the north korean leadership is doing what any nation's leader would be expected to do in the face of foreign agression
think of how piss weak he would look to his people if he did nothing in the face of sanctions
north korea will not lob nukes at anyone, but it feels it needs to "man up" to the united states to avoid inviting further demands
think about it... the united states is determined to prevent any country it doesn't like (can't influence/control) from having nuclear technology
if north korea wants nuclear power, it must resist such pressure from the west
the united states is the warmongering global nuclear threat, and the only reason why many states play nice with the united states is due to fear of finding themselves in the same place as north korea
many developing nations are looking to nuclear weapons as a deterrence for american military aggression; without nukes, a country (such as afghanistan or iraq) is susceptible to invasion and occupation at the whim of foreign business interests
countries only become socialist when the government gets so big and destroys free market capitalism to the point where the country's economy consists primarily of government activity
if you don't like fearmongering, don't keep watching the obama administration keep trying to convince the world that iran and north korea are going to nuke america
for those that are truly informed, the only nuclear threat is from the united states
everybody knows that corporations are focused on you getting low cost
cost doesn't equal sale price... if consumers really weren't happy to pay a high price, they wouldn't (corporations also don't stop you from complaining about prices, which plenty of consumers do, but at the end of the day they are happy enough to pay still otherwise they would look for alternatives)
if you really weren't happy with the price and inconvenience of paying tolls of I-55, you would look for alternatives. that you appear to still be in the whinging phase means the alternatives are ultimately far more inconvenient and that I-55 is the lesser of two evils
private health care, funded by you and your employer
when the government forces the issue, it creates a guaranteed demand and insurance companies can take advantage of it. it's not the insurance companies fault... anyone else (including you) would probably do the same if the opportunity for a guaranteed income came along.
in Australia private healthcare is optional, but while there is a public healthcare, you pay for it based on your income (as a percentage), so poor people who can't afford private healthcare are covered by medicare but high income earners who choose not to go private still pay for medicare (basically it encourages people who can afford private to get out of public funded medicare). australia's healthcare probably isn't the cheapest, but it works.
those insurance companies are great at keeping costs down
insurance companies are infinitely better at cost-cutting within their organisations than governments. again, prices and costs are different. costs are what the company spends, while prices are what consumers pay (which is what you're bitching about).
if you want to bitch about prices, compare what corporations charge to what governments tax. how much tax do you pay? make sure you add up state and federal taxes.
your lack of understanding of such a basic business concept as cost explains why there are so many socialist morons voting in america. do you really think the government is going to save you? your lack of understanding of the effects of government involvement in healthcare doesn't really offer you much credibility to judge the gray matter of others.
in a nutshell; when government gets involved, prices usually go up for consumers. probably the next government induced bubble burst will probably be student loans... because when the government guaranteed them, prices went though the roof; not because insurance companies are corrupt, but because the government was doing their marketing for them and selling loans at any price. and you should know that when demand increases for a company's product, prices often do too (look at the price of oil for example; price decreases usually only happen with tech products where mass production reduces costs for the company so companies like apple can reduce prices to compete with samsung, but if the government mandated that everyone should have a smartphone, prices of all phones from all makers would skyrocket). the underwriting costs were also eliminated by the government guarantees so banks made huge profits, which added further incentive to lend without due process. it's probably as bad (if not worse) as the sub-prime mortgage debacle.
Prior to 2010, federal loans were also divided between direct loans--originated and funded by the federal government--and guaranteed loans, originated and held by private lenders but guaranteed by the government.
In 2005, the bankruptcy laws were changed so that private educational loans also could not be readily discharged.
...even a liberal idiot like yourself should be able to join the dots here when you add in a few articles regarding the high amounts that students have borrowed and the lack of job opportunities for graduates; the government guaranteed the loans, and it will end up footing the bills when the defaults pile up.
socialism is what obama is doing... forcefully taking money of private citizens and distributing it
capitalism is private citizens engaging in business for voluntary payment by consumers
the business owners are behaving like capitalists should... the government voluntarily supports their business... the businesses don't force the government to do things for them
if the government is corrupt to the point where influence can be bought, then the government has too much influence and should be shrunk so that there is nothing to corrupt
capitalist businesses are no different to individuals... they act in their own interest (being that of their owners), which is no different to those that receive income from welfare, food stamps, etc or those that would pick up a greenback off the street and keep it for themselves
they don't do it because they are corrupt and greedy... they do it because they would be stupid not to take a bite when the government dangles a carrot in front of them
you don't honestly think politicians give a shit about balancing the budget do you?
the only statesman willing and able to see past the next election was Ron Paul, and US voters fucked up their chances to vote him into the presidency multiple times... apparently US voters don't give a shit about balancing the budget either, instead not being able to see past their next welfare check and/or food stamp
regardless of how many battles the mighty US military fights and wins, america's biggest threat is itself, and it has already lost
Apple was "more than a little troubled that AppGratis was pushing a business model that appeared to favor developers with the financial means to pay for exposure."
for a moment there i got confused into thinking apple was troubled by it's own app store
couldn't find an online source in 30 seconds, but i vaguely remember in the papers ages ago there was some stealth plane that was supposedly brought down (maybe the F-117 in 1999 but i can't remember exactly). there was some mention about using cell phone towers or something to look for interference in signal. not saying the papers are always right, but i remember it kinda made sense at the time.
the only link i found that is even remotely related is one about the EADS passive radar network, which seems to be based on a similar concept. have a squiz if you're interested.
maybe i'm off my tree, but i doubt i could have linked passive radar to bringing down of stealth airplanes on my own (until now i never knew it was called passive radar... i just googled "cell phone stealth shootdown")
a regular bathroom mirror might break, but if you took a piece of 2 inch steel plate and polished it to a reflective finish, that might work a bit better
the bad guys might just start off by polishing the existing armor on their tanks, and if it doesn't work they can combine it with other countermeasures like a smoke or steam screen to help absorb and disperse the laser energy
not saying this is the answer, but i think folks from developing countries that the US military seems to like picking fights with are smart enough to come up with cheap and efficient means to combat technologies that the US spends billions on
it's like the old urban legend about how NASA spent a heap of money developing a pen that writes in space and the Russians simply used a pencil... the moral is to work smarter, not harder, and the US military isn't exactly known for working smart (particularly considering the US defense budget is more than the sum of the next 8 highest spending countries, including China and Russia).
I think SOC for data centers makes a lot of sense.
Microcontroller and SOC tech is still catching up to current CPUs, but they have a major advantage of cramming just about everything on the mobo into the chip.
In a decade or so we may well be looking at today's data centers the way we currently look at ENIAC.
Slashdot Mirror
if i were american i'd be taking libertarians over the keynesian idiots and communist pigs running your country now... thank goodness i'm not american
there is also a lot more than just cash tied to the dollar
your whole economy is going to collapse at the rate you're going, which means no jobs, no energy and no food... good luck with that
the north korean leadership is doing what any nation's leader would be expected to do in the face of foreign agression
think of how piss weak he would look to his people if he did nothing in the face of sanctions
north korea will not lob nukes at anyone, but it feels it needs to "man up" to the united states to avoid inviting further demands
think about it... the united states is determined to prevent any country it doesn't like (can't influence/control) from having nuclear technology
if north korea wants nuclear power, it must resist such pressure from the west
the united states is the warmongering global nuclear threat, and the only reason why many states play nice with the united states is due to fear of finding themselves in the same place as north korea
many developing nations are looking to nuclear weapons as a deterrence for american military aggression; without nukes, a country (such as afghanistan or iraq) is susceptible to invasion and occupation at the whim of foreign business interests
countries only become socialist when the government gets so big and destroys free market capitalism to the point where the country's economy consists primarily of government activity
of course all governments are socialist... you just figured that out did you?
have you ever heard of a capitalist government?
if you don't like fearmongering, don't keep watching the obama administration keep trying to convince the world that iran and north korea are going to nuke america
for those that are truly informed, the only nuclear threat is from the united states
everybody knows that corporations are focused on you getting low cost
cost doesn't equal sale price... if consumers really weren't happy to pay a high price, they wouldn't (corporations also don't stop you from complaining about prices, which plenty of consumers do, but at the end of the day they are happy enough to pay still otherwise they would look for alternatives)
if you really weren't happy with the price and inconvenience of paying tolls of I-55, you would look for alternatives. that you appear to still be in the whinging phase means the alternatives are ultimately far more inconvenient and that I-55 is the lesser of two evils
private health care, funded by you and your employer
when the government forces the issue, it creates a guaranteed demand and insurance companies can take advantage of it. it's not the insurance companies fault... anyone else (including you) would probably do the same if the opportunity for a guaranteed income came along.
in Australia private healthcare is optional, but while there is a public healthcare, you pay for it based on your income (as a percentage), so poor people who can't afford private healthcare are covered by medicare but high income earners who choose not to go private still pay for medicare (basically it encourages people who can afford private to get out of public funded medicare). australia's healthcare probably isn't the cheapest, but it works.
those insurance companies are great at keeping costs down
insurance companies are infinitely better at cost-cutting within their organisations than governments. again, prices and costs are different. costs are what the company spends, while prices are what consumers pay (which is what you're bitching about).
if you want to bitch about prices, compare what corporations charge to what governments tax. how much tax do you pay? make sure you add up state and federal taxes.
your lack of understanding of such a basic business concept as cost explains why there are so many socialist morons voting in america. do you really think the government is going to save you? your lack of understanding of the effects of government involvement in healthcare doesn't really offer you much credibility to judge the gray matter of others.
in a nutshell; when government gets involved, prices usually go up for consumers. probably the next government induced bubble burst will probably be student loans... because when the government guaranteed them, prices went though the roof; not because insurance companies are corrupt, but because the government was doing their marketing for them and selling loans at any price. and you should know that when demand increases for a company's product, prices often do too (look at the price of oil for example; price decreases usually only happen with tech products where mass production reduces costs for the company so companies like apple can reduce prices to compete with samsung, but if the government mandated that everyone should have a smartphone, prices of all phones from all makers would skyrocket). the underwriting costs were also eliminated by the government guarantees so banks made huge profits, which added further incentive to lend without due process. it's probably as bad (if not worse) as the sub-prime mortgage debacle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_loan
Prior to 2010, federal loans were also divided between direct loans--originated and funded by the federal government--and guaranteed loans, originated and held by private lenders but guaranteed by the government.
In 2005, the bankruptcy laws were changed so that private educational loans also could not be readily discharged.
he won't be offering more welfare though, so voters probably won't like him much
other voters probably know he won't win so they will avoid the 'loser' vote
so you think you're better off where you are headed now?
when your precious dollar is worthless you might change your mind
i think you're confusing socialism and capitalism
socialism is what obama is doing... forcefully taking money of private citizens and distributing it
capitalism is private citizens engaging in business for voluntary payment by consumers
the business owners are behaving like capitalists should... the government voluntarily supports their business... the businesses don't force the government to do things for them
if the government is corrupt to the point where influence can be bought, then the government has too much influence and should be shrunk so that there is nothing to corrupt
capitalist businesses are no different to individuals... they act in their own interest (being that of their owners), which is no different to those that receive income from welfare, food stamps, etc or those that would pick up a greenback off the street and keep it for themselves
they don't do it because they are corrupt and greedy... they do it because they would be stupid not to take a bite when the government dangles a carrot in front of them
The air shows are a good public relations and recruiting tool.
so is Fox News, and it's still in full swing
Private solutions are never cheaper
yeah cos everyone knows the US government is incredibly focused on cost
you don't honestly think politicians give a shit about balancing the budget do you?
the only statesman willing and able to see past the next election was Ron Paul, and US voters fucked up their chances to vote him into the presidency multiple times... apparently US voters don't give a shit about balancing the budget either, instead not being able to see past their next welfare check and/or food stamp
regardless of how many battles the mighty US military fights and wins, america's biggest threat is itself, and it has already lost
They work cheap, but that's only good for people who don't seem to care for the long term.
wrong... that's all anyone cares about in the long term (including consumers)
proof: how much stuff in your house ISN'T made in China?
What could be a better PR mouthpiece for the US military than Fox News?
only if none of its shareholders are US politicians
occam's razor at work
who doesn't jack off to the "naked" chicks on the walls in duke nukem?
hail to the king, baby!
Apple was "more than a little troubled that AppGratis was pushing a business model that appeared to favor developers with the financial means to pay for exposure."
for a moment there i got confused into thinking apple was troubled by it's own app store
couldn't find an online source in 30 seconds, but i vaguely remember in the papers ages ago there was some stealth plane that was supposedly brought down (maybe the F-117 in 1999 but i can't remember exactly). there was some mention about using cell phone towers or something to look for interference in signal. not saying the papers are always right, but i remember it kinda made sense at the time.
the only link i found that is even remotely related is one about the EADS passive radar network, which seems to be based on a similar concept. have a squiz if you're interested.
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-10/01/radar-detects-stealth-aircraft
also the wiki article on passive radar (but still no mention of the stealth plane brought down unfortunately)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_radar#Advantages_and_disadvantages
maybe i'm off my tree, but i doubt i could have linked passive radar to bringing down of stealth airplanes on my own (until now i never knew it was called passive radar... i just googled "cell phone stealth shootdown")
but the global benchmark for operating system awesomeness is the ability to run doom
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuupoxmeQ6U
now i'm trying to imagine how you could play doom with punch cards and beads
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=lame
a regular bathroom mirror might break, but if you took a piece of 2 inch steel plate and polished it to a reflective finish, that might work a bit better
the bad guys might just start off by polishing the existing armor on their tanks, and if it doesn't work they can combine it with other countermeasures like a smoke or steam screen to help absorb and disperse the laser energy
not saying this is the answer, but i think folks from developing countries that the US military seems to like picking fights with are smart enough to come up with cheap and efficient means to combat technologies that the US spends billions on
it's like the old urban legend about how NASA spent a heap of money developing a pen that writes in space and the Russians simply used a pencil... the moral is to work smarter, not harder, and the US military isn't exactly known for working smart (particularly considering the US defense budget is more than the sum of the next 8 highest spending countries, including China and Russia).
maybe even just a smoke generator would be enough to greatly reduce the effectiveness of such a weapon
or steam, or a combination of things
i think the whole "laser" thing amounts to a toy, like much of defense R&D in the US
I think SOC for data centers makes a lot of sense.
Microcontroller and SOC tech is still catching up to current CPUs, but they have a major advantage of cramming just about everything on the mobo into the chip.
In a decade or so we may well be looking at today's data centers the way we currently look at ENIAC.
PunchCard GNU/Linux
motto: "for old farts that love doing things the hard way"