Actually, nearly all of the money from ticket sales goes on top grossing pictures goes to the studio, and a few cents (literally, in some cases) gets kept by the theater. They make a little bit more on the lower hyped films, but those generally draw fewer people.
The theaters make money on the concessions. The only make money on the concessions - which is why they're so expensive. Now, you may mean "total cost" of the movie experience, but personally I rarely buy any concessions. Why would I drink a 32+ oz coke right at the beginning of a 2-3 hour movie?
What good is an unlocked phone...if you can't use it on any other carrier? None of the semi-modern services (3g or up) are compatible across the carriers, and all of the voice systems are at least partially segregated.
Even LTE will be similarly hampered because "free market" dictates that every carrier use different frequencies for the same service.
No, a properly cased well cannot, as I understand it, be isoated from the surrounding soil/rock. The whole idea is to create fractures which allow the natural gas to escape and be pumped off. Unless there's some magical 1:1 recovery ratio of the fracking fluid, there's no way to prevent the fluid from entering the ground. Now, whether there is any realistic chance for the contaminants to end up in the aquifers is en entirely different question.
I don't know how easy it is to mark dyes to a specific well. I presume that would require trace chemicals with a particular signature along with the dye. If the dye is found, then the sample could be tested for the trace signature to track it to the well.
This is a double edged sword - if the wells are causing contamination, it's a 1:1 match. If the wells are contaminated but there is no trace then they're off the hook (unless they're not tracing the fluid, though I presume regulation could require all fluid sold to be traced and tracked like explosives currently are regulated).
This. Though the US domains aren't really controlled by the government, so that's not really necessary. I like the.gov block, though there should be a way to filter all of the mobile addresses used on the hill as well.
I can practically guarantee that loss or suspension of an account at the sole discretion of the provider is in their terms of service. Completely legal, and already agreed to by the candidates. Game, set, match.
Oh, I should say that there is seismic activity everywhere in the US. The predictions for probable magnitudes shift slightly over time. They are contained in the NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for building design. The isolines just shifted a bit 6 years ago in southern Virginia, for example, putting several counties into a lower seismic hazard zone.
The question is not, "is fracking causing seismic events" but rather, "is fracking causing a statistically significant increase in frequency or magnitude of events relative to the current baseline." That may seem nuanced, but it is the correct way to approach the issue.
I'm not sure about the effect of fracking on seismic activity, but I think correlation is all we will have to infer causation as we cannot directly monitor the changes in strain which lead to seismic conditions. I would expect that the USGS would have the data for the areas where wells have been drilled, and that a study could be done to determine the probabalistic model variation, but I have not heard of such a study.
As for contamination, are the fracking fluids spiked with dye trace to be able to determine if suspected contamination occurs (and there always is some suspicion, even if there is no actual)? I don't know anything about the regulations on fracking, so I don't know if such a tracer is required. They are used quite frequently in groundwater migration applications.
The U.S. will -- regardless of U.N. convention -- use overwhelming and disproportionate force.
No we won't. If we did, it would be over in hours, and we'd have a 51st state called "New Iowa" and it would consist of mile upon mile of radioactive glass. The US has forgotten that one way to make sure people don't fuck with you is to show a little crazy now and then. Following "rules of war" is the way you lose. Batshit crazy and fighting with your entire arsenal (I'm talking nukes) is how you win decisively. And lest you fear reprisals from the "world court," you need to be reminded that the winners make the rules and choose any judgment. What? Economic sanctions? Have you seen our trade deficit? We already run the fucking world economy, and as of 2012 we even export a huge amount of fuel. The world can't afford to cut us off.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not aberrations. Horrible, yes. And yet fewer civilians were harmed than in the most recent Iraq conflict.
And, yes, this is probably one of the many reasons why I'm unlikely to be elected president of the US.;-)
It depends on whether this is a push or pull service. The push service probably has a limit, but several providers (I believe DirecTV is this way) ask you to authorize them to pull their monthly fee, and you generally authorize them to simply bill the account through ACH - there is no mechanism for limits.
I don't allow any ACH attachment to my account, and I pay my bills by mail. It's actually no big deal, and it means that I can review each line item before the money leaves my account. Once a business has your money, the burden is on you to get it back. If you catch a fraudulent or incorrect charge before you pay, it's up to the company to sort it out an prove you owe the money, and they must place the fee on hold, without penalty, until the issue is resolved.
But it COULD have been far easier to fly, and you could have had more time at your destination. Quite honestly, being locked in a tin can, strapped in against potential impact, bombarded by the din of the engine(s) is not hat I call "vacation" or "quality time." It's even less so when I am in charge of the flight.
Imagine a world without the TSA - you arrive 45 minutes before your flight, your checked backs go straight into the cargo hold, you hang around for 10 minutes at the gate before boarding, your flight lasts 1/10 the time as your car travel, and you often arrive at your destination before the next mealtime. Sure, it's cheaper to drive if you have a large group (you're only paying for gasoline and wear/tear once), but the main convenience of flying is - or should I say WAS - time in transit.
It also sounds like your travel took you two days, vs about 1/2 a day for flying. For wage slaves, that's three extra days of limited "vacation" time, for the self-employed, it's three days of opportunity cost (about $3000 for me). BTW - I did a 900 mile trip via air recently - for three people it cost us the same as gas (+/-10%), but it was a discount carrier to a common destination.
Yes, but they live directly adjacent to everybody who wants to kill them (and, in the immortal words of Tome Lehrer - "...and everybody hates the Jews"). We're separated from them by a ocean on each side.
Not that it matters; I haven't heard of security screenings preventing a bomb from getting aboard a US aircraft, and yet we've had several bombs on them since 2001. Luckily, the passengers now understand that the "sit quietly and we'll land in Cuba and be home in a couple days" paradigm for hijacking is no longer valid. If a passenger gets rowdy, you take him down or you might die. And, so far, it's working pretty well.
A simple metal detector and carry-on x-ray is all that is necessary.
That was the criteria - 10 seconds to load on a 56k dialup connection - for my business home page. I still use that site, and it hasn't appreciably changed. Now, my information is primarily static, so that helps. I hate waiting for web pages to load when all I need is to read a couple paragraphs of content or get the link to what I need. I don't have all fucking day to waste while your flash animation loads before I can click through.
What part of funneling...half of that theater money into coordination of intelligence is ignoring them?
If you want to bring the fight to them, go activate your tactical nukes. Laser guided weapons aren't needed if you've got a 5 mile blast radius. One big sheet of radioactive glass - we'll call it New Iowa./fantasy_world
If you stop being afraid and start being smart, you'll be in much better shape.
Actually, it's called an "excuse" - and that's what it had to do with the war in Iraq. I joked when W got in that he was overheard talking to G. Bush Sr. saying "Don't worry, dad, I'll get him for you."
I do find it interesting that, of all the attempted bombings and other potential acts of terrorism related to our commercial aircraft, the only ones I've heard about have been the ones where people have tried stuff on planes and failed. None of the screening appears to be doing much - and the DHS has a large stake in proving they are doing their job and making "discoveries" public. That hasn't happened. Shoe bombers (now we take off our shoes), underwear bombers (that was a cute twist on the terrorists part, but now they just x-ray us or pat us down), theoretical liquid explosives (and why is it, exactly, that they take all of the suspected explosives and put them in a large trash can right next to the security line - wouldn't that be a security hazard?).
No, most really "successful" terrorist attacks - in terms of actual casualties - are one-off jobs. You're not going to get them with higher and higher levels of screening, you're just going to incite fear in the population and piss off people who actually have to get work done, raising the cost of everything for everybody. Basic security, good intelligence, tactical support when needed.
As for insurance companies, acts of terrorism are probably in the 3rd or 4th decimal place of impact to them. Hurricanes, floods, snow, fire, the occasional major earthquake, and ambulance chasing lawyers are their big payouts. Losses due to terrorist attacks probably pale in comparison to copper wiring thieves.
Who says he wasn't at work? Independent consulting does have its perks, including taking your kids to the park, or going out to play golf, on a nice afternoon.
Well, if you're going to pay the $1800, why would you buy a no-contract phone?
For $1.50 a day, everything that my wife or daughter schedules on our calendar is instantly synced to my calendar on my phone. Wherever I am, and whatever I'm doing, I can check and see if *event* can be scheduled. And, when I do schedule it, it gets pushed to my wife's phone and (soon) my daughter's iPod touch*. If I'm stuck somewhere, I have access to every email and every phone number in my book. No paper required. Sure, I could call information and get the number (provided there's phone), and it only costs me $2. It's a lot easier and faster with a phone.
Is it a major expense? Yes. If it came down to it, I would likely keep the "phone" and try to get a data-only plan ($15/mo for my iPad, for example), as I don't absolutely need voice service. But I use voice for business, and as long as I have 20 minutes of billable time a month, the phone pays for itself.
Everybody's situation is different. My wife didn't want one - she liked her dumb phone. She didn't see any real use for one. That evaporated about two days after she got her iPhone (which only costs us $15 more than here dumb phone per month, and adds free text messaging and data). There aren't too many devices which are real world changers, but unless you are a recluse this is one of them.
*not inadvertently scheduling a conflict with your kid's concert: priceless
I don't need a smartphone. I do, however, find it to be an economic advantage. I pat $100/mo for two smartphones, and I'll admit my wife doesn't technically need one. Still, it's a rare month that I don't save an hour or two by having my calendar, notes, work references, and the ability to discuss projects when in locations that have no landline. At $150/hr (my billing rate), I come out ahead even if count the full $100 I pay for both phones. These days, I'm busy enough that it's actual increased income; if it wasn't, then yes - it would be a want, and I'm willing to trade $100/mo for an extra 2 hours with my wife and daughter.
Don't be afraid of the iPad - it won't become indispensable. It's a convenience for a very limited array of tasks, and about the cheapest way I know to get mobile internet ($15/mo for 200MB - which is enough for just about everything but streaming content). My iPhone has replaced just about all my other gadgets, and most of my paper requirements (notes, calendar, lists). It can serve for browsing or entertainment in a pinch.
The iPad is too big to be convenient to carry everywhere and too small and too primitive to do any work requiring lots of input (typing reports, technical drawings, long/involved emails, etc.). It's good for one thing: consumption. I carry around tons of sheet music on it, all of my work reference books, books for fun reading, some movies and music, it makes a good browser for about 80% of the normal internet (forums can be annoying and the lack of flash really is a hindrance), and it's fun to play with. Still, I'll go for days without really using it. My phone - I might forgo 5 days a year.
I fixed that for the GP. The way to combat terror is to not be afraid of "them." That's the whole point of a terrorist - to create fear. They can't actually do much physical damage, as they're too small. Dropping all of the public security that was put in back in 2001, and funneling even half of that theater money into coordination of intelligence and PSAs about how safe a place the first world really is would do far, far more to combat "terror" than the entire government and media playing an unintentional, supporting role in the terror plan.
More troops were killed - by an order of magnitude - and more foreign civilians were killed - by almost 3 orders of magnitude - than died on 9/1/2001 in both towers. Trillions of dollars - more than the entire Wall Street bailout and recovery stimulus - have been spent or lost in productivity due to the reaction to that "attack" - a third of which was foiled by average citizens on the third plane with no training and no advanced knowledge of the attack.. All as a result of our "reaction", the terrorists had their effort multiplied thousands of times.
If you stop fearing a terrorist, you take most of their power away from them. So, yes - all we really need to do is grow a pair.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course I'm serious. And stop calling me Shirley.
This thread has been hacked in record time!!
Actually, nearly all of the money from ticket sales goes on top grossing pictures goes to the studio, and a few cents (literally, in some cases) gets kept by the theater. They make a little bit more on the lower hyped films, but those generally draw fewer people.
The theaters make money on the concessions. The only make money on the concessions - which is why they're so expensive. Now, you may mean "total cost" of the movie experience, but personally I rarely buy any concessions. Why would I drink a 32+ oz coke right at the beginning of a 2-3 hour movie?
What good is an unlocked phone...if you can't use it on any other carrier? None of the semi-modern services (3g or up) are compatible across the carriers, and all of the voice systems are at least partially segregated.
Even LTE will be similarly hampered because "free market" dictates that every carrier use different frequencies for the same service.
No, a properly cased well cannot, as I understand it, be isoated from the surrounding soil/rock. The whole idea is to create fractures which allow the natural gas to escape and be pumped off. Unless there's some magical 1:1 recovery ratio of the fracking fluid, there's no way to prevent the fluid from entering the ground. Now, whether there is any realistic chance for the contaminants to end up in the aquifers is en entirely different question.
I don't know how easy it is to mark dyes to a specific well. I presume that would require trace chemicals with a particular signature along with the dye. If the dye is found, then the sample could be tested for the trace signature to track it to the well.
This is a double edged sword - if the wells are causing contamination, it's a 1:1 match. If the wells are contaminated but there is no trace then they're off the hook (unless they're not tracing the fluid, though I presume regulation could require all fluid sold to be traced and tracked like explosives currently are regulated).
This. Though the US domains aren't really controlled by the government, so that's not really necessary. I like the .gov block, though there should be a way to filter all of the mobile addresses used on the hill as well.
I can practically guarantee that loss or suspension of an account at the sole discretion of the provider is in their terms of service. Completely legal, and already agreed to by the candidates. Game, set, match.
Oh, I should say that there is seismic activity everywhere in the US. The predictions for probable magnitudes shift slightly over time. They are contained in the NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for building design. The isolines just shifted a bit 6 years ago in southern Virginia, for example, putting several counties into a lower seismic hazard zone.
The question is not, "is fracking causing seismic events" but rather, "is fracking causing a statistically significant increase in frequency or magnitude of events relative to the current baseline." That may seem nuanced, but it is the correct way to approach the issue.
I'm not sure about the effect of fracking on seismic activity, but I think correlation is all we will have to infer causation as we cannot directly monitor the changes in strain which lead to seismic conditions. I would expect that the USGS would have the data for the areas where wells have been drilled, and that a study could be done to determine the probabalistic model variation, but I have not heard of such a study.
As for contamination, are the fracking fluids spiked with dye trace to be able to determine if suspected contamination occurs (and there always is some suspicion, even if there is no actual)? I don't know anything about the regulations on fracking, so I don't know if such a tracer is required. They are used quite frequently in groundwater migration applications.
The U.S. will -- regardless of U.N. convention -- use overwhelming and disproportionate force.
No we won't. If we did, it would be over in hours, and we'd have a 51st state called "New Iowa" and it would consist of mile upon mile of radioactive glass. The US has forgotten that one way to make sure people don't fuck with you is to show a little crazy now and then. Following "rules of war" is the way you lose. Batshit crazy and fighting with your entire arsenal (I'm talking nukes) is how you win decisively. And lest you fear reprisals from the "world court," you need to be reminded that the winners make the rules and choose any judgment. What? Economic sanctions? Have you seen our trade deficit? We already run the fucking world economy, and as of 2012 we even export a huge amount of fuel. The world can't afford to cut us off.
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not aberrations. Horrible, yes. And yet fewer civilians were harmed than in the most recent Iraq conflict.
And, yes, this is probably one of the many reasons why I'm unlikely to be elected president of the US. ;-)
With a new name. Something like Puppies and Children Protection Act. Or an Omnibus spending act.
It depends on whether this is a push or pull service. The push service probably has a limit, but several providers (I believe DirecTV is this way) ask you to authorize them to pull their monthly fee, and you generally authorize them to simply bill the account through ACH - there is no mechanism for limits.
I don't allow any ACH attachment to my account, and I pay my bills by mail. It's actually no big deal, and it means that I can review each line item before the money leaves my account. Once a business has your money, the burden is on you to get it back. If you catch a fraudulent or incorrect charge before you pay, it's up to the company to sort it out an prove you owe the money, and they must place the fee on hold, without penalty, until the issue is resolved.
But it COULD have been far easier to fly, and you could have had more time at your destination. Quite honestly, being locked in a tin can, strapped in against potential impact, bombarded by the din of the engine(s) is not hat I call "vacation" or "quality time." It's even less so when I am in charge of the flight.
Imagine a world without the TSA - you arrive 45 minutes before your flight, your checked backs go straight into the cargo hold, you hang around for 10 minutes at the gate before boarding, your flight lasts 1/10 the time as your car travel, and you often arrive at your destination before the next mealtime. Sure, it's cheaper to drive if you have a large group (you're only paying for gasoline and wear/tear once), but the main convenience of flying is - or should I say WAS - time in transit.
It also sounds like your travel took you two days, vs about 1/2 a day for flying. For wage slaves, that's three extra days of limited "vacation" time, for the self-employed, it's three days of opportunity cost (about $3000 for me). BTW - I did a 900 mile trip via air recently - for three people it cost us the same as gas (+/-10%), but it was a discount carrier to a common destination.
Yes, but they live directly adjacent to everybody who wants to kill them (and, in the immortal words of Tome Lehrer - "...and everybody hates the Jews"). We're separated from them by a ocean on each side.
Not that it matters; I haven't heard of security screenings preventing a bomb from getting aboard a US aircraft, and yet we've had several bombs on them since 2001. Luckily, the passengers now understand that the "sit quietly and we'll land in Cuba and be home in a couple days" paradigm for hijacking is no longer valid. If a passenger gets rowdy, you take him down or you might die. And, so far, it's working pretty well.
A simple metal detector and carry-on x-ray is all that is necessary.
That was the criteria - 10 seconds to load on a 56k dialup connection - for my business home page. I still use that site, and it hasn't appreciably changed. Now, my information is primarily static, so that helps. I hate waiting for web pages to load when all I need is to read a couple paragraphs of content or get the link to what I need. I don't have all fucking day to waste while your flash animation loads before I can click through.
What part of funneling...half of that theater money into coordination of intelligence is ignoring them?
If you want to bring the fight to them, go activate your tactical nukes. Laser guided weapons aren't needed if you've got a 5 mile blast radius. One big sheet of radioactive glass - we'll call it New Iowa. /fantasy_world
If you stop being afraid and start being smart, you'll be in much better shape.
Actually, it's called an "excuse" - and that's what it had to do with the war in Iraq. I joked when W got in that he was overheard talking to G. Bush Sr. saying "Don't worry, dad, I'll get him for you."
I do find it interesting that, of all the attempted bombings and other potential acts of terrorism related to our commercial aircraft, the only ones I've heard about have been the ones where people have tried stuff on planes and failed. None of the screening appears to be doing much - and the DHS has a large stake in proving they are doing their job and making "discoveries" public. That hasn't happened. Shoe bombers (now we take off our shoes), underwear bombers (that was a cute twist on the terrorists part, but now they just x-ray us or pat us down), theoretical liquid explosives (and why is it, exactly, that they take all of the suspected explosives and put them in a large trash can right next to the security line - wouldn't that be a security hazard?).
No, most really "successful" terrorist attacks - in terms of actual casualties - are one-off jobs. You're not going to get them with higher and higher levels of screening, you're just going to incite fear in the population and piss off people who actually have to get work done, raising the cost of everything for everybody. Basic security, good intelligence, tactical support when needed.
As for insurance companies, acts of terrorism are probably in the 3rd or 4th decimal place of impact to them. Hurricanes, floods, snow, fire, the occasional major earthquake, and ambulance chasing lawyers are their big payouts. Losses due to terrorist attacks probably pale in comparison to copper wiring thieves.
Who says he wasn't at work? Independent consulting does have its perks, including taking your kids to the park, or going out to play golf, on a nice afternoon.
My kingdom for a mod point. Well done, AC.
Well, if you're going to pay the $1800, why would you buy a no-contract phone?
For $1.50 a day, everything that my wife or daughter schedules on our calendar is instantly synced to my calendar on my phone. Wherever I am, and whatever I'm doing, I can check and see if *event* can be scheduled. And, when I do schedule it, it gets pushed to my wife's phone and (soon) my daughter's iPod touch*. If I'm stuck somewhere, I have access to every email and every phone number in my book. No paper required. Sure, I could call information and get the number (provided there's phone), and it only costs me $2. It's a lot easier and faster with a phone.
Is it a major expense? Yes. If it came down to it, I would likely keep the "phone" and try to get a data-only plan ($15/mo for my iPad, for example), as I don't absolutely need voice service. But I use voice for business, and as long as I have 20 minutes of billable time a month, the phone pays for itself.
Everybody's situation is different. My wife didn't want one - she liked her dumb phone. She didn't see any real use for one. That evaporated about two days after she got her iPhone (which only costs us $15 more than here dumb phone per month, and adds free text messaging and data). There aren't too many devices which are real world changers, but unless you are a recluse this is one of them.
*not inadvertently scheduling a conflict with your kid's concert: priceless
I don't need a smartphone. I do, however, find it to be an economic advantage. I pat $100/mo for two smartphones, and I'll admit my wife doesn't technically need one. Still, it's a rare month that I don't save an hour or two by having my calendar, notes, work references, and the ability to discuss projects when in locations that have no landline. At $150/hr (my billing rate), I come out ahead even if count the full $100 I pay for both phones. These days, I'm busy enough that it's actual increased income; if it wasn't, then yes - it would be a want, and I'm willing to trade $100/mo for an extra 2 hours with my wife and daughter.
Don't be afraid of the iPad - it won't become indispensable. It's a convenience for a very limited array of tasks, and about the cheapest way I know to get mobile internet ($15/mo for 200MB - which is enough for just about everything but streaming content). My iPhone has replaced just about all my other gadgets, and most of my paper requirements (notes, calendar, lists). It can serve for browsing or entertainment in a pinch.
The iPad is too big to be convenient to carry everywhere and too small and too primitive to do any work requiring lots of input (typing reports, technical drawings, long/involved emails, etc.). It's good for one thing: consumption. I carry around tons of sheet music on it, all of my work reference books, books for fun reading, some movies and music, it makes a good browser for about 80% of the normal internet (forums can be annoying and the lack of flash really is a hindrance), and it's fun to play with. Still, I'll go for days without really using it. My phone - I might forgo 5 days a year.
I'll give you a call as soon as I have a day when I actually need the towing capacity of diesel truck on a daily basis.
(ever wonder if maybe you weren't the target market?)
Grow a pair and ignore them.
I fixed that for the GP. The way to combat terror is to not be afraid of "them." That's the whole point of a terrorist - to create fear. They can't actually do much physical damage, as they're too small. Dropping all of the public security that was put in back in 2001, and funneling even half of that theater money into coordination of intelligence and PSAs about how safe a place the first world really is would do far, far more to combat "terror" than the entire government and media playing an unintentional, supporting role in the terror plan.
More troops were killed - by an order of magnitude - and more foreign civilians were killed - by almost 3 orders of magnitude - than died on 9/1/2001 in both towers. Trillions of dollars - more than the entire Wall Street bailout and recovery stimulus - have been spent or lost in productivity due to the reaction to that "attack" - a third of which was foiled by average citizens on the third plane with no training and no advanced knowledge of the attack.. All as a result of our "reaction", the terrorists had their effort multiplied thousands of times.
If you stop fearing a terrorist, you take most of their power away from them. So, yes - all we really need to do is grow a pair.