page of /. after I don't know how long. It is an marketing gimmick, nothing more. Dilbert is irrelevant, and when one is irrelevent, there is little else to do but employ gimmicks. OTOH, I am sure it will work. Admas will sell some of his collected blog entries, people will reminisce about the good old days, and many will complain simply because they cannot understand that a business must generate a good profit.
Part of professional training is training students to be professionals. While a good argument can be made that post graduate students who do not already have sufficient self control to stay on task should simply fail, this ignores that sometimes good habits are learned and must be enforced before they become habits.
Then I heard an interview with Bill Gates in which he implied MS hired all the top graduates from certain colleges. They were trying to establish relationships with other schools, but these were the only ones that had acceptable candidates. This was in conjunction with his assertion that there not enough CS majors in America, so MS had to import workers from other countries.
From informal observations, I also note that in certain parts of the country there are preferential schools for certain disciplines. For instance, if one wanted to be an engineer or a lawyer or an artist or writer, it is beneficial to choose the right school.
So yea, when you graduate it might matter. It depends if one plans to stay local or engage in a nation wide search. It depends if one can get into a big name college, or a state school is all that is available. It depends if one goes corporate or small business. But, above all else, choose a school that matches you personality. Choose a school that gives a renaissance education, if that is what you want, a technical education, if that is what you want, or a party education, though that is risky. If you wish the later, do not believe the surveys. Check the beer consumption statistics, and make sure to include the bible belt in your search. You will be surprised.
Pretty much, as a fiscal conservative I understand the need to not spend more money that you make, or can reasonably pay back. I certainly do not understand people paying, for example, half a trillion dollars in a discretionary war with no plans on how repay the debt. It has crossed my mind that these so-called conservative, mostly christian, persons do not feel they have a moral obligation to pay debts that they can paw off to other people, but that, frankly, makes more sense. Any responsible moral person knows the first rule to keep your word and pay off debts.
At the end of the day, taxes pay for things we use and need in this great country. I have no problem paying taxes, because the United States has given me an education, opportunities, and freedom. None of those, especially the last, are free. Why would I want to use things that I don't pay for,a nd perhaps even be charitable. For instance, everyone complains about gas taxes, and they suck. I mostly use about 30-40 miles of road, mostly in crap shape. Outside of town we have a beautiful 6 lane road through cow pasture, built so that developers could make money building and selling houses, and used by by a few commuters who do not even come close to cover the costs of the road. I could complain, but what good does it do. I pay taxes to pay for what we need in America, not for what I need.
OTOH, I do order for amazon, and the lack of taxes is a consideration in my purchase. But it is my states decision to base their income primarily on a sales tax, a tax which is both regressive and extremely difficult and expensive to collect. They could do payroll taxes, or investment taxes, but they don't. Everyone, even those would make barely enough to live on, have to pay the tax. Well, i am sorry. I don't think sales taxes work, and the lesson they should be taking from the internet is and globalization is to create a tax based on ability. Remember, as many conservatives know, a penny from a pauper is worth much more than a dollar from a millionaire.
Fundamentally, one buys a Mac not because of the OS, but because of the system. Mac OS works, and is affordable, in the way that MS products are not because it only has to work on a small range of hardware, hardware that meets certain standards. Such hardware is expensive. Such expense is not justified for all persons. If the hardware limits were not there, there would be much less different from the GPC.
In reality the MS PC is only a year or two behind the mac. There is very little that can't be done on the PC. If one wants a machine that costs less than a Mac, if one wants expansion, if one wants cheap memory and cheap processors, then a PC may be a better choice. It is no different than anything else. One may want the fancy stuff, but one can't always afford it.
I have a Mac because I like the machines. The expansion through SCSI or Firewire or USB is quite good. They last a very long time. They are well built. They are durable. There has only occasionally been a huge superiority over competing OS. The OS alone has never justified my purchase, and i would be suspec of anyone who thought i was. It is the total package.
It is fear mongering. If the Iranian government can get machinery to refine nuclear materials, then why not an plane. And what are they going to do with one plane, other than use it create other planes, in which case they need a whole plane to begin with, not bit and pieces.
To put it plainly, Ebay may be where someone like the Eric Rudolf and the Army of God might buy stuff to kill women and children. And while a group like that could use an F-16, I do not see the US administration monitoring radical US traditional churches, just people whose beliefs disagree with their own.