Before they spend the money on protecting children from the evil Internet, maybe they should spend some effort on protecting children from the evil collapsing infrastructure.
It doesn't matter if their house, the road, or a tall building collapses on them and kills them. At least they won't have had to give a blowjob to a middle aged pervert.....
Note: This post is sarcasm. I hate having to inform people of humour, but with the mods around here, you can't take the chance.....
That's nothing, really. In the UK the tax makes up over 80 percent of the cost. And as a result we don't piss it down the drain like US people do with "cars" that haven't improved economy-wise since the 1970s. How is that going for you with GM now then? Not that our car industry improved fast enough to keep up:-(
Funny....Vauxhaul, a European brand name, that gets quite good economy across the board, is a GM brand. There are a few others, too. Admittedly, it's been nearly 7 years since I've driven a Vauxhaul in Europe, but by my memory it was pretty peppy, and admirably efficient.
Besides that, even the North American versions are significantly better now than in the 70's. I currently drive a 2000 Chevy Impala. Full size, big car, big engine, fast....the whole bit. A lot of police departments use them, because of the size, reliability, and performance. It uses slightly more than half the fuel of my first car, which was a mid-size early 80's Chevrolet wagon. And it's faster, too.
There's a Youtube vid of a Honda Insight (hybrid) being driven very gently on an out of town road, windows up, no air conditioning, in econo mode, etc.etc. Basically every little thing they could do to get every inch out of the fuel they're using. Got 67 MPG. If I drive my Impala - which is not hybrid, probably twice the weight, and with the frontal area of a barn door compared to the Honda - in the same manner, at the same speed, I can easily break 50MPG. Somewhere around 53, depending on traffic; which the Honda didn't have to deal with. If I can do 53, and the Honda can only do 67 with all the advantages it's got....that's pretty pathetic.
That's like saying I should be able to get a Peterbilt 18 wheeler for the same price as a Yugo, because they can both be used to drive to the grocery store.....
Microsoft has no similar offering to Linux. Similarly, they have no similar offering to Eclipse.
"Similar" does not mean "something that the general public possibly could use in place of." In reality, it means the two items have to be virtually identical.
Linux is free as in freedom, open source, and unix-like. Windows is expensive, closed source, and decidedly not unix like.
They are not similar. They're pretty much polar opposites.
Considering how often the RIAA and ilk try to push the idea that downloading is stealing, I think we should use it against them, if they do try to pull this stunt.
Do I get charged with tax evasion of 8.25% of the value, if I steal a car? No. I get charged with car theft.
So if the RIAA think downloading is stealing, I should be charged with theft, not tax evasion. But downloading is not stealing, it's copyright violation, so I shouldn't be charged with theft, either.
Put a 1955 Corvette next to any Corvette since 2000 to see what I mean. Remember, that '55 Vette cost about $2800 so you didn't have to be a partner in a law firm or a crooked derivatives trader to afford one.
Brilliant logic there, Holmes.
That $2800 in 1955 would have been a year's wages for a person with a good job, considering that minimum wage in 1955 was $0.75 an hour....
0.75 X 8hr/day X 5days/week = $30 / week, before tax.
It would take a minimum wage person in 1955 just under two years to be able to afford a Corvette, if they needed no money for _anything_ else, and paid no taxes.
MSRP for the base 2009 Corvette is $48,565. Current minimum wage is $7.25.
Same calculations:
7.25X8X5 = $290/week
Now, it would take someone on minimum wage slightly over 3 years to be able to afford a Corvette. Not exactly a huge jump. And not so much a problem with the price of the car, as it is that minimum wage has not kept up to the cost of living. A person living on minimum wage now is much worse off than somebody living on minimum wage in 1955, across the board. Food, rent, transportation, entertainment....they call cost a significant portion more than in 1955, relative to minimum wage.
Suddenly that $2800 Corvette's not looking so cheap, is it?
GM didn't buy Saturn. It was a new division that was developed completely in house, with completely dedicated platforms, engines, and factories.
It didn't "turn to crap" after GM bought them, because GM didn't buy them. It was crap for a few years after GM first released them, just like every new car is crap and has various bugs and issues to work out.
And considering this was a new car from the ground up, it's not exactly surprising that there were problems.
Incidentally, I owned a 1998 Saturn for six years, and it never gave me an serious problems. I'd still be driving it, but some idiot in a full-size pickup turned left across the front of me and I T-boned him at close to 80km/h. Totalled the car, and I walked away from it. The guy in the truck was hurt worse than I was. Which tells you something about the quality and safety of this car...
It really pisses me off when some dope comes out with crap about some company (not that I'm not the first in line to bash corporate stupidity, mind you) when it's obvious they know nothing about them.
By that logic, there isn't any proof that the Obama administration isn't the puppet of an evil race of reptilian aliens living deep beneath the earth's crust.
That's the difference between not saying something in a specific context, and not saying anything at all.
Me not saying "I'm not from Pluto" doesn't mean I'm probably from Pluto.
But a lawyer/PR drone for a corporation not saying "We don't have that information" in response to a specific situation where they've been accused of asking for and receiving that information, speaks volumes.
Not to mention that the RIAA's wording "We've made no such request for this information." means precisely squat as to whether they have that information.
Sure....they didn't ask for it. But that doesn't mean they didn't receive it.
Don't think about what PR departments say; think about what they _don't_ say. Why exactly did the RIAA word it that way? If they didn't have that information, they would say: "We don't have that information, and never did."
Yes, I'm cynical. But with an organization like the RIAA, what reason do I have to be otherwise?
As to Last.fm's statements that they've given that information to noone? Well...noone that the president knows of. Maybe one of the few people that have access to that "tightly controlled" information is a malicious insider. Wouldn't be the first time it happened....
BadAnalogyGuy is a troll/tongue-in-cheek comedian (depending on your viewpoint). His analogies are deliberately bad. Look at his post history and you'll see.
Again...exact same problem. How does the Firefox protect against trusted programs from flipping the bit that Firefox sets to say the extension has been installed properly?
I don't think you quite get it. The prepositions "to" and "from" are not interchangeable because they have opposite meanings.
True, but this is one of those things where vagueness in the language can make a sentence mean what you want it to mean, or it's complete opposite.
Kinda like a sign near my parent's place: "This road restricted to heavy trucks."
Does that mean only heavy trucks are allowed on it? Or heavy trucks are the only thing not allowed on it? It depends on whether the "to" acts on "heavy trucks" or "restricted". Which is entirely a matter of what frame of mind the reader is in at the time.
Similarly, "Me was a downgrade to 98" can mean it's own polar opposite, depending on the listener.
Is "to" acting on "98" or "downgrade"? If "to" is acting on "98", then Me is considered worse than 98. If "to" is acting on "downgrade", then Me is considered better than 98.
Incidentally, the reason I bring this up is that when I read the sentence, I parsed it to mean that Me was worse than 98, which isn't how you took it.
Replace "to" with "for"...it doesn't change the meaning as I took it, but it completely eliminates the vagueness:
"No, I am sorry ME was complete downgrade for Win 98!"
How it's taken is probably more to do with local dialects than anything....
Slashdot Mirror
No, you left out the fact that you're going downhill to get 50 mpg with the Impala.
No, driving very gently, up to ~30MPH top speed, which is the exact same way the Honda managed to get 67MPG.
Nice.
I get modded down for stating facts.
Guess the truth hurts, doesn't it?
While you are worry about US$ 0.15/mo. We in Brazil need to worry about 40%, that's what we pay in taxes for any kind of telecomunication service.
I wish I could pay US$ 0.15 in taxes.
Yeah, but at least you have good beer....
Before they spend the money on protecting children from the evil Internet, maybe they should spend some effort on protecting children from the evil collapsing infrastructure.
It doesn't matter if their house, the road, or a tall building collapses on them and kills them. At least they won't have had to give a blowjob to a middle aged pervert.....
Note: This post is sarcasm. I hate having to inform people of humour, but with the mods around here, you can't take the chance.....
wtf did i just read :(
You read that whole thing?
Masochist.
That's nothing, really. In the UK the tax makes up over 80 percent of the cost. And as a result we don't piss it down the drain like US people do with "cars" that haven't improved economy-wise since the 1970s. How is that going for you with GM now then? Not that our car industry improved fast enough to keep up :-(
Funny....Vauxhaul, a European brand name, that gets quite good economy across the board, is a GM brand. There are a few others, too.
Admittedly, it's been nearly 7 years since I've driven a Vauxhaul in Europe, but by my memory it was pretty peppy, and admirably efficient.
Besides that, even the North American versions are significantly better now than in the 70's. I currently drive a 2000 Chevy Impala. Full size, big car, big engine, fast....the whole bit. A lot of police departments use them, because of the size, reliability, and performance.
It uses slightly more than half the fuel of my first car, which was a mid-size early 80's Chevrolet wagon. And it's faster, too.
There's a Youtube vid of a Honda Insight (hybrid) being driven very gently on an out of town road, windows up, no air conditioning, in econo mode, etc.etc. Basically every little thing they could do to get every inch out of the fuel they're using. Got 67 MPG.
If I drive my Impala - which is not hybrid, probably twice the weight, and with the frontal area of a barn door compared to the Honda - in the same manner, at the same speed, I can easily break 50MPG. Somewhere around 53, depending on traffic; which the Honda didn't have to deal with.
If I can do 53, and the Honda can only do 67 with all the advantages it's got....that's pretty pathetic.
Do they similarly tax photographs?
I would tax holiday snaps!
But, when they did it, did they pronounce it sau-kra-teez? Or Soe-kraets?
Crap. I replied to the wrong comment when I went hunting for it again.....
See here:
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1255929&cid=28202013
That's like saying I should be able to get a Peterbilt 18 wheeler for the same price as a Yugo, because they can both be used to drive to the grocery store.....
Microsoft has no similar offering to Linux. Similarly, they have no similar offering to Eclipse.
"Similar" does not mean "something that the general public possibly could use in place of." In reality, it means the two items have to be virtually identical.
Linux is free as in freedom, open source, and unix-like.
Windows is expensive, closed source, and decidedly not unix like.
They are not similar. They're pretty much polar opposites.
Considering how often the RIAA and ilk try to push the idea that downloading is stealing, I think we should use it against them, if they do try to pull this stunt.
Do I get charged with tax evasion of 8.25% of the value, if I steal a car? No. I get charged with car theft.
So if the RIAA think downloading is stealing, I should be charged with theft, not tax evasion. But downloading is not stealing, it's copyright violation, so I shouldn't be charged with theft, either.
Put a 1955 Corvette next to any Corvette since 2000 to see what I mean. Remember, that '55 Vette cost about $2800 so you didn't have to be a partner in a law firm or a crooked derivatives trader to afford one.
Brilliant logic there, Holmes.
That $2800 in 1955 would have been a year's wages for a person with a good job, considering that minimum wage in 1955 was $0.75 an hour....
0.75 X 8hr/day X 5days/week = $30 / week, before tax.
It would take a minimum wage person in 1955 just under two years to be able to afford a Corvette, if they needed no money for _anything_ else, and paid no taxes.
MSRP for the base 2009 Corvette is $48,565. Current minimum wage is $7.25.
Same calculations:
7.25X8X5 = $290/week
Now, it would take someone on minimum wage slightly over 3 years to be able to afford a Corvette. Not exactly a huge jump. And not so much a problem with the price of the car, as it is that minimum wage has not kept up to the cost of living. A person living on minimum wage now is much worse off than somebody living on minimum wage in 1955, across the board. Food, rent, transportation, entertainment....they call cost a significant portion more than in 1955, relative to minimum wage.
Suddenly that $2800 Corvette's not looking so cheap, is it?
You did read what he wrote, right? He's driving an Escort. That car hasn't been manufactured for years.
The key word in that second sentence you quoted is "anymore."
Combining the two sentences, he's saying "America can't build a quality car like my Escort, anymore."
Huh?
GM didn't buy Saturn. It was a new division that was developed completely in house, with completely dedicated platforms, engines, and factories.
It didn't "turn to crap" after GM bought them, because GM didn't buy them. It was crap for a few years after GM first released them, just like every new car is crap and has various bugs and issues to work out.
And considering this was a new car from the ground up, it's not exactly surprising that there were problems.
Incidentally, I owned a 1998 Saturn for six years, and it never gave me an serious problems. I'd still be driving it, but some idiot in a full-size pickup turned left across the front of me and I T-boned him at close to 80km/h. Totalled the car, and I walked away from it. The guy in the truck was hurt worse than I was. Which tells you something about the quality and safety of this car...
It really pisses me off when some dope comes out with crap about some company (not that I'm not the first in line to bash corporate stupidity, mind you) when it's obvious they know nothing about them.
By that logic, there isn't any proof that the Obama administration isn't the puppet of an evil race of reptilian aliens living deep beneath the earth's crust.
That's the difference between not saying something in a specific context, and not saying anything at all.
Me not saying "I'm not from Pluto" doesn't mean I'm probably from Pluto.
But a lawyer/PR drone for a corporation not saying "We don't have that information" in response to a specific situation where they've been accused of asking for and receiving that information, speaks volumes.
Cool.
The Greeks have a fastback Humvee!
Ok, I may be cynical, but you're just downright paranoid....
Not to mention that the RIAA's wording "We've made no such request for this information." means precisely squat as to whether they have that information.
Sure....they didn't ask for it. But that doesn't mean they didn't receive it.
Don't think about what PR departments say; think about what they _don't_ say. Why exactly did the RIAA word it that way? If they didn't have that information, they would say: "We don't have that information, and never did."
Yes, I'm cynical. But with an organization like the RIAA, what reason do I have to be otherwise?
As to Last.fm's statements that they've given that information to noone? Well...noone that the president knows of. Maybe one of the few people that have access to that "tightly controlled" information is a malicious insider. Wouldn't be the first time it happened....
BadAnalogyGuy is a troll/tongue-in-cheek comedian (depending on your viewpoint). His analogies are deliberately bad. Look at his post history and you'll see.
That would require effort. And I'm lazy....
It's "new" in the exact same sense that this extension is "new".
Again...exact same problem. How does the Firefox protect against trusted programs from flipping the bit that Firefox sets to say the extension has been installed properly?
I guess I'm just wiped from working on a bibliography (in MLA format) for my eight-year-old last night.
You should have just copied and pasted....
No...he's copying it to the clipboard, then printing out a hard copy.
This guy's violating copyright TWICE in TWO KEYSTROKES!11!1!!!
Ooooh...hardcore!
I don't think you quite get it. The prepositions "to" and "from" are not interchangeable because they have opposite meanings.
True, but this is one of those things where vagueness in the language can make a sentence mean what you want it to mean, or it's complete opposite.
Kinda like a sign near my parent's place:
"This road restricted to heavy trucks."
Does that mean only heavy trucks are allowed on it? Or heavy trucks are the only thing not allowed on it?
It depends on whether the "to" acts on "heavy trucks" or "restricted". Which is entirely a matter of what frame of mind the reader is in at the time.
Similarly, "Me was a downgrade to 98" can mean it's own polar opposite, depending on the listener.
Is "to" acting on "98" or "downgrade"?
If "to" is acting on "98", then Me is considered worse than 98.
If "to" is acting on "downgrade", then Me is considered better than 98.
Incidentally, the reason I bring this up is that when I read the sentence, I parsed it to mean that Me was worse than 98, which isn't how you took it.
Replace "to" with "for"...it doesn't change the meaning as I took it, but it completely eliminates the vagueness:
"No, I am sorry ME was complete downgrade for Win 98!"
How it's taken is probably more to do with local dialects than anything....
Next thing you know Jimbo will be rounding up Scientologists,forcing them into camps near active volcanos, and then blowing them all up with H-bombs.
Ok...when do we get started? :)