... republican bloggers..call for the hunting down of peoples kids
I believe it's now customary to call those extreme people "chicken hawks" rather than lumping them all together with "republican".
Hopefully the more moderate people (who now refer to themselves as Democrat "or" Republican) in the "Middle" (where the American people actually stand) will strike out and start their own new "party" in the next decade. It's not impossible, they'll just have to come up with another color for the maps on TV and of course millions of dollars. I would gladly donate $25 to see some 3-way action and I know tens of thousands more would also.
Anyway, the proper terms are "chicken hawk", "leftie" and "normal". Since politics is a battle of words and rarely actions, it's important to not play the dog wagger's games. Thank you.
Yeah, the Geek Squad is like those 10 minute lube and oil places. You don't really need to be an expert mechanic to change a car's oil and likewise, you don't need to be a computer expert to clear temp files, turn off system restore, and remove spyware from HKLM/Software/Microsoft/Windows/Run.
Another good thing is that they charge A LOT, over $60 an hour, which means I can undercut them and still make a decent wage.
A method of reducing atmospheric warming due to the greenhouse effect resulting from a layer of gases in the atmosphere which absorb strongly near infrared wavelength radiation, comprising the step of dispersing tiny particles of a material within the gases' layer, the particle material characterized by wavelength-dependent emissivity or reflectivity, in that said material has high emissivities with respect to radiation in the visible and far infrared wavelength spectra, and low emissivity in the near infrared wavelength spectrum, whereby said tiny particles provide a means for converting infrared heat energy into far infrared radiation which is radiated into space.
It's easy to see that what we need to do is neuter all men at the age of 18 and then we don't have to worry about it.
I mean really, what's the point? Sex just gets men in trouble all the damn time. If we were all neutered, we wouldn't have to think about it and could be good little robots, working our jobs until we die. There would be no luxury, no wasteful spending on shiny things to impress the wife because you wouldn't HAVE ONE. What about continuation of the species? Well, they could get a sample of sperm from every man and store it and partner the sperm up with a computer database of women. Of course, you would have to build a whole new religion around it, so when all males reach a certain age, they expect the snip as part of a coming of age ritual.
Anyway, you can't civilize out sex without something like this enevitably happening. However, I do think sex is a pretty primative way of continuing the species and I think that we can probably come up with a better and safer way nowadays. After that, a simple pill to take away the desire and pleasure associated with it and we'll have fixed the number one problem with the human race. Seriously, 4/5 of the bible is about dealing with the problems related to sex, having sex with your neighbors, having sex with your neigbors dog, etc. 99% of daytime television deals with the same topics (Whose baby, you're banging your brother's mother, etc). And look around at your own immediate surroundings, your office for instance. Provided you don't work at a game publisher, you probably have some women around the office and probably there's been some relationships. THAT CAUSES PROBLEMS! YOU KNOW IT!
Ok, so we just eliminated 100% of rape, 100% of murder (mostly jealousy related, although theft also. BUT WHY WAS HE STEALING? because his wife said, you betta go out and get a job!), 100% of problems with unwanted/unplanned children, 100% of wasteful production being spent on useless crap like toilet seat covers and clothes, there's almost too much to list!
And because we wouldn't have testicles, WE WOULDN'T MISS IT!
It's a brave new world. And I'm leading the charge into the mid-21st century with my Neuterist platform. I promise to rid the world of all crime and suffering, all murder and rape, all war, all greed, all lust. Vote with the Neuterists and we'll literally sieze all of these problems by the balls, separate them with a razor scalpel and a quick flick of the wrist, and toss them out with the tater tots from last nights dinner.
well, what if Fon kept a GIS database of the locations of all the member routers and then your client could automagically connect to them while you're on the move. Free always on WiFi everywhere for $5 a year. Probably don't even need the GIS.
P.S. Every major city will be holding a book burning this July 4th in celebration of our Independence; our Independence from free-thought that does not consist of A. Jesus or B. NASCAR.
Alleged sex offender. Allegedly scoping out your child. What's stopping them from pulling YOUR library records because they don't like you, and making up some story to throw you behind bars. This dude was 23, probably was a skateboarder or something and said "lick me where I pee" but the police wants to get rid of such a trouble maker so they just pin sexual comments on him. Maybe the girl threw something at his car, or maybe she's lying. God knows 12 year olds NEVER lie. I don't see how someone's library records could possibly stop a life or death situation. You see that stupid crap in the movies all the time but that doesn't make it real. Real police work is tedious and exhaustive. It has to be that way to protect the innocent. That is what sets America apart from the rest of the world. Now if a bunch of Redneck cops want to flex on the constitution, and then COMPLAIN that the librarian didn't LET THEM? Shit, it's every citizen's duty to make sure that the constitution is followed and to speak out if it isn't. For the protection of future generations. But I forgot, only "lefties" think about the future.
Yeah, you should go get a job with them and get that $16B. It's practically Bill Gatesian. I think craigslist has hit it on the head with the online classified.
As for the "banging anything I can get my hands on" well this is certainly a normal desire but the issue isn't the banging but what can be the result of it. How would you like to have been staring at either marriage or child support payments at the age of 15?
While that might be fun, you can get quite a bit of of those features with a "Virtual" PBX or virtual attendant. I know that the poster did not want to pay for such a service, but it's dirt cheap. They have services that work with VOIP or POTS and give you all the possible options of a PBX. You can set up your cell phone as a extension, etc., auto call routing, MMS message the incoming phone number to your mobile, assign business rules to number types, etc.
Asterisk is really cool but it's overkill for one person. Better to spend the 5 bucks a month for one of those services (just google Virtual Attendant or Virtual PBX) than waste months on Asterisk, unless you want to, I mean.
Well, bonds are good. But so is working without distractions. For a coder or programmer, being at home is probably the best environment. No one cares about the lack of shower that leads to grease level 6 where the real work gets done. Maybe the nut cheese vapors have some sort of nootropic effect.
Anyway, I think the best thing is a good mix of tele and in the office work. For me, I like to tele in the morning from home where I have my dual monitors, my espresso maker, my clean air, etc. It allows me to work solid in the morning right after getting up until I start to lose focus. I'm usually at my highest focus right after waking up. If I waste that time showering and driving, I'll just sit around at work.
So I work in the morning from home and when the focus starts to fade I save all and sync up, and then go shower and commute. I spend about the same amount of hours working but FEWER hours in the car, etc. becuase the traffic is lighter at 10:30 than at 7:30. Plus there's fuel savings, etc. And I don't have to go in every day--sometimes you get on a roll and don't need to go to the office to stay motivated to work.
There are some jobs that need you to be there: anything physical obviously (factory worker, garbageman, etc.). In my opinion, most meetings are bullshit though. Sending an email is usually enough to get it across. But I think some people need meetings to make them feel like they are part of a family. I'm like a hitman, a contractor, BOFH style, so I just do what I do.
What really bugs me is when I get PICNIC calls from the office (usually the same couple of people) who demand I come in and make their computer run faster or reconnect the cable they kicked out of the wall. Oh well, I bill extra for those.
Contrary to popular belief, Microsoft is a publishing company FIRST, software company second. They are just forseeing the enevitable future which will require robots to perform some of our daily tasks. Why not carry a product to meet a growing niche? It costs them nothing in , since they basically just bought a company that already did it for very little, because they were probably poor and starving and sold out for like $10M. Now, they can put their marketing people on it to make it look all clean and run "pretty smooth" and make it fit in with the rest of the MS "stable" (hah pun). So in total they spend maybe $20M and then they only need to sell 100,000 copies at $200 to make their money back. And, since it's a growing business, microsoft can afford to give it away for a while to get people hooked, pushing "premium" or "commercial" licenses on the people who are most likely to pay for it (large corporations, universities, governments).
It's just like the record business, where a record label pays an artist $10M for their talent and then goes on to sell 10 million copies at $5-10 profit per pop, forever.
Not to mention that it'll run on the Windows OS which means they sell 2 licenses with every copy used.
My great grandmother married my great grandfather when she was 14 and he was 20 and were married for over 60 years (until he passed).
I know for a fact that when I was 14, I wanted to bang everything in sight. But all the girls were way more mature than me (because they mature sooner) and they all wanted someone with the more adult behavior. I don't have enough fingers to count all the relationships that went on at my high school that would probably be considered illegal today. Looking back, it was probably pretty stupid but kids are having sex, and girls are going to get whatever they want, there's always some doofus with a Camaro....
Regardless of what happened, the law is the law. If you are 18 or 19 or 20 and messing around with younger girls, you'd better be careful and know how old they really are. You'd better not piss them off and you'd better not piss their parents off. Parental consent is the most important thing. Just be a good person. If you're older than that, you're being stupid because the college girls are much more classy and experienced..
I always say, half your age plus 7 is the ideal and probably should be the law, even after the age of majority. So I'm 26, 26/2=13+7=20.
When I'm 40, 40/2=20+7=27
etc.
Don't mess around outside the formula, it's not worth it.
I have a friend who worked in the payments section of a (large adult site) and his job was to manually review payment requests as they come through. They do this because they don't want women's card names (hi fraud rate), bad info, etc. and they want to grant access fast (faster than a bank could process the payment). Anyway, he was part of a team of 6 working 24 hours a day and each person did at least 1 transaction a second. These were for pay by the minute sites also, so it was big money.
As far as feature porno movies, they use the same publishing model everyone else does. The people who actually are in the "trenches" (heh) making them aren't the Jackie Treehorns of the world who do the publishing (mostly). Publishing is always lucrative. That's how Microsoft got rich, that's how the big record companies, time warner, etc. got rich. Guess what, if you pay a fixed cost to make something and then sell COPIES of it (which cost practically nothing), you are going to make a fortune.
Most people don't know how to pirate stuff, and most of the people who get porn are middle aged guys with plenty of money and no sex life. They aren't looking to break the law; they pay for it. So you have content that appeals to the very basest of human emotions that costs almost nothing to make and it's easy to distribute. The internet has probably increased porn sales 10 fold because people can get it immediately, not have to make an embarrassing trip down to the local smutty.
The idea is for us to have one "wire" coming into our home. The wire will be "sold" based on the available bandwidth, in certain chunks with absolute QOS for that amount (using router technology already in existence for VoIP, etc).
The problem is exactly like what happened in the 90's with ELECTRICITY. Enron "oversold" some lines, causing them to go down. If that happens with this proposed network structure, there will be a sudden bidding war for space on the surviving connections because all of the traffic still needs to travel somewhere but there's not bandwidth for all of it. In addition, the providers won't invest in new bandwidth because that will drop the overall "value" of a bandwidth "frame" or unit (unless demand is skyrocketing). The market forces basically guarantee that all lines will be filled almost to capacity at all times.
So, like the utility business, they will try to put a regulating body into place. However, learning from Enron, the big telcoms are going to stack it with "their" people. Therefore this regulating body must be totally neutral and totally about getting as much bandwidth to the people as possible, taxing the PROVIDERS (telcos/cable companies) who use the wires in order to make sure everyone has everything they need at the lowest possible cost.
Members of the body would have to prove their nutrality ahead of time by showing:
a. They are not immediately or indirectly related by blood to any employee of any of the providers (to a certain point, ie: 3 generations, by law across 3 degrees) b. They do not own stock in any of the companies c. a. and b. qualify also for any company that has, is or will contract(ed)(s) with the provider for any purpose d. Anyone who lies will have their right hand chopped off and will be publically humilliated in a stockade.
The problem is the utility paradox, as I like to call it. It's a flaw in the capitalist system based on human desire. It would be pretty easy to open the utility business up to everyone, but you'll have a huge web of wires from 123818 different companies overhead. Company 1 only runs to house A on your block, etc. And gradually market forces whittle it down to the people who are making money, with Company 2 saying "well, we only got 10 people signed up in the city, it's not worth going in there). Which is where we're at now. The problem is that someone OWNS the wire going into our house, rather than "we" owning it. But because of deregulation, they have to let anyone use it.
The problem is that these companies are settled in and there is a huge war between the party line cable providers and the star topology telcos at the local (to the end) level. The cable companies are ahead because their loop/party line is way cheaper to implement within a city. BUT, as bandwidth requirements skyrocket, they are going to run out fast. The star topology telcos have a huge infrastructure in place but it's all outdated and they need to raise money to build a new network. Otherwise, they are going to lose out in the short term to the better positioned cable providers and eventually the cable providers will buy them up to shut them down.
The trump card of the telcos is twofold:
#1, they have a monopoly on long hauls. The industry consolidation has converged what used to be 12-15 long haul "tier one" providers into about 5 (V, E, M, A, U). Pretty much every long haul line in America and translantic is owned by a telco. I think Cox (a large privately held cable provider) is trying to put a network into place, but it's held together by leased lines from the telco, which would be affected by the new tariffs.
#2, they have WIRELESS, which is going to be a big part of local access. Where I'm from, most people don't have a land telephone line; they use a cellular. Wireless still needs long hauls for long distance though...
So, the telcos need to raise money to boost their failing high-profit local business. How to do that? Leverage their trump card with a government imposed corporate tar
What about redundancy, in light of: backhoe operators, lightning, government wiretapping, corporate mismanagement, black hats, "phishers" (I hate that term), etc. do you think it's a good idea to have all of your connectivity through one provider? All of your eggs in one basket. The only way I would have it that way is if there was strong regulation by a non-government independent body with power and accountability of the actual physical wire. Then the wire will be "sold" based on the available bandwidth, in certain chunks guaranteeing QOS of that amount.
The problem is exactly like what happened in the 90's with ELECTRICITY. Enron "oversold" some lines, causing them to go down. All of a sudden there's a bidding war because all of the traffic still needs to travel somewhere but there's not bandwidth for all of it. In addition, the providers won't invest in new bandwidth because that will drop the overall "value" of a bandwidth "frame" or unit (unless demand is skyrocketing). The market forces basically guarantee that all lines will be filled almost to capacity.
Therefore this regulating body must be totally neutral and totally about getting as much bandwidth to the people as possible, taxing the PROVIDERS who use the wires in order to make sure everyone has everything they need at the lowest possible cost.
Members of the body would have to prove their nutrality ahead of time by showing:
a. They are not immediately or indirectly related by blood to any employee of any of the providers (to a certain point, ie: 3 generations, by law across 3 degrees) b. They do not own stock in any of the companies c. a. and b. qualify also for any company that has, is or will contract(ed)(s) with the provider for any purpose d. Anyone who lies will have their right hand chopped off and will be publically humilliated in a stockade.
The problem is the utility paradox, as I like to call it. It's a flaw in the capitalist system based on human desire. It would be pretty easy to open the utility business up to everyone, but you'll have a huge web of wires from 123818 different companies overhead. Company 1 only runs to house A on your block, etc. And gradually market forces whittle it down to the people who are making money, with Company 2 saying "well, we only got 10 people signed up in the city, it's not worth going in there). Which is where we're at now.
The problem is that these companies are settled in and there is a huge war between the party line cable providers and the star topology telcos at the local (to the end) level. The cable companies are ahead because their loop/party line is way cheaper to implement within a city. BUT, as bandwidth requirements skyrocket, they are going to run out fast. The star topology telcos have a huge infrastructure in place but it's all outdated and they need to raise money to build a new network. Otherwise, they are going to lose out in the short term to the better positioned cable providers and eventually the cable providers will buy them up to shut them down.
The trump card of the telcos is twofold:
#1, they have a monopoly on long hauls. The industry consolidation has converged what used to be 12-15 long haul "tier one" providers into about 5 (V, E, M, A, U). Pretty much every long haul line in America and translantic is owned by a telco. I think Cox (a large privately held cable provider) is trying to put a network into place, but it's held together by leased lines from the telco, which would be affected by the new tariffs.
#2, they have WIRELESS, which is going to be a big part of local access. Where I'm from, most people don't have a land telephone line; they use a cellular. Wireless still needs long hauls for long distance though...
So, the telcos need to raise money to boost their failing high-profit local business. How to do that? Leverage their trump card with a government imposed corporate tariff that taxes their competition more than anyone else. And of course consumers are going to be affected because we will be paying a third time for any bandwidth we consume.
It's pretty obvious the telcos are trying to move internet access to the same system of billing they use for the cell phones. Overcharging. Limited hardware availability. Contracts. Double ended charging (think about it: you pay for your "minutes", so does the person on the other end. Same with texts..) Etc. Like Ma Bell used to do. They are trying to do this with our Internet. It doesn't make any sense to punish the users because the companies made a bad deal to begin with. They can either turn it off or try to figure out a way to make money. To get a TARIFF passed on all bandwidth is crazy! I can't believe we are getting so screwed by congress lately.
Hell no. Look people, the worst case, we're all going to move to a WiFi mesh network and CUT OUT the telcos. If that's what they want, fine. We can already do almost 100km hauls with off the shelf 802.11b and custom antennas. There are also satellites, amateur radio bands, etc. that haven't even been touched. It's going to be tough to compete with fiber bandwidth at first but I think if enough local traffic moves off the network, they will have to lower prices to increase demand or they will fold. Also, there is nothing stopping us from using POTS lines with $5.00 56K modems to dial across the country.
This just seems like a huge step backwards. They are already charging on BOTH ends for the bandwidth, and now they want to prioritize traffic. At least when the government owned the internet (well, they ran it over leased telco lines, which would now be TAXED by the private telcos) everyone had equal access.
The problem is that not just anyone can go out and run a wire. You have to get easements, lease space. Maybe we COULD get some sort of Global Internet Backbone Coop going though, where we get investors, pull our own cables cross country, utilize hi bandwidth RF links for weird hauls, etc. Because local loop stuff is all going to be Wifi, you only need a few points of entry per city. Let them crush themselves and our company will rise above doing things the old way for cheaper.
Yeah, I've been developing a large project in PHP and I love it. It's fast and doesn't bother me with stupid crap I don't need to be thinking about when I'm designing and building. Sure, it holds your hand with little shortcuts and it is garbage to make a real app with. But who cares? My project is web-based, basically a front-end for a database. PHP handles all the text stuff just fine.
Now, when this site goes live, and I start to sell it, I'm going to run into slowdowns, etc. But if a function is too slow, you just rewrite it in a different tool that works faster. Perl, Python, whatever. Why would you rip your hair out during the design phase though? Make it work in PHP, then replace/extend with the other tools for lower level functions.
I think the real problem is that "web site designers" are using Dreamweaver to generate their PHP rather than typing it themselves. I use Dreamweaver in "coder" mode because I like the syntax highlighting and stuff integrated with the check-in/check-out and built in FTP client (not that I couldn't get that somewhere else but whatever). They have a lot of "special case" code that gets put in by default which slows the mess down.
Now, if I was writing software with multimillions of records and tons of memory use (image processing, for instance), I would use C++. Just remember that your job is to make it work Cheap, Fast, Good (pick any two.)
Would they? I'm not entirely convinced. A small nuclear attack of that sort would likely result in a proportional strike - good bye Tehran, for example. Massive retaliation MAY not be the response, though it certainly is possible.
An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind.
I think he "got chipped" a few years back as a publicity stunt. The stock's name is ADSX, sooner or later it's going to shoot up. It's heavily news driven.
Also, SpyChips has a lot of information on all forms of RFID, bit more paranoid side of things.
Slashdot Mirror
... republican bloggers ..call for the hunting down of peoples kids
I believe it's now customary to call those extreme people "chicken hawks" rather than lumping them all together with "republican".
Hopefully the more moderate people (who now refer to themselves as Democrat "or" Republican) in the "Middle" (where the American people actually stand) will strike out and start their own new "party" in the next decade. It's not impossible, they'll just have to come up with another color for the maps on TV and of course millions of dollars. I would gladly donate $25 to see some 3-way action and I know tens of thousands more would also.
Anyway, the proper terms are "chicken hawk", "leftie" and "normal". Since politics is a battle of words and rarely actions, it's important to not play the dog wagger's games. Thank you.
Yeah, the Geek Squad is like those 10 minute lube and oil places. You don't really need to be an expert mechanic to change a car's oil and likewise, you don't need to be a computer expert to clear temp files, turn off system restore, and remove spyware from HKLM/Software/Microsoft/Windows/Run.
Another good thing is that they charge A LOT, over $60 an hour, which means I can undercut them and still make a decent wage.
Filed by Hughes Aircraft Company in 1990....
It's easy to see that what we need to do is neuter all men at the age of 18 and then we don't have to worry about it.
I mean really, what's the point? Sex just gets men in trouble all the damn time. If we were all neutered, we wouldn't have to think about it and could be good little robots, working our jobs until we die. There would be no luxury, no wasteful spending on shiny things to impress the wife because you wouldn't HAVE ONE. What about continuation of the species? Well, they could get a sample of sperm from every man and store it and partner the sperm up with a computer database of women. Of course, you would have to build a whole new religion around it, so when all males reach a certain age, they expect the snip as part of a coming of age ritual.
Anyway, you can't civilize out sex without something like this enevitably happening. However, I do think sex is a pretty primative way of continuing the species and I think that we can probably come up with a better and safer way nowadays. After that, a simple pill to take away the desire and pleasure associated with it and we'll have fixed the number one problem with the human race. Seriously, 4/5 of the bible is about dealing with the problems related to sex, having sex with your neighbors, having sex with your neigbors dog, etc. 99% of daytime television deals with the same topics (Whose baby, you're banging your brother's mother, etc). And look around at your own immediate surroundings, your office for instance. Provided you don't work at a game publisher, you probably have some women around the office and probably there's been some relationships. THAT CAUSES PROBLEMS! YOU KNOW IT!
Ok, so we just eliminated 100% of rape, 100% of murder (mostly jealousy related, although theft also. BUT WHY WAS HE STEALING? because his wife said, you betta go out and get a job!), 100% of problems with unwanted/unplanned children, 100% of wasteful production being spent on useless crap like toilet seat covers and clothes, there's almost too much to list!
And because we wouldn't have testicles, WE WOULDN'T MISS IT!
It's a brave new world. And I'm leading the charge into the mid-21st century with my Neuterist platform. I promise to rid the world of all crime and suffering, all murder and rape, all war, all greed, all lust. Vote with the Neuterists and we'll literally sieze all of these problems by the balls, separate them with a razor scalpel and a quick flick of the wrist, and toss them out with the tater tots from last nights dinner.
well, what if Fon kept a GIS database of the locations of all the member routers and then your client could automagically connect to them while you're on the move. Free always on WiFi everywhere for $5 a year. Probably don't even need the GIS.
P.S. Every major city will be holding a book burning this July 4th in celebration of our Independence; our Independence from free-thought that does not consist of A. Jesus or B. NASCAR.
Alleged sex offender. Allegedly scoping out your child. What's stopping them from pulling YOUR library records because they don't like you, and making up some story to throw you behind bars. This dude was 23, probably was a skateboarder or something and said "lick me where I pee" but the police wants to get rid of such a trouble maker so they just pin sexual comments on him. Maybe the girl threw something at his car, or maybe she's lying. God knows 12 year olds NEVER lie. I don't see how someone's library records could possibly stop a life or death situation. You see that stupid crap in the movies all the time but that doesn't make it real. Real police work is tedious and exhaustive. It has to be that way to protect the innocent. That is what sets America apart from the rest of the world. Now if a bunch of Redneck cops want to flex on the constitution, and then COMPLAIN that the librarian didn't LET THEM? Shit, it's every citizen's duty to make sure that the constitution is followed and to speak out if it isn't. For the protection of future generations. But I forgot, only "lefties" think about the future.
Yeah, you should go get a job with them and get that $16B. It's practically Bill Gatesian. I think craigslist has hit it on the head with the online classified.
As for the "banging anything I can get my hands on" well this is certainly a normal desire but the issue isn't the banging but what can be the result of it. How would you like to have been staring at either marriage or child support payments at the age of 15?
Indeed.
I assume you are single - and planning to remain so.
:)
Married actually
While that might be fun, you can get quite a bit of of those features with a "Virtual" PBX or virtual attendant. I know that the poster did not want to pay for such a service, but it's dirt cheap. They have services that work with VOIP or POTS and give you all the possible options of a PBX. You can set up your cell phone as a extension, etc., auto call routing, MMS message the incoming phone number to your mobile, assign business rules to number types, etc.
Asterisk is really cool but it's overkill for one person. Better to spend the 5 bucks a month for one of those services (just google Virtual Attendant or Virtual PBX) than waste months on Asterisk, unless you want to, I mean.
Well, bonds are good. But so is working without distractions. For a coder or programmer, being at home is probably the best environment. No one cares about the lack of shower that leads to grease level 6 where the real work gets done. Maybe the nut cheese vapors have some sort of nootropic effect.
Anyway, I think the best thing is a good mix of tele and in the office work. For me, I like to tele in the morning from home where I have my dual monitors, my espresso maker, my clean air, etc. It allows me to work solid in the morning right after getting up until I start to lose focus. I'm usually at my highest focus right after waking up. If I waste that time showering and driving, I'll just sit around at work.
So I work in the morning from home and when the focus starts to fade I save all and sync up, and then go shower and commute. I spend about the same amount of hours working but FEWER hours in the car, etc. becuase the traffic is lighter at 10:30 than at 7:30. Plus there's fuel savings, etc. And I don't have to go in every day--sometimes you get on a roll and don't need to go to the office to stay motivated to work.
There are some jobs that need you to be there: anything physical obviously (factory worker, garbageman, etc.). In my opinion, most meetings are bullshit though. Sending an email is usually enough to get it across. But I think some people need meetings to make them feel like they are part of a family. I'm like a hitman, a contractor, BOFH style, so I just do what I do.
What really bugs me is when I get PICNIC calls from the office (usually the same couple of people) who demand I come in and make their computer run faster or reconnect the cable they kicked out of the wall. Oh well, I bill extra for those.
Contrary to popular belief, Microsoft is a publishing company FIRST, software company second. They are just forseeing the enevitable future which will require robots to perform some of our daily tasks. Why not carry a product to meet a growing niche? It costs them nothing in , since they basically just bought a company that already did it for very little, because they were probably poor and starving and sold out for like $10M. Now, they can put their marketing people on it to make it look all clean and run "pretty smooth" and make it fit in with the rest of the MS "stable" (hah pun). So in total they spend maybe $20M and then they only need to sell 100,000 copies at $200 to make their money back. And, since it's a growing business, microsoft can afford to give it away for a while to get people hooked, pushing "premium" or "commercial" licenses on the people who are most likely to pay for it (large corporations, universities, governments).
It's just like the record business, where a record label pays an artist $10M for their talent and then goes on to sell 10 million copies at $5-10 profit per pop, forever.
Not to mention that it'll run on the Windows OS which means they sell 2 licenses with every copy used.
My great grandmother married my great grandfather when she was 14 and he was 20 and were married for over 60 years (until he passed).
I know for a fact that when I was 14, I wanted to bang everything in sight. But all the girls were way more mature than me (because they mature sooner) and they all wanted someone with the more adult behavior. I don't have enough fingers to count all the relationships that went on at my high school that would probably be considered illegal today. Looking back, it was probably pretty stupid but kids are having sex, and girls are going to get whatever they want, there's always some doofus with a Camaro....
Regardless of what happened, the law is the law. If you are 18 or 19 or 20 and messing around with younger girls, you'd better be careful and know how old they really are. You'd better not piss them off and you'd better not piss their parents off. Parental consent is the most important thing. Just be a good person. If you're older than that, you're being stupid because the college girls are much more classy and experienced..
I always say, half your age plus 7 is the ideal and probably should be the law, even after the age of majority. So I'm 26, 26/2=13+7=20.
When I'm 40, 40/2=20+7=27
etc.
Don't mess around outside the formula, it's not worth it.
Don't worry, he'll die in an "accident" and the insider they place inside will rise to the top and take the company public, with ads.
confidential filetype:xls
top secret filetype:xls
confidential filetype:mdb
Wee.
I have a friend who worked in the payments section of a (large adult site) and his job was to manually review payment requests as they come through. They do this because they don't want women's card names (hi fraud rate), bad info, etc. and they want to grant access fast (faster than a bank could process the payment). Anyway, he was part of a team of 6 working 24 hours a day and each person did at least 1 transaction a second. These were for pay by the minute sites also, so it was big money.
As far as feature porno movies, they use the same publishing model everyone else does. The people who actually are in the "trenches" (heh) making them aren't the Jackie Treehorns of the world who do the publishing (mostly). Publishing is always lucrative. That's how Microsoft got rich, that's how the big record companies, time warner, etc. got rich. Guess what, if you pay a fixed cost to make something and then sell COPIES of it (which cost practically nothing), you are going to make a fortune.
Most people don't know how to pirate stuff, and most of the people who get porn are middle aged guys with plenty of money and no sex life. They aren't looking to break the law; they pay for it. So you have content that appeals to the very basest of human emotions that costs almost nothing to make and it's easy to distribute. The internet has probably increased porn sales 10 fold because people can get it immediately, not have to make an embarrassing trip down to the local smutty.
"We don't need the PC"
Translation: We don't need Microsoft
The idea is for us to have one "wire" coming into our home. The wire will be "sold" based on the available bandwidth, in certain chunks with absolute QOS for that amount (using router technology already in existence for VoIP, etc).
The problem is exactly like what happened in the 90's with ELECTRICITY. Enron "oversold" some lines, causing them to go down. If that happens with this proposed network structure, there will be a sudden bidding war for space on the surviving connections because all of the traffic still needs to travel somewhere but there's not bandwidth for all of it. In addition, the providers won't invest in new bandwidth because that will drop the overall "value" of a bandwidth "frame" or unit (unless demand is skyrocketing). The market forces basically guarantee that all lines will be filled almost to capacity at all times.
So, like the utility business, they will try to put a regulating body into place. However, learning from Enron, the big telcoms are going to stack it with "their" people. Therefore this regulating body must be totally neutral and totally about getting as much bandwidth to the people as possible, taxing the PROVIDERS (telcos/cable companies) who use the wires in order to make sure everyone has everything they need at the lowest possible cost.
Members of the body would have to prove their nutrality ahead of time by showing:
a. They are not immediately or indirectly related by blood to any employee of any of the providers (to a certain point, ie: 3 generations, by law across 3 degrees)
b. They do not own stock in any of the companies
c. a. and b. qualify also for any company that has, is or will contract(ed)(s) with the provider for any purpose
d. Anyone who lies will have their right hand chopped off and will be publically humilliated in a stockade.
The problem is the utility paradox, as I like to call it. It's a flaw in the capitalist system based on human desire. It would be pretty easy to open the utility business up to everyone, but you'll have a huge web of wires from 123818 different companies overhead. Company 1 only runs to house A on your block, etc. And gradually market forces whittle it down to the people who are making money, with Company 2 saying "well, we only got 10 people signed up in the city, it's not worth going in there). Which is where we're at now. The problem is that someone OWNS the wire going into our house, rather than "we" owning it. But because of deregulation, they have to let anyone use it.
The problem is that these companies are settled in and there is a huge war between the party line cable providers and the star topology telcos at the local (to the end) level. The cable companies are ahead because their loop/party line is way cheaper to implement within a city. BUT, as bandwidth requirements skyrocket, they are going to run out fast. The star topology telcos have a huge infrastructure in place but it's all outdated and they need to raise money to build a new network. Otherwise, they are going to lose out in the short term to the better positioned cable providers and eventually the cable providers will buy them up to shut them down.
The trump card of the telcos is twofold:
#1, they have a monopoly on long hauls. The industry consolidation has converged what used to be 12-15 long haul "tier one" providers into about 5 (V, E, M, A, U). Pretty much every long haul line in America and translantic is owned by a telco. I think Cox (a large privately held cable provider) is trying to put a network into place, but it's held together by leased lines from the telco, which would be affected by the new tariffs.
#2, they have WIRELESS, which is going to be a big part of local access. Where I'm from, most people don't have a land telephone line; they use a cellular. Wireless still needs long hauls for long distance though...
So, the telcos need to raise money to boost their failing high-profit local business. How to do that? Leverage their trump card with a government imposed corporate tar
What about redundancy, in light of: backhoe operators, lightning, government wiretapping, corporate mismanagement, black hats, "phishers" (I hate that term), etc. do you think it's a good idea to have all of your connectivity through one provider? All of your eggs in one basket. The only way I would have it that way is if there was strong regulation by a non-government independent body with power and accountability of the actual physical wire. Then the wire will be "sold" based on the available bandwidth, in certain chunks guaranteeing QOS of that amount.
The problem is exactly like what happened in the 90's with ELECTRICITY. Enron "oversold" some lines, causing them to go down. All of a sudden there's a bidding war because all of the traffic still needs to travel somewhere but there's not bandwidth for all of it. In addition, the providers won't invest in new bandwidth because that will drop the overall "value" of a bandwidth "frame" or unit (unless demand is skyrocketing). The market forces basically guarantee that all lines will be filled almost to capacity.
Therefore this regulating body must be totally neutral and totally about getting as much bandwidth to the people as possible, taxing the PROVIDERS who use the wires in order to make sure everyone has everything they need at the lowest possible cost.
Members of the body would have to prove their nutrality ahead of time by showing:
a. They are not immediately or indirectly related by blood to any employee of any of the providers (to a certain point, ie: 3 generations, by law across 3 degrees)
b. They do not own stock in any of the companies
c. a. and b. qualify also for any company that has, is or will contract(ed)(s) with the provider for any purpose
d. Anyone who lies will have their right hand chopped off and will be publically humilliated in a stockade.
The problem is the utility paradox, as I like to call it. It's a flaw in the capitalist system based on human desire. It would be pretty easy to open the utility business up to everyone, but you'll have a huge web of wires from 123818 different companies overhead. Company 1 only runs to house A on your block, etc. And gradually market forces whittle it down to the people who are making money, with Company 2 saying "well, we only got 10 people signed up in the city, it's not worth going in there). Which is where we're at now.
The problem is that these companies are settled in and there is a huge war between the party line cable providers and the star topology telcos at the local (to the end) level. The cable companies are ahead because their loop/party line is way cheaper to implement within a city. BUT, as bandwidth requirements skyrocket, they are going to run out fast. The star topology telcos have a huge infrastructure in place but it's all outdated and they need to raise money to build a new network. Otherwise, they are going to lose out in the short term to the better positioned cable providers and eventually the cable providers will buy them up to shut them down.
The trump card of the telcos is twofold:
#1, they have a monopoly on long hauls. The industry consolidation has converged what used to be 12-15 long haul "tier one" providers into about 5 (V, E, M, A, U). Pretty much every long haul line in America and translantic is owned by a telco. I think Cox (a large privately held cable provider) is trying to put a network into place, but it's held together by leased lines from the telco, which would be affected by the new tariffs.
#2, they have WIRELESS, which is going to be a big part of local access. Where I'm from, most people don't have a land telephone line; they use a cellular. Wireless still needs long hauls for long distance though...
So, the telcos need to raise money to boost their failing high-profit local business. How to do that? Leverage their trump card with a government imposed corporate tariff that taxes their competition more than anyone else. And of course consumers are going to be affected because we will be paying a third time for any bandwidth we consume.
It's pretty obvious the telcos are trying to move internet access to the same system of billing they use for the cell phones. Overcharging. Limited hardware availability. Contracts. Double ended charging (think about it: you pay for your "minutes", so does the person on the other end. Same with texts..) Etc. Like Ma Bell used to do. They are trying to do this with our Internet. It doesn't make any sense to punish the users because the companies made a bad deal to begin with. They can either turn it off or try to figure out a way to make money. To get a TARIFF passed on all bandwidth is crazy! I can't believe we are getting so screwed by congress lately.
Hell no. Look people, the worst case, we're all going to move to a WiFi mesh network and CUT OUT the telcos. If that's what they want, fine. We can already do almost 100km hauls with off the shelf 802.11b and custom antennas. There are also satellites, amateur radio bands, etc. that haven't even been touched. It's going to be tough to compete with fiber bandwidth at first but I think if enough local traffic moves off the network, they will have to lower prices to increase demand or they will fold. Also, there is nothing stopping us from using POTS lines with $5.00 56K modems to dial across the country.
This just seems like a huge step backwards. They are already charging on BOTH ends for the bandwidth, and now they want to prioritize traffic. At least when the government owned the internet (well, they ran it over leased telco lines, which would now be TAXED by the private telcos) everyone had equal access.
The problem is that not just anyone can go out and run a wire. You have to get easements, lease space. Maybe we COULD get some sort of Global Internet Backbone Coop going though, where we get investors, pull our own cables cross country, utilize hi bandwidth RF links for weird hauls, etc. Because local loop stuff is all going to be Wifi, you only need a few points of entry per city. Let them crush themselves and our company will rise above doing things the old way for cheaper.
Yeah, I've been developing a large project in PHP and I love it. It's fast and doesn't bother me with stupid crap I don't need to be thinking about when I'm designing and building. Sure, it holds your hand with little shortcuts and it is garbage to make a real app with. But who cares? My project is web-based, basically a front-end for a database. PHP handles all the text stuff just fine.
Now, when this site goes live, and I start to sell it, I'm going to run into slowdowns, etc. But if a function is too slow, you just rewrite it in a different tool that works faster. Perl, Python, whatever. Why would you rip your hair out during the design phase though? Make it work in PHP, then replace/extend with the other tools for lower level functions.
I think the real problem is that "web site designers" are using Dreamweaver to generate their PHP rather than typing it themselves. I use Dreamweaver in "coder" mode because I like the syntax highlighting and stuff integrated with the check-in/check-out and built in FTP client (not that I couldn't get that somewhere else but whatever). They have a lot of "special case" code that gets put in by default which slows the mess down.
Now, if I was writing software with multimillions of records and tons of memory use (image processing, for instance), I would use C++. Just remember that your job is to make it work Cheap, Fast, Good (pick any two.)
Find your representative.
Go to their website.
Click on contact info.
Call your representative.
Write your representative.
Please.
Would they? I'm not entirely convinced. A small nuclear attack of that sort would likely result in a proportional strike - good bye Tehran, for example. Massive retaliation MAY not be the response, though it certainly is possible.
An eye for an eye will leave the whole world blind.
--Ghandi
I think he "got chipped" a few years back as a publicity stunt. The stock's name is ADSX, sooner or later it's going to shoot up. It's heavily news driven.
Also, SpyChips has a lot of information on all forms of RFID, bit more paranoid side of things.