Hmm. Well, now that I think about it, there is the slight possibility that Ballmer does have some ideas that are worthwhile, but that he is embattled by other members of MS (some of the underlings have fiefdoms, and are dragging their heels / are ill-suited for their jobs, but getting rid of them requires more effort than can be had / company politics). However, bringing your Economics professor from college on board typically isn't a sign of that; even more when it appears that you're taking extremely bad advice (freshmen year of college level MicroEconomics) about market segmentation -> Windows 7 is experiencing market fragmentation, not segmentation. Were I him, I'd spend some time programming in C++, C#, and VB (perhaps some ASP.NET), just as a refresher of how the vast majority of his organization thinks; if you want to be the owner of a factory, it is an unwritten rule that you must know how to work, and preferably repair, every machine contained therein.
Lastly, the desktop will never die. People enjoy having far too much control over their own lives, and PCs are an expression of that individuality.
This is going to sound kind of mean, but tell them to adapt. You have perhaps a dozen icons to memorize that represent 90% of the operations you will ever need to perform on a computer; and there really aren't any viable replacements. Who uses Read / Write media today? What would be considered universal? A thumb drive? The 'cloud'? Who here owns a rewritable DVD, or Blu-Ray?
The funny part (I own Adobe Acrobat) is that the PDF format is actually a lot more versatile that simply forms / documents, as it is commonly used.
Though I would love to know how to turn off the accessibility options in CS5. I have one of those drawing tablets (part of the package), so Adobe thinks I am physically handicapped, and wants to 'help' me by scanning the document or something before I can use it (and it takes forever).
I believe you missed the point. Charity, taken from people at the proverbial gunpoint, is not charity; it's theft. You are denying the giver a voluntary choice, i.e. duress free, to determine whether or not to donate to a cause. If you wish to argue that you believe the ends justify the means, then say so.
"3) the non Saucer and body section parts are for... looks? Site is slashdotted, so I can't tell." -> 'Tis so we know that it isn't a UFO. What alien would build a craft like this, and why? As it will be easier to identify, that should cut down on the false sightings of real UFOs -> "OMG, dude, there's an alien spacecraft! Look! Look!" "Nah that's just the Enterprise." "You're right, let's go back to playing CS."
It's...beautiful elsewhere as well. We do not have a monopoly on beauty; we did, however, have the majority in shares on the freedom racket until recently.
Seriously. We're talking about Adobe, which ranks up there with Oracle, MS, and friends. If they can all create security patches for their last several major products, as well as the variations for each, then Adobe can do the same.
And if you want to do something about bandwidth, just integrate a Bit torrent client into the downloader, like, I don't know, a fair number of other companies have done.
What more, Adobe has a really sorry record for security, plus some infamy associated with its upgrades. Adobe Acrobat Reader is constantly updating itself, to deal with security issues, which all, apparently, need a system reboot (why does an application like this need a system reboot, I wonder).
Hmm. While I have some doubt in that statement as well, it is worth mentioning that various animals can extract energy from food sources that we, as human beings, cannot. Plants have a ton of cellulose that in human beings is indigestible, but in ruminants offers a fair amount of energy.
Nonsense. She promoted the idea that the individual, not the group, was the most important part of any society; the the individual is the atom of society, making everything else possible (a bottom-up approach), as opposed to the sadly more common top-down approach (society makes the individual, the individual cannot exist without society). She also promoted the idea that it's okay to acknowledge, as an individual, that you have wants and desires of your own, that that was not a bad thing, and it's perfectly okay to stay at home and read a book rather than working a soup kitchen. What more, that it is idiotic to proclaim that you are a selfless individual when you do not actually know the needs nor wants of your brother (yes, you may know that he wants to eat or sleep, but typically not which song he wants to listen to, etc.).
Finally, she loathed hypocrisy more than anything. She despised the kinds of people who promoted nonsense philosophies, who were more interested in scamming people, or making a profit at the expense of someone else. Remember, in any of her books, the people who worked were payed very well. It's only the people who used things like 'eminent domain' or political connections that ended up getting thrown under a bus. I am greatly curious why so many people, who have seen the abuses of eminent domain and political lobbying, seem to despise the point Rand was trying to get across.
As for the Social Darwinism angle, I believe you have that slightly off. Her point, if you read closely, was that any charity that comes at the end of a gunpoint is not charity. That a Good Samaritan is by choice, not by mandate.
But then, most people seem to misunderstand Rand. Reading comprehension not being what it used to be, I can understand.
Yes, 9 billion might let you live as opulent a life as 10 billion. But for those of us who use our own money as seed capital for our next business venture, 1 billion makes a hell of a difference. That's seed capital you're fingering.
Fair enough. Allow me to clear the country, then proceed with the experiment. Crank the taxes up to confiscatory, on all classes, and write me a report on its effects.
I, and the others, will be sunbathing on a few of the more tropical islands. We'll keep a private jet, on a runway near you, fueled up and ready to go; if it turns out we are wrong, give us a phone call; if not, take the jet, as you will probably want to. ^_^
Yes, but if we bleat that it is, in fact, the greatest nation in the world, and demand that all bleat with us, or be destroyed, then we can keep up the image perpetually.
With that kind of money, he can afford private tutors (the education angle is covered), and by the time his kids are seeking acceptance at college / university, the admissions committees will be lining up for a shot at a possible donation.
Or he, like many others in life, thought the US might be a better fit than his previous country, and having spent several years in the US, found it was not.
And the only reason we are discussing this today, on/., instead of the thousands of others who attained US citizenship, then choose citizenship elsewhere, is because he has such a large amount of money.
Do these people complain when a Japanese businessman brings his vast fortune to the United States? But they complain when an American businessman leaves with his fortune. I do not think the US wants to be known as the grave yard of the wealthy -> "Come to the US, gain a citizenship, we are the freest country in the world! But if you find it not to your liking, know that you can leave, but we are totally going to confiscate all your shit at the border."
See, that kind of tagline would scare the foreign wealthy away.
Lastly, perhaps more than a knee-jerk analysis is needed here. Why are some of the wealthy leaving the US? Do they have a point about the taxes? I know, I know, it's blasphemy to say that, and people assume that if it's not the wealthy paying those taxes, it's them.
Babe, that's 18 years of your life that you are not going to get back.
Secondly, it costs money to emigrate from the US. Other countries typically don't want you unless you're a skilled worker, or have money.
"I used to be a Randroid too, and once upon a time I would have agreed with you. Then I grew up, attained some sophistication, discovered empathy, and got a clue." -> Hmm. Use of the word 'Randroid' implies lack of sophistication, lack of understanding why someone might have problems with the society they are born in implies lack of empathy, and the 'go with the flow / crowd mentality; change is impossible' attitude implies that wisdom has never seen the inside of your head (clueless).
Now stop being bitter because your life didn't turn out the way you hoped it might, and have some hope that a few of the younger ones will break free of their bonds.
Hmm. I suppose Ron Paul's idea is just to take away the preloaded debit cards and credit cards that are so popular among government scandals, and to eventually work out the rest.
I imagine that if I took the company credit card, and tried to charge a few entertainment expenses from the local strip joint, the CEO would have me in his office before the ink on the receipt was dry.
Because, like or not, there are always a handful of people whom you'd rather not share a bunk with. Or at least, that's how the argument goes.
Profit, in the free-market (yes, yes, that phrase must be a curse-word to some people) sense, is a...bonus for doing a good job. Unfortunately, and I believe you will agree with me here, there are no free-markets implemented as such, only free-markets in name. Perhaps at one time there were, but these days, there are nothing but middlemen, demanding protection money. I feel almost as though we are on the infamous 'B' Ark from the HHGTTG.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm. Well, now that I think about it, there is the slight possibility that Ballmer does have some ideas that are worthwhile, but that he is embattled by other members of MS (some of the underlings have fiefdoms, and are dragging their heels / are ill-suited for their jobs, but getting rid of them requires more effort than can be had / company politics). However, bringing your Economics professor from college on board typically isn't a sign of that; even more when it appears that you're taking extremely bad advice (freshmen year of college level MicroEconomics) about market segmentation -> Windows 7 is experiencing market fragmentation, not segmentation. Were I him, I'd spend some time programming in C++, C#, and VB (perhaps some ASP.NET), just as a refresher of how the vast majority of his organization thinks; if you want to be the owner of a factory, it is an unwritten rule that you must know how to work, and preferably repair, every machine contained therein.
Lastly, the desktop will never die. People enjoy having far too much control over their own lives, and PCs are an expression of that individuality.
Hmm. Laser-induced fusion...
Look at the parent's username.
It's Netscape, isn't it? ;-)
This is going to sound kind of mean, but tell them to adapt. You have perhaps a dozen icons to memorize that represent 90% of the operations you will ever need to perform on a computer; and there really aren't any viable replacements. Who uses Read / Write media today? What would be considered universal? A thumb drive? The 'cloud'? Who here owns a rewritable DVD, or Blu-Ray?
This is a problem that simply doesn't exist.
The funny part (I own Adobe Acrobat) is that the PDF format is actually a lot more versatile that simply forms / documents, as it is commonly used.
Though I would love to know how to turn off the accessibility options in CS5. I have one of those drawing tablets (part of the package), so Adobe thinks I am physically handicapped, and wants to 'help' me by scanning the document or something before I can use it (and it takes forever).
I believe you missed the point. Charity, taken from people at the proverbial gunpoint, is not charity; it's theft. You are denying the giver a voluntary choice, i.e. duress free, to determine whether or not to donate to a cause. If you wish to argue that you believe the ends justify the means, then say so.
"3) the non Saucer and body section parts are for... looks? Site is slashdotted, so I can't tell." -> 'Tis so we know that it isn't a UFO. What alien would build a craft like this, and why? As it will be easier to identify, that should cut down on the false sightings of real UFOs -> "OMG, dude, there's an alien spacecraft! Look! Look!" "Nah that's just the Enterprise." "You're right, let's go back to playing CS."
Wait, what is an impulse drive? And yes, this thing is missing a warp drive.
It's...beautiful elsewhere as well. We do not have a monopoly on beauty; we did, however, have the majority in shares on the freedom racket until recently.
Haha. I agree with this statement, but only if I get to dress in a red ST uniform, and command the ship for its first mission. ;-)
Seriously. We're talking about Adobe, which ranks up there with Oracle, MS, and friends. If they can all create security patches for their last several major products, as well as the variations for each, then Adobe can do the same.
And if you want to do something about bandwidth, just integrate a Bit torrent client into the downloader, like, I don't know, a fair number of other companies have done.
What more, Adobe has a really sorry record for security, plus some infamy associated with its upgrades. Adobe Acrobat Reader is constantly updating itself, to deal with security issues, which all, apparently, need a system reboot (why does an application like this need a system reboot, I wonder).
Fairly certain, should these allegations prove true, that this does constitute a conflict of interest.
Hmm. While I have some doubt in that statement as well, it is worth mentioning that various animals can extract energy from food sources that we, as human beings, cannot. Plants have a ton of cellulose that in human beings is indigestible, but in ruminants offers a fair amount of energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruminant
Nonsense. She promoted the idea that the individual, not the group, was the most important part of any society; the the individual is the atom of society, making everything else possible (a bottom-up approach), as opposed to the sadly more common top-down approach (society makes the individual, the individual cannot exist without society). She also promoted the idea that it's okay to acknowledge, as an individual, that you have wants and desires of your own, that that was not a bad thing, and it's perfectly okay to stay at home and read a book rather than working a soup kitchen. What more, that it is idiotic to proclaim that you are a selfless individual when you do not actually know the needs nor wants of your brother (yes, you may know that he wants to eat or sleep, but typically not which song he wants to listen to, etc.).
Finally, she loathed hypocrisy more than anything. She despised the kinds of people who promoted nonsense philosophies, who were more interested in scamming people, or making a profit at the expense of someone else. Remember, in any of her books, the people who worked were payed very well. It's only the people who used things like 'eminent domain' or political connections that ended up getting thrown under a bus. I am greatly curious why so many people, who have seen the abuses of eminent domain and political lobbying, seem to despise the point Rand was trying to get across.
As for the Social Darwinism angle, I believe you have that slightly off. Her point, if you read closely, was that any charity that comes at the end of a gunpoint is not charity. That a Good Samaritan is by choice, not by mandate.
But then, most people seem to misunderstand Rand. Reading comprehension not being what it used to be, I can understand.
Yes, 9 billion might let you live as opulent a life as 10 billion. But for those of us who use our own money as seed capital for our next business venture, 1 billion makes a hell of a difference. That's seed capital you're fingering.
And a tip of my hat to you, kind sir.
You scored 10 / 10 on reading comprehension.
Fair enough. Allow me to clear the country, then proceed with the experiment. Crank the taxes up to confiscatory, on all classes, and write me a report on its effects.
I, and the others, will be sunbathing on a few of the more tropical islands. We'll keep a private jet, on a runway near you, fueled up and ready to go; if it turns out we are wrong, give us a phone call; if not, take the jet, as you will probably want to. ^_^
Yes, but if we bleat that it is, in fact, the greatest nation in the world, and demand that all bleat with us, or be destroyed, then we can keep up the image perpetually.
With that kind of money, he can afford private tutors (the education angle is covered), and by the time his kids are seeking acceptance at college / university, the admissions committees will be lining up for a shot at a possible donation.
Or he, like many others in life, thought the US might be a better fit than his previous country, and having spent several years in the US, found it was not.
And the only reason we are discussing this today, on /., instead of the thousands of others who attained US citizenship, then choose citizenship elsewhere, is because he has such a large amount of money.
Do these people complain when a Japanese businessman brings his vast fortune to the United States? But they complain when an American businessman leaves with his fortune. I do not think the US wants to be known as the grave yard of the wealthy -> "Come to the US, gain a citizenship, we are the freest country in the world! But if you find it not to your liking, know that you can leave, but we are totally going to confiscate all your shit at the border."
See, that kind of tagline would scare the foreign wealthy away.
Lastly, perhaps more than a knee-jerk analysis is needed here. Why are some of the wealthy leaving the US? Do they have a point about the taxes? I know, I know, it's blasphemy to say that, and people assume that if it's not the wealthy paying those taxes, it's them.
Does it bother you that some people on this earth might be 'self-made'? Is that...jealousy I hear?
Babe, that's 18 years of your life that you are not going to get back.
Secondly, it costs money to emigrate from the US. Other countries typically don't want you unless you're a skilled worker, or have money.
"I used to be a Randroid too, and once upon a time I would have agreed with you. Then I grew up, attained some sophistication, discovered empathy, and got a clue." -> Hmm. Use of the word 'Randroid' implies lack of sophistication, lack of understanding why someone might have problems with the society they are born in implies lack of empathy, and the 'go with the flow / crowd mentality; change is impossible' attitude implies that wisdom has never seen the inside of your head (clueless).
Now stop being bitter because your life didn't turn out the way you hoped it might, and have some hope that a few of the younger ones will break free of their bonds.
Hmm. I suppose Ron Paul's idea is just to take away the preloaded debit cards and credit cards that are so popular among government scandals, and to eventually work out the rest.
I imagine that if I took the company credit card, and tried to charge a few entertainment expenses from the local strip joint, the CEO would have me in his office before the ink on the receipt was dry.
Because, like or not, there are always a handful of people whom you'd rather not share a bunk with. Or at least, that's how the argument goes.
Profit, in the free-market (yes, yes, that phrase must be a curse-word to some people) sense, is a...bonus for doing a good job. Unfortunately, and I believe you will agree with me here, there are no free-markets implemented as such, only free-markets in name. Perhaps at one time there were, but these days, there are nothing but middlemen, demanding protection money. I feel almost as though we are on the infamous 'B' Ark from the HHGTTG.