And this is the optimal most efficient possible solution that a free market creates, how again?
It's not. A free market economy would let these company fail, and allow a lower barrier of entry for competition. The free market truly shines when there is high liquidity and many participants. The current economic system we have favors the former, but not the later.
I wonder where they came from? It's not like they came from our schools, our churches, our towns, or anything like that. I think they're alien invaders. I'm working on how they use mind control techniques to get good, honest, logical people like us to vote for them.
It's really not hard at all. Here, have a look at some of the usual techniques.
I think maybe I do deserve a WOOSH on this one. I was replying more to the anti immigrant sentiments a few comments up, of which I replied that it's actually in our countries best interest to attract enterprising, talented, and hard working individuals here, to this country. I thought yours was a continuance of the original argument; that it would some how be a good thing for our country to keep immigrants out it. I probably should have picked a better comment to reply to, but yours happened to end the train of thought.
In all fairness, you should probably tell the self-styled "Libertarians" that, first. Judging by the pro-corporate dribble most of them echo incessantly, they missed the memo.
Funny thing is, the only pro-corporate dribble I hear is from others, talking about the "views" of Libertarians. I personally have never met a Libertarian that was pro-corpratisim. Please do not confuse us for the neo-cons. They like to borrow our rhetoric, but really they are the antithesis of Libertarian philosophy.
I'm not criticising American ideals or the American people, but this kind of behaviour is made possible by unregulated free-market capitalism.
Nope. It's made possible by regulated near-free-market capitalism and worse. If it were a truly unregulated free-market, there wouldn't be things like IP that Apple could use to prevent competitors from cloning Apple hardware and software and selling at a lower price or adopting a more free (as in speech) version of iTunes service. Only the power of law keeps the competitors at bay.
^ Mod parent up if you value freedom. Most people confuse Libertarians with neo cons. In reality, corpratisim is the exact thing Libertarians are against. A government shouldn't give us regulations, it should give us the tools to regulate ourselves against concentrated power, regardless of its form.
Remove all barriers to exporting jobs to India in exchange for terminating immigration to the US and paying all Indians to repatriate to India.
The US got along just great before the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.
Here's a better idea, lets remove all the barriers to immigration, and welcome immigrants with open fucking arms (especially the smart and/or hard working ones). Trying to eliminate competition so we don't have to work so hard is a losing attitude. Immigrants aren't the reason our country is going to shit, it's people like you!
Sincerely,
A Born and Raised American of German Decent
I always take a bit of issue with this whole "we get the government we deserve" thing. What if the system was designed so that the only choices we have are horrible (for the majority of us at least)? The illusion of choice we have is false, and no amount of voting will fix that. The only thing that will fix this is activism, and, well... I guess we get the government we deserve then.:(
Here's my prediction: The version of OS X that comes after Mountain Lion will only let you install applications/software from the App Store. Again, Steve's plan; not Tim's.
So Xcode will only run on Windows and Linux?
I suppose this would shut up the "it's bullshit that iOS development requires a Mac" crowd, at least.
Nope, it won't. This requirement has nothing to do with XCode. We develop for iOS in Eclipse. All the mac mini does is upload the binary with the App Loader utility. It is total bullshit that Apple makes you do that. No rational person should think otherwise.
I'm not saying that there aren't any issues. I just think that the security benefits overweigh the downsides of a more controlled environment. From a technological standpoint, this is absolutely the way to go in the consumer market. If this leads to some applications getting rejected, it is not a technological problem. It just means that it needs to be solved in some other way. For instance, allowing users to install root certificates for 3rd party "app stores". This could be the case for instance how MacPorts and other other package management systems would work in the future.
PS. It was probably also a smart move to deny emulators in iOS. I'm already somewhat skeptical about games because of concern for battery life. Running something inside emulators does not sound good until we have phones running on supercapacitors or some better power source.
There is an inherent flaw in this thinking, and this flaw also shows us why large powerful governments are a bad idea,. That flaw is trust, or more specifically, trust in a single entity. Think about it. Almost every malware attack vector starts with exploiting a common point of trust (eg. You trust java or flash or your browser). When trust is centralized, the baddies only need to focus their efforts on subverting that single point. This is true in both government, and information security. My point is, creating an eco system that relies on a central point of trust is setting us up for failure. (sorry for typos, using a tablet)
"Big governments and their corporate creations locked into a tight positive feedback loop."
Are you implying, as has been falsely implied many times before, that a small government results in a lower probability of a corrupt, monopolistic economy arising? I would have thought seemingly intelligent people would have moved past that. Governments might aid corporations due to corruption, but when you give it all over to an unregulated "free" market, nobody needs corruption to screw over the people; they just do it. "Big governments" at least have the potential to work; free markets, by their nature, will fall into monopolies which are astronomically more abusive than governments.
The correct answer is regulation and a watchful populous which punishes corruption in elections. I'd also like a flying rainbow pony.
I would rather the government focus its time and energy into giving us the tools to regulate ourselves. What if the government's primary role was to enforce criminal and contract law between consenting adults, and all lawyers were public servants?
If you're currently using Exchange, perhaps now is the time to think about using a cloud service for email.
As much as many of the small office sysadmins want to think, there really is no competition in the large enterprise market for email. No cloud IMAP doesn't cut it. Sadly... People demand tight auth, calendar, mail integration, Exchange handles this really well. (Unfortunately)
So does Google Apps for the enterprise. (Unfortunately)
I bet they could corner a market in "social gaming." Think Steam, but for light weight mobile and web based games integrated with a large social network. I think there would be a lot of potential for generating revenue there.
People will only be driven away if they see their privacy being violated -- information exposed to friends, etc. Now, suppose that Facebook just conveniently sells more detailed information to advertisers at higher prices, without telling the users -- nobody will leave the site, and even if they are told what is happening they will just say, "Well so what, I am not that interesting so why should I care?"
Because you don't want to get advertisements for butt plugs while checking your facebook at work?
If that's the case, it's of no consequence to me - I use Dolphin HD.
Good man! I almost wrote Android off as unusable, then I found it's only the Browser that sucks. UI opinions aside, Dolphin rocks the house in performance.
I am curious to know if anyone has used another full featured browser on Android that preforms better than Dolphin. If so, please share.
he didn't need bittorrent, all he had to do was go to a mirror site that didn't have bandwidth issues. Bittorrent can be usefull but speed is not one of the things it excels at.
It depends on the peers in the swarm (local peer discovery), and how well your set up can handle multiple connections. Using automated block lists to prevent people from poisoning the protocol also makes a big difference.
I rarely get speeds off BT that are less than 3 - 5 times the max I've ever pulled off a single HTTP pipe. It is significantly faster than any other transfer protocol I have used. It can also be turd slow given the right circumstances, but if you can connect to a hundred or so legit peers... whoooooweeeeeeiii it's fast.
Surprised it took me this long to find a post talking about the vast media conspiracy to discredit Ron Paul. This, in spite of the fact that Paul has gotten much more attention than his polling levels could possibly justify. But yeah, there is a "media blackout" and the establishment is out to get him. Shit, the news media even treat this kook with kid gloves. He just doesn't appeal to most people. Sorry. Get over it.
You can't honestly expect me to believe this when I have seen it for _myself_ first hand? Can you? Do you even follow the news on a regular basis? I do, and it is clear that there is a coordinated effort in the news media to discredit _any_ ideas that do not conform to the status quo. Do you think this has anything to do with the fact that 90% of media in the US is owned by 6 companies? Here's a hint, it does.
I am a liberal. I voted for Obama. I don't think Ron Paul is a godsend. I sure as hell think he's better than the other choices.
He isn't advocating a straight move back to the gold standard for one. It is an important teaching point about sound money though (gold would arguably be the most sound money historically). He advocates for mostly open borders for immigrants, saying that it isn't a problem if the economy is sound (enough jobs to support them). And yes, he doesn't want to have overseas bases everywhere. He wants international relatins to be based on trade, not carrier groups.
Quoting this AC because he is exactly right. Most of Ron Paul's criticism is based on misinformation, bought and paid for by those who have the most to lose under an RP presidency; corporate conglomerates that control both sides of the isle.
Slashdot Mirror
Am I the only one who read this article as "an effective way to DoS GoDaddy sites?"
And this is the optimal most efficient possible solution that a free market creates, how again?
It's not. A free market economy would let these company fail, and allow a lower barrier of entry for competition. The free market truly shines when there is high liquidity and many participants. The current economic system we have favors the former, but not the later.
I wonder where they came from? It's not like they came from our schools, our churches, our towns, or anything like that. I think they're alien invaders. I'm working on how they use mind control techniques to get good, honest, logical people like us to vote for them.
It's really not hard at all. Here, have a look at some of the usual techniques.
I think maybe I do deserve a WOOSH on this one. I was replying more to the anti immigrant sentiments a few comments up, of which I replied that it's actually in our countries best interest to attract enterprising, talented, and hard working individuals here, to this country. I thought yours was a continuance of the original argument; that it would some how be a good thing for our country to keep immigrants out it. I probably should have picked a better comment to reply to, but yours happened to end the train of thought.
In all fairness, you should probably tell the self-styled "Libertarians" that, first. Judging by the pro-corporate dribble most of them echo incessantly, they missed the memo.
Funny thing is, the only pro-corporate dribble I hear is from others, talking about the "views" of Libertarians. I personally have never met a Libertarian that was pro-corpratisim. Please do not confuse us for the neo-cons. They like to borrow our rhetoric, but really they are the antithesis of Libertarian philosophy.
I'm not criticising American ideals or the American people, but this kind of behaviour is made possible by unregulated free-market capitalism.
Nope. It's made possible by regulated near-free-market capitalism and worse. If it were a truly unregulated free-market, there wouldn't be things like IP that Apple could use to prevent competitors from cloning Apple hardware and software and selling at a lower price or adopting a more free (as in speech) version of iTunes service. Only the power of law keeps the competitors at bay.
^ Mod parent up if you value freedom. Most people confuse Libertarians with neo cons. In reality, corpratisim is the exact thing Libertarians are against. A government shouldn't give us regulations, it should give us the tools to regulate ourselves against concentrated power, regardless of its form.
How about this:
Remove all barriers to exporting jobs to India in exchange for terminating immigration to the US and paying all Indians to repatriate to India.
The US got along just great before the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.
Here's a better idea, lets remove all the barriers to immigration, and welcome immigrants with open fucking arms (especially the smart and/or hard working ones). Trying to eliminate competition so we don't have to work so hard is a losing attitude. Immigrants aren't the reason our country is going to shit, it's people like you! Sincerely, A Born and Raised American of German Decent
I always take a bit of issue with this whole "we get the government we deserve" thing. What if the system was designed so that the only choices we have are horrible (for the majority of us at least)? The illusion of choice we have is false, and no amount of voting will fix that. The only thing that will fix this is activism, and, well... I guess we get the government we deserve then. :(
So Xcode will only run on Windows and Linux?
I suppose this would shut up the "it's bullshit that iOS development requires a Mac" crowd, at least.
Nope, it won't. This requirement has nothing to do with XCode. We develop for iOS in Eclipse. All the mac mini does is upload the binary with the App Loader utility. It is total bullshit that Apple makes you do that. No rational person should think otherwise.
I'm not saying that there aren't any issues. I just think that the security benefits overweigh the downsides of a more controlled environment. From a technological standpoint, this is absolutely the way to go in the consumer market. If this leads to some applications getting rejected, it is not a technological problem. It just means that it needs to be solved in some other way. For instance, allowing users to install root certificates for 3rd party "app stores". This could be the case for instance how MacPorts and other other package management systems would work in the future.
PS. It was probably also a smart move to deny emulators in iOS. I'm already somewhat skeptical about games because of concern for battery life. Running something inside emulators does not sound good until we have phones running on supercapacitors or some better power source.
There is an inherent flaw in this thinking, and this flaw also shows us why large powerful governments are a bad idea,. That flaw is trust, or more specifically, trust in a single entity. Think about it. Almost every malware attack vector starts with exploiting a common point of trust (eg. You trust java or flash or your browser). When trust is centralized, the baddies only need to focus their efforts on subverting that single point. This is true in both government, and information security. My point is, creating an eco system that relies on a central point of trust is setting us up for failure. (sorry for typos, using a tablet)
One day Apple will start selling iOS devices in the Macbook or iMac form factor.
Absolutely, I agree with you. And guess what they will be up against? Right. Android in the PC form factor.
Don't forget about Windows 8! hehe
"Big governments and their corporate creations locked into a tight positive feedback loop." Are you implying, as has been falsely implied many times before, that a small government results in a lower probability of a corrupt, monopolistic economy arising? I would have thought seemingly intelligent people would have moved past that. Governments might aid corporations due to corruption, but when you give it all over to an unregulated "free" market, nobody needs corruption to screw over the people; they just do it. "Big governments" at least have the potential to work; free markets, by their nature, will fall into monopolies which are astronomically more abusive than governments. The correct answer is regulation and a watchful populous which punishes corruption in elections. I'd also like a flying rainbow pony.
I would rather the government focus its time and energy into giving us the tools to regulate ourselves. What if the government's primary role was to enforce criminal and contract law between consenting adults, and all lawyers were public servants?
If you're currently using Exchange, perhaps now is the time to think about using a cloud service for email.
As much as many of the small office sysadmins want to think, there really is no competition in the large enterprise market for email. No cloud IMAP doesn't cut it. Sadly... People demand tight auth, calendar, mail integration, Exchange handles this really well. (Unfortunately)
So does Google Apps for the enterprise. (Unfortunately)
I bet they could corner a market in "social gaming." Think Steam, but for light weight mobile and web based games integrated with a large social network. I think there would be a lot of potential for generating revenue there.
Question: Was 44.1 kHz chosen in part because the integer 44100 is highly composite? It's divisible by the following factors up to its square root: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21, 25, 28, 30, 35, 36, 42, 45, 49, 50, 60, 63, 70, 75, 84, 90, 98, 100, 105, 126, 140, 147, 150, 175, 180, 196, 210.
Especially interesting is that it's divisible by 7.
Prime factorization of 44100 is 2^2 x 3^2 x 5^2 x 7^2, or (2x3x5x7)^2, or just 210^2. Pretty cool, huh? Coincidence or by design?
./ need to let you keep some mod points in a reserve so you can use them when you come across some fine gems like these! :D
Read that comment again there.
People will only be driven away if they see their privacy being violated -- information exposed to friends, etc. Now, suppose that Facebook just conveniently sells more detailed information to advertisers at higher prices, without telling the users -- nobody will leave the site, and even if they are told what is happening they will just say, "Well so what, I am not that interesting so why should I care?"
Because you don't want to get advertisements for butt plugs while checking your facebook at work?
If that's the case, it's of no consequence to me - I use Dolphin HD.
Good man! I almost wrote Android off as unusable, then I found it's only the Browser that sucks. UI opinions aside, Dolphin rocks the house in performance.
I am curious to know if anyone has used another full featured browser on Android that preforms better than Dolphin. If so, please share.
Just to give some benchmarks, I usually pull a blue ray in about 45 minutes to an hour tops.
he didn't need bittorrent, all he had to do was go to a mirror site that didn't have bandwidth issues. Bittorrent can be usefull but speed is not one of the things it excels at.
It depends on the peers in the swarm (local peer discovery), and how well your set up can handle multiple connections. Using automated block lists to prevent people from poisoning the protocol also makes a big difference.
I rarely get speeds off BT that are less than 3 - 5 times the max I've ever pulled off a single HTTP pipe. It is significantly faster than any other transfer protocol I have used. It can also be turd slow given the right circumstances, but if you can connect to a hundred or so legit peers... whoooooweeeeeeiii it's fast.
Surprised it took me this long to find a post talking about the vast media conspiracy to discredit Ron Paul. This, in spite of the fact that Paul has gotten much more attention than his polling levels could possibly justify. But yeah, there is a "media blackout" and the establishment is out to get him. Shit, the news media even treat this kook with kid gloves. He just doesn't appeal to most people. Sorry. Get over it.
You can't honestly expect me to believe this when I have seen it for _myself_ first hand? Can you? Do you even follow the news on a regular basis? I do, and it is clear that there is a coordinated effort in the news media to discredit _any_ ideas that do not conform to the status quo. Do you think this has anything to do with the fact that 90% of media in the US is owned by 6 companies? Here's a hint, it does.
I am a liberal. I voted for Obama. I don't think Ron Paul is a godsend. I sure as hell think he's better than the other choices.
Maybe. I'm pretty happy with it though.
Oops, sorry. I thought you were replying to this person:
Manage Blocked Sites: https://www.google.ca/reviews/t [google.ca]
I've had Experts Exchange blocked for years now.
As a coder, you should know to automate this instead of retyping it every time.
He isn't advocating a straight move back to the gold standard for one. It is an important teaching point about sound money though (gold would arguably be the most sound money historically). He advocates for mostly open borders for immigrants, saying that it isn't a problem if the economy is sound (enough jobs to support them). And yes, he doesn't want to have overseas bases everywhere. He wants international relatins to be based on trade, not carrier groups.
Quoting this AC because he is exactly right. Most of Ron Paul's criticism is based on misinformation, bought and paid for by those who have the most to lose under an RP presidency; corporate conglomerates that control both sides of the isle.