Devon makes business management software (accounting, shipping, employee training, etc.), but for a specific market segment only: nuclear power plants.
This change specifically continues the ban on commercial grade services or equipment and in particular does not supersede any specific bans from other orders or laws. In and of itself, it doesn't give a pass to Blue Coat et al.
This particular order seems to continue banning export of that stuff because it's all commercial-grade, and possibly also banned by the lists of specific things from some other laws or orders, which I didn't read but are not superseded by this one.
The war on drugs was extremely successful. As planned, it created a massive free labor population, funneled drug money directly to law enforcement and created more business for lawyers and gun dealers. Ruining the lives of dissident youth was just a happy coincidence.
David Lowery's role in all this is similar (though less evil) to that of women who go into rural Thailand to convince families to give up their daughters, under the false pretenses that they will have comfortable housing and gainful employment in the city.
Especially because the "financial perspective" is that piracy results in a slight increase in label profits. Unfortunately, folks like David Lowery have "financial" confused with "ideological."
Lay definitions are fine for their purpose. In science as well as the philosophy of science, "verification" refers to establishment of certainty, which can only be accomplished via sound deductive logic. In contrast, inductive logic can, with certainty, only reject falsifiable statements.
Even the development of that most powerful system for induction, the human brain, is subject to precisely this constraint. Thus neural development occurs through a process of "pruning" of so-called "exuberantly" formed synapses. That carefully formed inductive models can come to approximate reality to some extent is itself a highly corroborated hypothesis.
Credit (formalized debt) actually predates commodity currencies and government money, though without a common unit of account, credit is just deferred barter.
Interestingly, non-metal currencies were used in the ancient world and early Middle Ages (e.g. squares of intricate cloth in Prague). My sense is that people had already learned the value of a common unit of account - and the necessity of seniorage - so they realized they could use these "pure fiat" currencies after gold disappeared in the wake of the fall of the Western Empire. It must have seemed a natural fusion of their traditional formal/informal debt systems with the common unit of account formerly provided by the Roman solidus.
You can invalidate (or falsify) a hypothesis, but you can't validate (verify) one. Hypothesis which consistently survive falsification are said to be "corroborated," due to our increasing confidence.
The Fed was created by Congress. It also turns over its "profits", including interest payments on US debt, directly to the Treasury General Account (quotes because the Fed has unlimited power to issue currency).
I don't think there is really any comparison between the Fed and a truly private enterprise. Sure, the private banking system has a hand in running things, but is clear from the Federal Reserve Act that the executive branch has final say over the Fed's action.
It's fair to describe the Fed as a public-private partnership, but the Fed is not really a profitable enterprise, since all its profits are monies it creates electronically and credits to its own accounts. Furthermore, it lacks the defining element of a private operation, which is the inability to create money, in turn leading to an operational constraint in which money must be obtained prior to being spent. In contrast, the government / Fed must issue money before it can be collected back from the public.
It's a great book, unfortunately quite expensive ($55 on Amazon). It's "possible" there is a PDF floating around online...
I haven't read much about private mints in other time periods, but in the Middle Ages the "private" mints (i.e. the free mints) were nevertheless operated by churchmen, feudal lords or vassals of feudal lords. Each of these had military power as well as license and ability to collect taxes. Also at that time, the ability to assay gold was much less common than in the classical period or Renaissance.
Another interesting aspect to the reemergence of coin in Europe is the collapse of currencies after their issuing mints were taken over by immunists, lords or wealthy individuals who obtained immunity to royal taxation and often royal justice as well. It seems that the people were unwilling to trust the metal content of such coins, which is borne out by the adulterated coins they seem to have issued.
Way to skip over half the formula. The availability of goods for purchase in gold cannot be a sufficient condition for the use of gold as a currency - it's a circular argument. Demand for the currency must be created somewhere, via a levy of taxes.
Gold was valuable in the Old West because it was valuable in the East, where it was valuable because the government was collecting taxes while operating its gold-convertible currency.
Uh, yes it is. The Fed is authorized to exist by Congress. The Federal Reserve act gives the Treasury Secretary power over the Fed chairman should they disagree, and indeed the chair is appointed by the President of the United States.
To be sure, the private banking sector has a significant role in running the Fed, which I believe should be reduced or eliminated entirely. But if you think Bernanke is working only for their interests, you haven't been reading the screeds against him coming precisely from the leaders of that sector.
Good one. By any reasonable measure there has been massive deflation since the beginning of the industrial revolution.
Sure, there has been some apparent inflation driven by food, energy and fraudulent bubble markets. But how much cheaper today than in the past is a computer? Antibiotics? Rapid transportation? Instantaneous communication? Access to knowledge? These had infinite prices not too long ago.
You should read Medieval Money and its Uses, by Peter Spufford. Indeed, when the Roman Empire collapsed in the West, gold fell out of use in favor of informal debt systems. Silver coinage was gradually re-introduced as West European governments regained the ability to collect taxes and use minted coins to fund state expenditures, thus introducing the coins into their economies.
Seriously, I am tired of the circular logic underlying much of these arguments. Whatever initial condition led to acceptance of gold, etc. in lieu of in-kind payments, it was not "because I can buy stuff with it."
Of course, but other people have already stated and demonstrated a willingness to accept gold as payment. It's quite circular to say that this is the origin of its value.
What is more interesting are the conditions which led to the first gold-accepting person accepting gold (before which gold did not have "intrinsic" value.
Slashdot Mirror
CNN's front page has a link (under "trends") to a devoted page.
Fox doesn't have any thing on the home page, but it's World page has this.
NBC's home page has a link to its story.
TFA gives all the sample sizes (broken down by procedure), so if you aren't content with eyeballing them you can pull out the trusty slide rule.
Devon makes business management software (accounting, shipping, employee training, etc.), but for a specific market segment only: nuclear power plants.
This change specifically continues the ban on commercial grade services or equipment and in particular does not supersede any specific bans from other orders or laws. In and of itself, it doesn't give a pass to Blue Coat et al.
This particular order seems to continue banning export of that stuff because it's all commercial-grade, and possibly also banned by the lists of specific things from some other laws or orders, which I didn't read but are not superseded by this one.
Ah yes, the freedomogiston hypothesis.
The war on drugs was extremely successful. As planned, it created a massive free labor population, funneled drug money directly to law enforcement and created more business for lawyers and gun dealers. Ruining the lives of dissident youth was just a happy coincidence.
David Lowery's role in all this is similar (though less evil) to that of women who go into rural Thailand to convince families to give up their daughters, under the false pretenses that they will have comfortable housing and gainful employment in the city.
Do not trust label scouts.
Especially because the "financial perspective" is that piracy results in a slight increase in label profits. Unfortunately, folks like David Lowery have "financial" confused with "ideological."
For example, every rice cooker. All those "6 cup" rice cookers on Amazon have their own "cup" which is about 2/3 of a regular, 8 fl. oz. cup.
You are not from California.
Lay definitions are fine for their purpose. In science as well as the philosophy of science, "verification" refers to establishment of certainty, which can only be accomplished via sound deductive logic. In contrast, inductive logic can, with certainty, only reject falsifiable statements.
Even the development of that most powerful system for induction, the human brain, is subject to precisely this constraint. Thus neural development occurs through a process of "pruning" of so-called "exuberantly" formed synapses. That carefully formed inductive models can come to approximate reality to some extent is itself a highly corroborated hypothesis.
Credit (formalized debt) actually predates commodity currencies and government money, though without a common unit of account, credit is just deferred barter.
Interestingly, non-metal currencies were used in the ancient world and early Middle Ages (e.g. squares of intricate cloth in Prague). My sense is that people had already learned the value of a common unit of account - and the necessity of seniorage - so they realized they could use these "pure fiat" currencies after gold disappeared in the wake of the fall of the Western Empire. It must have seemed a natural fusion of their traditional formal/informal debt systems with the common unit of account formerly provided by the Roman solidus.
You can invalidate (or falsify) a hypothesis, but you can't validate (verify) one. Hypothesis which consistently survive falsification are said to be "corroborated," due to our increasing confidence.
Such is the nature of inductive science.
Except you don't "validate" a hypothesis.
Indeed. The object you import is even called BlackBoxSolver.
The Fed was created by Congress. It also turns over its "profits", including interest payments on US debt, directly to the Treasury General Account (quotes because the Fed has unlimited power to issue currency).
I don't think there is really any comparison between the Fed and a truly private enterprise. Sure, the private banking system has a hand in running things, but is clear from the Federal Reserve Act that the executive branch has final say over the Fed's action.
It's fair to describe the Fed as a public-private partnership, but the Fed is not really a profitable enterprise, since all its profits are monies it creates electronically and credits to its own accounts. Furthermore, it lacks the defining element of a private operation, which is the inability to create money, in turn leading to an operational constraint in which money must be obtained prior to being spent. In contrast, the government / Fed must issue money before it can be collected back from the public.
It's a great book, unfortunately quite expensive ($55 on Amazon). It's "possible" there is a PDF floating around online...
I haven't read much about private mints in other time periods, but in the Middle Ages the "private" mints (i.e. the free mints) were nevertheless operated by churchmen, feudal lords or vassals of feudal lords. Each of these had military power as well as license and ability to collect taxes. Also at that time, the ability to assay gold was much less common than in the classical period or Renaissance.
Another interesting aspect to the reemergence of coin in Europe is the collapse of currencies after their issuing mints were taken over by immunists, lords or wealthy individuals who obtained immunity to royal taxation and often royal justice as well. It seems that the people were unwilling to trust the metal content of such coins, which is borne out by the adulterated coins they seem to have issued.
Way to skip over half the formula. The availability of goods for purchase in gold cannot be a sufficient condition for the use of gold as a currency - it's a circular argument. Demand for the currency must be created somewhere, via a levy of taxes.
Gold was valuable in the Old West because it was valuable in the East, where it was valuable because the government was collecting taxes while operating its gold-convertible currency.
Uh, yes it is. The Fed is authorized to exist by Congress. The Federal Reserve act gives the Treasury Secretary power over the Fed chairman should they disagree, and indeed the chair is appointed by the President of the United States.
To be sure, the private banking sector has a significant role in running the Fed, which I believe should be reduced or eliminated entirely. But if you think Bernanke is working only for their interests, you haven't been reading the screeds against him coming precisely from the leaders of that sector.
Good one. By any reasonable measure there has been massive deflation since the beginning of the industrial revolution.
Sure, there has been some apparent inflation driven by food, energy and fraudulent bubble markets. But how much cheaper today than in the past is a computer? Antibiotics? Rapid transportation? Instantaneous communication? Access to knowledge? These had infinite prices not too long ago.
Uh, really slow, heavy cars I guess.
You should read Medieval Money and its Uses, by Peter Spufford. Indeed, when the Roman Empire collapsed in the West, gold fell out of use in favor of informal debt systems. Silver coinage was gradually re-introduced as West European governments regained the ability to collect taxes and use minted coins to fund state expenditures, thus introducing the coins into their economies.
Boom.
Seriously, I am tired of the circular logic underlying much of these arguments. Whatever initial condition led to acceptance of gold, etc. in lieu of in-kind payments, it was not "because I can buy stuff with it."
Of course, but other people have already stated and demonstrated a willingness to accept gold as payment. It's quite circular to say that this is the origin of its value.
What is more interesting are the conditions which led to the first gold-accepting person accepting gold (before which gold did not have "intrinsic" value.