There are two ways to think of this - as a problem devoid of human emotion, "you are worth whatever people think your worth," or as one which accepts that, as a human trading time for money there is a limit to the value you have when compared to others working on the same team/company.
If you agree with the former, we can eliminate any form of social welfare or assistance. If you are poor and get sick, you die. If you don't work, you don't get any food, even if you are disabled. Insurance can (or should) not exist - you pay your way, and if fate frowns on you, tough shit. Minimum wage should never exist.
As soon as you move off that emotionally-void stance, you land at some form of wage shaving or wage inflation, on the presumption that every human life is valuable in some way or to some degree. It can be implemented as a minimum wage, a salary cap, a progressive tax, a soup kitchen, a church homeless shelter, non-profit or reduced cost medical care, an estate tax - you name it. A multiplier is just a different way to look at preventing one human being from being recognized as being infinitely more valuable than another. You're really just negotiating the line once you step out of the capitalist theoretical circle and believe (as every single religion in the world, and nearly every human believes about the other humans in his or her monkeyspace).
If you're concerned about the poor MBa who is working his fingers to the bone 70 hours a week, you need not fret - simply set the threshold at an acceptable level to you. Minimum wage is $7.25/hr in the US, or $15100/yr. I'll grant you an MBa from an ivy league school at $100k/yr for 6 years, $72,000 in interest to get that degree, and 6 years of lost wages at double the federal minimum wage. We'll presume, for the sake of argument, that with such lofty qualifications, razor sharp intellect, and 70hr/wk work ethic that you will be hired straight away. We'll take the bottom of the 99th percentile (aka "1%er") as a benchmark for a comfortable lifestyle *plus* pay off all that hard-earned money you spent on the MBa in just 3 years. So $762,000/3 years and $250,000/yr to "live".
That gives us multiplier of 33, which seems like enough to assuage your problems with a "cap" - AND, all you need to do to make more money is to raise the salary of your lowest paid workers. Double your lowest paid worker to $15 an hour (hey, that's almost 150% of the poverty level for the US!!), and you can bang out that million dollar salary - that'll cover those tuition bills and still leave you a few nickels for your brilliance! Oh, and the pain and suffering of your stressful job - can't forget that - as you take the corporate jet top your next meeting!
You can argue all you want to you are blue in the face. If Walmart or your own fictitious company did just what you advocated your customers will go to Target or to a competitor.
Suffering is a problem yes. But how do you deal with it? Yes human dignity is worth something, but not all humans are equal otherwise these people in that link would donate to the workers who got that TV off that high ladder for them.
However for someone out of work for awhile or fresh out of school with no experience an asshole company would make sense for resume building but would go out of business soon as they would get monkeys to run it.
What happened with the wealth increase is globalization shock and a steep recession. But after you cut back you have pent up demand and this is what happened last year as people are buying again which is increasing as well as the pull an employee has with negotiating a wage.
Believe it or not there are still shortages on skilled workers in this country. It is bashed on slashdot as false but many companies which use averages for compensation have to pay more to gain people with the right skill sets.
The middle class is being destroyed in western nations due to not being as valuable as they once were due to globalization and an over supply of college educated folks
Not because the rich can force us all to work for less. The middle class is growing in Asia and in India at an exponential rate. It will return back again as the price of dollar declines and inflation goes up in these countries. Some companies are manufacturing back in the US as the cost savings have dwindled.
The market determines your salary and it goes up and down for each individual/company. My example in another post was you can get rich programming.... at a.com or inventing a new app rather than POS code at pizza hut, where food production is valued higher.
You can't pay an engineer minimum wage. He will find a job elsewhere where he is valued more.
Some is true with the middle class here. Many jobs were lost because India can do them for a fraction of the price and Americans are lazy (seriously not flamebait) and do not work as many hours as foreign counterparts.
Jobs was worth every penny after what he brought to Apple.
Apple didn't magically invent the iphone, imac, ipod, appstore, and Steve led the way. It brought value to hundreds of millions of people.
Yes if you are skilled doing programming/network design/chip design/ you can get wealthy. The key is to not work for someone elses dream.
Think of a product or server you and your fellow coworkers can provide? Start a company with your partners and make something. Or move to a place with startups in Silicon Valley where you make less starting out but have options in owning shares of the company. Many will fail but you will have many clients on your resume fast until one sticks and you strike gold.
You are more valuable than you think. Just because your current company doesn't value what you do as part of the bottom line, doesn't mean your skillset wont benefit someone else more greatly.... of course if you have a baby and a wife there is also risk. Are you willing to take that? If not then being paid a lot less is worth the price in terms of job security and benefits.
If you are going to die you are willing to pay a premium to fix that right? Hence, a doctor gets a high compensation that your Starbucks Batrista this morning doesn't deserve.
It is impossible to retire and live a comfortable with just 60k. You can't buy a house in modern cities, save for retirement, pay for child's education, get a new car, etc. So you need to provide that level of service and people decide what it is worth. If you do not have work or little then it is too high. If you have people knocking your door down with offers then it is too low etc.
I don't think the school comment was about teachers - it was more likely referring to the increasing sizes of school district administration staff making 6 figures and contributing basically nothing to the education process.
As someone who used to work for school districts I am here to tell you they are directors. In Russia and other countries they are called just that in Russian.
A bad admin can run good teachers out and have A HUGE IMPACT in student attendance, discipline, and test scores. It is up to the principal to expel students or follow good paperwork and keep the bad students in so they can claim less suspensions etc. This is one example where fights go up but the paperwork looks best, or you kick out the students and risk your job but your schools grade goes up.
This is was just one example and school teachers much prefer THE SECOND option so they can teach. A good teacher with 3 years experience and go elsewhere otherwise.
So yes 6 figures for a school admin is appropriate compensation as they can make or great hundreds to thousands of student lives!
$10 - $15 an hour is more from what I read historically.
Still doesn't get you much except in very rural areas.
But 60k a year is ludicrous. Some people who are valuable to society and have to work hard and invest to get to where they are need that extra cash otherwise no risk taking or hard work would be done. Soviet Union is a classic example. People worked because they were forced and hated it. Not because they had bigger dreams in mind.
It would distort the free market and no one would take the risk or the very hard work like 70 hour work weeks, MBAs, and other things for dozens of years without the compensation.
Doing so would make great talent do something else or not try as hard and everyone looses out.
If someone is paid too much the market takes care of that with something called a firing. Losing your job does suck and is very disruptive but the shareholders need a return and who is the shareholder? Your elderly mom, YOU, etc. If you have a savings plan you own shares. Also investment money is needed to expand or go into more markets. They only way to do that is to have great accounting books.
Yes it does suck to be laid off at a human level, but ask yourself what are you providing? The reason you are let go is because you fix some computers. The CEO on the otherhand changes the lives of milllions of people.
You want that cash and job security then you ought to be a better worker and provide greater value. The sky is the limit and the CEO didn't start out like this overnight. It was not luck. Even company founders are poor. It took Zuckerberg 10 years before he became very wealthy.
The free market takes care of everything if you just bud out and not interfere.
See what happens when one bad CEO comes into a great innovating company like Nokia?
Another word JOBS.
Even if you hate Apple look what happened to Apple since 1997 when Steve Jobs came back who is considered one of the best CEOs? CEO's get paid a lot because they have a HUGE impact on stock price and company performance. You can argue how unfair it is until you are blue in the face. Fact of tthe matter they are worth every penny and have a huge pull that the average slashdot reader and I can only dream of in terms of benefits and compensation from our jobs.
Bankers on the otherhand is tricky. Bankers get paid like they were before deregulation. That is they were once paid only on interest grown. Not principal plus interest accured like today saying yeah I earned that 6 million today and need 10% of that NOW!... in reality the customer put down 5.99 million and you made $10,000 but claim it was really 6 million in assets. This was because of the way paperwork used to handled prio to the mid 1980s.
So yes many are worth every penny but something should be done but wont because that is evil socialism that we can't allow etc. Politicians need that money to fool stupid voters with fancy commercials every 2 years.
I am hoping WIndows 9 will close the gap if it is true that MS is making modern apps that run on both with Metro 2.0. I know metro is a bad word here on slashdot but the new Windows will not have a start screen unless it detects no keyboard at startup and they will run like win32 apps in a Windows 7 style desktop.
There are apps for Windows mobile surprisingly. Accuweather, youtube HD, Nokia maps and driving, etc.
I like it because it is very lightweight and less buggy with excellent touch support compared to Android. Android has more sensor support a notification center, google integration, and a gigantic library of apps. But it has its moments and like pcs quality will vary depending on model and crapware bundled with it.
I read and like your posts here and like mostly what you have to say even if I do not agree with everything.
It is a shame to bash others because they do not agree with you. I would not call you and Android fanboy and I expect the same in return. Yeah I am close to 40 and I am quite advanced in technical knowledge thank you very much. I prefer Windows Phone for the reasons stated and I had an unpleasant experience with Android 2.x slowing down to a crawl even after reflashing and multiple resets on a galaxy S 1.
Windows Phone may not have all the apps of Android but it doesn't freeze up, slow down, and my phone only has a dual core qualcom cpu which is on the low to mid end compared to the much faster iphone 5s and galaxy IV's. But I got it out of costs. It is smarter to pay $60 a month for a phone with no contract and unlocked for $300 than to pay $100 a month for an iphone/droid over 2 years. You throw away $1200!
Sorry I will not blow $600 for a high end galaxy/nexus/ishiny. So I picked it based off of that and it has not disappointed surprisingly
Google has things locked very tight on Android which will make compatibility difficult and a constantly changing targeting if MS were dumb enough to make an Android fork.
Windows Phone would turn into a mobile version of OS/2 which is used by few and developers say "Oh it runs Android. Lets just target that only and ignore MS we will get both platforms etc", but in reality Google changes AOSP apis and viola it breaks on Windows Phone.
Windows Phone is not a bad OS even if it is spouted here as the anti Christ from people who actually never ran it. If it were not made by Microsoft I think people would like it here seriously.
Seriously this is not flame bait and I am not trolling here.
Just speaking as a Windows Phone user who is happy who switched. Windows Phone does have some features. It is very light and responsive on lower end hardware and has neat features with battery and data saving, and the best cut and paste support on touch around compared to IOS and Android (speaking as an ex android user). The view on this site is that MS is years behind and it is all soo buggy, slow, and crappy compared to the coolness of Android from people of course who actually never even used it before?!
It is not perfect as it lacks a notification center and voice support is less than with other platforms. But it does not mean it is crap either.
I am a former Android user and use a Nokia. Really Windows Phone is not a bad OS and if it was not made by Microsoft it would not be soo bashed here.
I think Ms will destroy its brand name and turn it into another OS/2 as developers will just target Android and with AOSP it means compatibility problems will arise often for Windows Phone users.
Windows 9 will have a unified modern apps that run on the phone and desktop if rumors are true. This will put a dent into both.
Why do that when they get shit prices which are artificially low?
California is freaking HUGE and piping it or making a cement ditch 800 miles long is billions upon billions of dollars. Who is going to pay for this?.. I keep hitting the price raise thing and I do not mean to be a spammer on this but it just is so obvious for anyone who took economics.
Raise the prices and the problem will take care of itself and maybe just maybe if farmers are willing to pay market rates then creating a 1,000 mile aqueduct will be worth it and profitable. But until these low prices are taken care of who cares and why bother.
The water is sold dirt cheap to California, not for drinking but to farms.
The frustrating thing as someone who used to live in las Vegas is we had the rate hikes somewhat and were told to conserve water and were paid to put rocks instead of grass in our yards. Yet we only used something like 4% of the water as we recycled it all back.
By nature of scarcity it makes sense to charge more for water in semi arid to desert areas. Farmers can adopt by growing oranges, nuts, and wines that grow well in dryer climates. Rice on the otherhand which has been mentioned on here is STUPID. In the past it used to be grown in the Carolin s and Florida where they have plenty of swamps and natural water.
In the past you hardly had any farmers outside of citris so water was not so scarce.
So raise the rates but not call it a tax. I think they many republicans come from rural areas outside the cities like Bakersfield and orange and nut growers make up the voters who of course want FREE FREE FREE and yell MOOCHERS at Mom's using tax money for food stamps to feed their kids.
But something has to give otherwise no one will have water and everyone looses.
Economics 101 as many on the left feel is unjust takes care of the issue nicely with price hikes in scarcity and competition in excess supply leading to lower prices. I guess people cheat both ways as we see with the cable companies merge. You need lots of competitors and government to bud out when lowering prices below natural levels for a scarce resource like water.
Why water lawns out in a desert? Maybe the next shower won't be an hour if your water bill is $400 a month? Yeah they will whine but tough shit there is not enough water. If you really want it you can still have it of course but be ware there are consequences of using a scarce resource.
I think the farms are the ones who are corrupting the state. I have sympathy for small farmers. Farming corps on the otherhand tough shit.
Walmart is to blame too oddly. Reason being if their cucumbers are above a certain razor thin margin of cost to produce for pickles Walmart will leave for a competitor! You can't have cheap pickles in california without subsidized water compared to a farmer in Georgia who has no problem.
What a freaking mess. But yes if I were king I would raise prices to control the situation and use the extra cash to bring in more water until the next rainy season next year.
In truth this is a 1 out of 100 year drought. It most certainly is not manufactured as it has not rain yet in southern California and the rainy season is almost DONE.
But to answer your post on why? The answer is easy. RAISE PRICES! Raise them high enough and then you can afford to pump them out with disiel powered pumps too. Keep in mind you can't just get the water out of the ground overnight.
You need to have infrastructure to move it, rights, plenty of capital while you wait to get paid, etc. These things take time.
Raising prices will also curb usage as well.
I think a HUGE crises will hit when Hoover Dam shuts down due to lake Mead drying up FIRST and it is a possibility that LA will have no water this fall. The state will be totally out:-(
I do not understand why politicians wont do this. Raise the rates 400% and water usage will drop and in the end a true crises of NO WATER by the summer will be avoided.
The laws of supply and demand benefit everyone even including the consumer. Why don't the left wing politicians see this? It benefits the consumer as Lake Mead wont dry up totally.
When next winter when the snow and rain returns then you lower prices or keep them high while the reservoirs recover.... oh heck who am I kidding. The top 3 big farm corporations will cry foul and go lobby some money to use up everyone's water at prices below demand and then freak out when no water is left. I hope I am not being too cynical but corruption is pissing me off.
Name one scientist who believes the polar vertex is caused by warming based on scientific evidence? One!
change for the sake of change
on
A New Car UI
·
· Score: 2
One thing Windows 8, newer google maps with chrome, newer YouTube, office 2013, gnome 3, and some will say Windows 7, is change is almost universally bad!
If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Art professors have no business mucketing around with design. I hate the new touch, little to no color, All CAPS, flat, one criteria based (only consumption, or road focused), and no detail to anything else
Right now the arctic ocean and Hudson Bay are 100% frozen due to this thing we call winter. Summer it is a different story.
Second the world is getting cooler or stagnate in warming in recent years due to solar lull and dining as evident in the lack of solar flares. Last time this happened we had the mini ice age from 1400 - 1850. There is no scientific basis of global warming causing the polar vortex.
Right now the arctic ocean and Hudson Bay are 100% frozen due to this thing we call winter. Summer it is a different story.
Second the world is getting cooler or stagnate in warming in recent years due to solar lull and dining as evident in the lack of solar flares. Last time this happened we had the mini ice age from 1400 - 1850. There is no scientific basis of global warming causing the polar vortex.
Slashdot Mirror
There are two ways to think of this - as a problem devoid of human emotion, "you are worth whatever people think your worth," or as one which accepts that, as a human trading time for money there is a limit to the value you have when compared to others working on the same team/company.
If you agree with the former, we can eliminate any form of social welfare or assistance. If you are poor and get sick, you die. If you don't work, you don't get any food, even if you are disabled. Insurance can (or should) not exist - you pay your way, and if fate frowns on you, tough shit. Minimum wage should never exist.
As soon as you move off that emotionally-void stance, you land at some form of wage shaving or wage inflation, on the presumption that every human life is valuable in some way or to some degree. It can be implemented as a minimum wage, a salary cap, a progressive tax, a soup kitchen, a church homeless shelter, non-profit or reduced cost medical care, an estate tax - you name it. A multiplier is just a different way to look at preventing one human being from being recognized as being infinitely more valuable than another. You're really just negotiating the line once you step out of the capitalist theoretical circle and believe (as every single religion in the world, and nearly every human believes about the other humans in his or her monkeyspace).
If you're concerned about the poor MBa who is working his fingers to the bone 70 hours a week, you need not fret - simply set the threshold at an acceptable level to you. Minimum wage is $7.25/hr in the US, or $15100/yr. I'll grant you an MBa from an ivy league school at $100k/yr for 6 years, $72,000 in interest to get that degree, and 6 years of lost wages at double the federal minimum wage. We'll presume, for the sake of argument, that with such lofty qualifications, razor sharp intellect, and 70hr/wk work ethic that you will be hired straight away. We'll take the bottom of the 99th percentile (aka "1%er") as a benchmark for a comfortable lifestyle *plus* pay off all that hard-earned money you spent on the MBa in just 3 years. So $762,000/3 years and $250,000/yr to "live".
That gives us multiplier of 33, which seems like enough to assuage your problems with a "cap" - AND, all you need to do to make more money is to raise the salary of your lowest paid workers. Double your lowest paid worker to $15 an hour (hey, that's almost 150% of the poverty level for the US!!), and you can bang out that million dollar salary - that'll cover those tuition bills and still leave you a few nickels for your brilliance! Oh, and the pain and suffering of your stressful job - can't forget that - as you take the corporate jet top your next meeting!
Ok devils advocate again here.
Let's see doubling minimum wage to Walmart consumers? Not ONE WAS WILLING to donate 15% for a 15 hour paycheck strictly for the workers.
You can argue all you want to you are blue in the face. If Walmart or your own fictitious company did just what you advocated your customers will go to Target or to a competitor.
Suffering is a problem yes. But how do you deal with it? Yes human dignity is worth something, but not all humans are equal otherwise these people in that link would donate to the workers who got that TV off that high ladder for them.
A skilled worker would go elsewhere.
However for someone out of work for awhile or fresh out of school with no experience an asshole company would make sense for resume building but would go out of business soon as they would get monkeys to run it.
What happened with the wealth increase is globalization shock and a steep recession. But after you cut back you have pent up demand and this is what happened last year as people are buying again which is increasing as well as the pull an employee has with negotiating a wage.
Believe it or not there are still shortages on skilled workers in this country. It is bashed on slashdot as false but many companies which use averages for compensation have to pay more to gain people with the right skill sets.
The middle class is being destroyed in western nations due to not being as valuable as they once were due to globalization and an over supply of college educated folks
Not because the rich can force us all to work for less. The middle class is growing in Asia and in India at an exponential rate. It will return back again as the price of dollar declines and inflation goes up in these countries. Some companies are manufacturing back in the US as the cost savings have dwindled.
The market determines your salary and it goes up and down for each individual/company. My example in another post was you can get rich programming. ... at a .com or inventing a new app rather than POS code at pizza hut, where food production is valued higher.
You can't pay an engineer minimum wage. He will find a job elsewhere where he is valued more.
Some is true with the middle class here. Many jobs were lost because India can do them for a fraction of the price and Americans are lazy (seriously not flamebait) and do not work as many hours as foreign counterparts.
Jobs was worth every penny after what he brought to Apple.
Apple didn't magically invent the iphone, imac, ipod, appstore, and Steve led the way. It brought value to hundreds of millions of people.
Yes if you are skilled doing programming/network design/chip design/ you can get wealthy. The key is to not work for someone elses dream.
Think of a product or server you and your fellow coworkers can provide? Start a company with your partners and make something. Or move to a place with startups in Silicon Valley where you make less starting out but have options in owning shares of the company. Many will fail but you will have many clients on your resume fast until one sticks and you strike gold.
You are more valuable than you think. Just because your current company doesn't value what you do as part of the bottom line, doesn't mean your skillset wont benefit someone else more greatly. ... of course if you have a baby and a wife there is also risk. Are you willing to take that? If not then being paid a lot less is worth the price in terms of job security and benefits.
Or society is willing to pay for it.
If you are going to die you are willing to pay a premium to fix that right? Hence, a doctor gets a high compensation that your Starbucks Batrista this morning doesn't deserve.
It is impossible to retire and live a comfortable with just 60k. You can't buy a house in modern cities, save for retirement, pay for child's education, get a new car, etc. So you need to provide that level of service and people decide what it is worth. If you do not have work or little then it is too high. If you have people knocking your door down with offers then it is too low etc.
There are many who say it doesn't take a genius to click an icon and answer a call so why pay more than $13/hr? IT IS SOOO easy etc.
Sadly they then say how they are an exception and not really a cost center because I do such and such.
I don't think the school comment was about teachers - it was more likely referring to the increasing sizes of school district administration staff making 6 figures and contributing basically nothing to the education process.
As someone who used to work for school districts I am here to tell you they are directors. In Russia and other countries they are called just that in Russian.
A bad admin can run good teachers out and have A HUGE IMPACT in student attendance, discipline, and test scores. It is up to the principal to expel students or follow good paperwork and keep the bad students in so they can claim less suspensions etc. This is one example where fights go up but the paperwork looks best, or you kick out the students and risk your job but your schools grade goes up.
This is was just one example and school teachers much prefer THE SECOND option so they can teach. A good teacher with 3 years experience and go elsewhere otherwise.
So yes 6 figures for a school admin is appropriate compensation as they can make or great hundreds to thousands of student lives!
$10 - $15 an hour is more from what I read historically.
Still doesn't get you much except in very rural areas.
But 60k a year is ludicrous. Some people who are valuable to society and have to work hard and invest to get to where they are need that extra cash otherwise no risk taking or hard work would be done. Soviet Union is a classic example. People worked because they were forced and hated it. Not because they had bigger dreams in mind.
*devils advocate*
Why should they be capped?
It would distort the free market and no one would take the risk or the very hard work like 70 hour work weeks, MBAs, and other things for dozens of years without the compensation.
Doing so would make great talent do something else or not try as hard and everyone looses out.
If someone is paid too much the market takes care of that with something called a firing. Losing your job does suck and is very disruptive but the shareholders need a return and who is the shareholder? Your elderly mom, YOU, etc. If you have a savings plan you own shares. Also investment money is needed to expand or go into more markets. They only way to do that is to have great accounting books.
Yes it does suck to be laid off at a human level, but ask yourself what are you providing? The reason you are let go is because you fix some computers. The CEO on the otherhand changes the lives of milllions of people.
You want that cash and job security then you ought to be a better worker and provide greater value. The sky is the limit and the CEO didn't start out like this overnight. It was not luck. Even company founders are poor. It took Zuckerberg 10 years before he became very wealthy.
The free market takes care of everything if you just bud out and not interfere.
One word ELOP.
See what happens when one bad CEO comes into a great innovating company like Nokia?
Another word JOBS.
Even if you hate Apple look what happened to Apple since 1997 when Steve Jobs came back who is considered one of the best CEOs? CEO's get paid a lot because they have a HUGE impact on stock price and company performance. You can argue how unfair it is until you are blue in the face. Fact of tthe matter they are worth every penny and have a huge pull that the average slashdot reader and I can only dream of in terms of benefits and compensation from our jobs.
Bankers on the otherhand is tricky. Bankers get paid like they were before deregulation. That is they were once paid only on interest grown. Not principal plus interest accured like today saying yeah I earned that 6 million today and need 10% of that NOW! ... in reality the customer put down 5.99 million and you made $10,000 but claim it was really 6 million in assets. This was because of the way paperwork used to handled prio to the mid 1980s.
So yes many are worth every penny but something should be done but wont because that is evil socialism that we can't allow etc. Politicians need that money to fool stupid voters with fancy commercials every 2 years.
I am hoping WIndows 9 will close the gap if it is true that MS is making modern apps that run on both with Metro 2.0. I know metro is a bad word here on slashdot but the new Windows will not have a start screen unless it detects no keyboard at startup and they will run like win32 apps in a Windows 7 style desktop.
There are apps for Windows mobile surprisingly. Accuweather, youtube HD, Nokia maps and driving, etc.
I like it because it is very lightweight and less buggy with excellent touch support compared to Android. Android has more sensor support a notification center, google integration, and a gigantic library of apps. But it has its moments and like pcs quality will vary depending on model and crapware bundled with it.
I read and like your posts here and like mostly what you have to say even if I do not agree with everything.
It is a shame to bash others because they do not agree with you. I would not call you and Android fanboy and I expect the same in return. Yeah I am close to 40 and I am quite advanced in technical knowledge thank you very much. I prefer Windows Phone for the reasons stated and I had an unpleasant experience with Android 2.x slowing down to a crawl even after reflashing and multiple resets on a galaxy S 1.
Windows Phone may not have all the apps of Android but it doesn't freeze up, slow down, and my phone only has a dual core qualcom cpu which is on the low to mid end compared to the much faster iphone 5s and galaxy IV's. But I got it out of costs. It is smarter to pay $60 a month for a phone with no contract and unlocked for $300 than to pay $100 a month for an iphone/droid over 2 years. You throw away $1200!
Sorry I will not blow $600 for a high end galaxy/nexus/ishiny. So I picked it based off of that and it has not disappointed surprisingly
No it is open like MacOSX is open.
Google has things locked very tight on Android which will make compatibility difficult and a constantly changing targeting if MS were dumb enough to make an Android fork.
Windows Phone would turn into a mobile version of OS/2 which is used by few and developers say "Oh it runs Android. Lets just target that only and ignore MS we will get both platforms etc", but in reality Google changes AOSP apis and viola it breaks on Windows Phone.
Windows Phone is not a bad OS even if it is spouted here as the anti Christ from people who actually never ran it. If it were not made by Microsoft I think people would like it here seriously.
Seriously this is not flame bait and I am not trolling here.
Just speaking as a Windows Phone user who is happy who switched. Windows Phone does have some features. It is very light and responsive on lower end hardware and has neat features with battery and data saving, and the best cut and paste support on touch around compared to IOS and Android (speaking as an ex android user). The view on this site is that MS is years behind and it is all soo buggy, slow, and crappy compared to the coolness of Android from people of course who actually never even used it before?!
It is not perfect as it lacks a notification center and voice support is less than with other platforms. But it does not mean it is crap either.
I am a former Android user and use a Nokia. Really Windows Phone is not a bad OS and if it was not made by Microsoft it would not be soo bashed here.
Android has issues. It is partially opensourced where AOSP is the proprietary part that locks developers and Microsoft to Google similar to MacOSX being partially open.
I think Ms will destroy its brand name and turn it into another OS/2 as developers will just target Android and with AOSP it means compatibility problems will arise often for Windows Phone users.
Windows 9 will have a unified modern apps that run on the phone and desktop if rumors are true. This will put a dent into both.
Why do that when they get shit prices which are artificially low?
California is freaking HUGE and piping it or making a cement ditch 800 miles long is billions upon billions of dollars. Who is going to pay for this? .. I keep hitting the price raise thing and I do not mean to be a spammer on this but it just is so obvious for anyone who took economics.
Raise the prices and the problem will take care of itself and maybe just maybe if farmers are willing to pay market rates then creating a 1,000 mile aqueduct will be worth it and profitable. But until these low prices are taken care of who cares and why bother.
The water is sold dirt cheap to California, not for drinking but to farms.
The frustrating thing as someone who used to live in las Vegas is we had the rate hikes somewhat and were told to conserve water and were paid to put rocks instead of grass in our yards. Yet we only used something like 4% of the water as we recycled it all back.
By nature of scarcity it makes sense to charge more for water in semi arid to desert areas. Farmers can adopt by growing oranges, nuts, and wines that grow well in dryer climates. Rice on the otherhand which has been mentioned on here is STUPID. In the past it used to be grown in the Carolin s and Florida where they have plenty of swamps and natural water.
In the past you hardly had any farmers outside of citris so water was not so scarce.
The right loves price hikes. Just not taxes.
So raise the rates but not call it a tax. I think they many republicans come from rural areas outside the cities like Bakersfield and orange and nut growers make up the voters who of course want FREE FREE FREE and yell MOOCHERS at Mom's using tax money for food stamps to feed their kids.
But something has to give otherwise no one will have water and everyone looses.
Economics 101 as many on the left feel is unjust takes care of the issue nicely with price hikes in scarcity and competition in excess supply leading to lower prices. I guess people cheat both ways as we see with the cable companies merge. You need lots of competitors and government to bud out when lowering prices below natural levels for a scarce resource like water.
No residentual folks need to pay up too.
Why water lawns out in a desert? Maybe the next shower won't be an hour if your water bill is $400 a month? Yeah they will whine but tough shit there is not enough water. If you really want it you can still have it of course but be ware there are consequences of using a scarce resource.
I think the farms are the ones who are corrupting the state. I have sympathy for small farmers. Farming corps on the otherhand tough shit.
Walmart is to blame too oddly. Reason being if their cucumbers are above a certain razor thin margin of cost to produce for pickles Walmart will leave for a competitor! You can't have cheap pickles in california without subsidized water compared to a farmer in Georgia who has no problem.
What a freaking mess. But yes if I were king I would raise prices to control the situation and use the extra cash to bring in more water until the next rainy season next year.
In truth this is a 1 out of 100 year drought. It most certainly is not manufactured as it has not rain yet in southern California and the rainy season is almost DONE.
But to answer your post on why? The answer is easy. RAISE PRICES! Raise them high enough and then you can afford to pump them out with disiel powered pumps too. Keep in mind you can't just get the water out of the ground overnight.
You need to have infrastructure to move it, rights, plenty of capital while you wait to get paid, etc. These things take time.
Raising prices will also curb usage as well.
I think a HUGE crises will hit when Hoover Dam shuts down due to lake Mead drying up FIRST and it is a possibility that LA will have no water this fall. The state will be totally out :-(
Raising prices ensures there will be supply left.
I do not understand why politicians wont do this. Raise the rates 400% and water usage will drop and in the end a true crises of NO WATER by the summer will be avoided.
The laws of supply and demand benefit everyone even including the consumer. Why don't the left wing politicians see this? It benefits the consumer as Lake Mead wont dry up totally.
When next winter when the snow and rain returns then you lower prices or keep them high while the reservoirs recover. ... oh heck who am I kidding. The top 3 big farm corporations will cry foul and go lobby some money to use up everyone's water at prices below demand and then freak out when no water is left. I hope I am not being too cynical but corruption is pissing me off.
Name one scientist who believes the polar vertex is caused by warming based on scientific evidence? One!
One thing Windows 8, newer google maps with chrome, newer YouTube, office 2013, gnome 3, and some will say Windows 7, is change is almost universally bad!
If it ain't broke don't fix it!
Art professors have no business mucketing around with design. I hate the new touch, little to no color, All CAPS, flat, one criteria based (only consumption, or road focused), and no detail to anything else
Right now the arctic ocean and Hudson Bay are 100% frozen due to this thing we call winter. Summer it is a different story.
Second the world is getting cooler or stagnate in warming in recent years due to solar lull and dining as evident in the lack of solar flares. Last time this happened we had the mini ice age from 1400 - 1850. There is no scientific basis of global warming causing the polar vortex.
<citation needed>
here
Right now the arctic ocean and Hudson Bay are 100% frozen due to this thing we call winter. Summer it is a different story.
Second the world is getting cooler or stagnate in warming in recent years due to solar lull and dining as evident in the lack of solar flares. Last time this happened we had the mini ice age from 1400 - 1850. There is no scientific basis of global warming causing the polar vortex.
ATI's driver is free and opensourced and speced unlike the nvidia one which is a binary blob.