The very USPS page that is linked to from this summary says that batteries that are in devices are generally exempt from this. Essentially you can ship all the iPods/iPads/iPhones you want. It is external (ie not built-in) batteries that have additional restrictions, though those are not very severe.
Read it again. It says that the USPS is prohibiting international shipments of lithium cells this year. They anticipate that the UPU and ICAO will allow lithium cells that are enclosed within personal electronic devices, starting 2013. Right now, you are not allowed to ship either the bare cells or cells contained within electronic devices.
IIRC, there have been several incidences in years past where fires have occurred after containers of bulk cells have been damaged by forklifts at airport terminals. Between that and some other isolated cases of consumer devices having problems on aircraft, plus some crashes of cargo planes that may be linked to fires from lithium cells, they've become a bit reluctant to allow lithium cells on passenger aircraft.
IMO, it is not a mission of government to 'encourage' higher education. The federal government doesn't even have a Constitutional mandate to do so. What's best for the country is for the government to get out of markets where their involvement produces negative outcomes for the consumer. Higher education, healthcare and housing being the prime examples.
So if better education usually (not always) results in better wages, resulting in more taxable income (regardless of the tax level), the government shouldn't have a mission to encourage higher education?
When society is bent on harming your industry by any means, then why hire people
lets sort this in the right order:
"when industry is bent on harming OUR society by any means, then why subsidize/support them?"
big oil is clearly a "me, Me, ME! gimme gimme gimme!!" green fest. nothing matters to them but profits and the right to keep doing what they are doing, unless supplies do finally run out OR we've ruined our environment so bad its unlivable here.
of couse, those that make decisions wont' be alive for the fallout (so to speak). they are fat (literally) dumb and happy to keep on keepin' on.
there should be zero respect for any industry that works that way.
of course, this is the US, backwards-land as it is, these days;(
A recent PBS show noted that until recent years, Wall Street workers made about the same amount of money as doctors and lawyers. Now many of them make salaries and bonuses that boggle the minds of regular people. They went on to say that this happened once before--just before the great depression. How is it in my best interest, with my 401K in the market, if Wall Street is more concerned about their checking account than mine?
Then let's talk about about the flap over a major bank instituting a $5/month fee for their debit card holders because, well, they weren't making enough money. In years past when the economy was down, businesses tightened their belts, realized that their customers were having a hard time too, and waited it out. Now it's, screw our customers, we need more revenue.
It's also been commented on/. how the wireless companies, which are near monopolies, keep trying to maximize profits by any means. This, I think, is at least partially because the early growth they enjoyed (and Wall Street loved) has gone away as new customers have dwindled due to market saturation. This "growth at any cost" mentality ships jobs offshore, shrinking the very market most of these companies are targeting.
Looking for more and more tax breaks/subsidies and expecting the poor and middle class to have fewer breaks/higher taxes is an example of industry bent on harming our society.
It's a shame that the FCC doesn't make the carriers divest the network, regulate the network operators, and let the carriers buy airtime/data from the network. Kind of like the power companies in some states.
Doesn't LTE actually converge these 2 standards - CDMA and GSM into one?
Well, you could potentially use VoIP on LTE, but where you don't have LTE, you still have to fall back on GSM or CDMA. IIRC, LTE also uses spectrum more efficiently than 3G, so all of the carriers with LTE would like to migrate their users over to 4G phones.
The sad part is that if the developers had chosen a name that would be acceptable in professional and school environments, and if it had a well-designed user's group, GIMP could possibly have made a sizable dent in Photo Shop's market share. It's a powerful image manipulation program, but if users are put off by the name, they won't try it. If they try it but can't resolve issues they have using it, via a user's group in this case. And the UI needs to be at least somewhat intuitive/logical or they won't use it.
I hate it when someone does a better job of making a point I was trying to make.
We can argue all day about what a fair amount for each person is, and of course some people are going to deny that they gain any benefit, direct or indirect, from public systems. In the end, pretty much everyone who pays taxes is going to think that they are paying too much and some other group is paying too little.
Well, this is a single data point, but the only outdoor sign I've seen contains an x86-based MB and drives the two LED displays as a single QVGA 'monitor.' This could work, except that in an outdoor environment, enclosed within the sign, the temperature extremes are not going to be friendly to a densely-packed system.
If someone (people/companies) benefit from an infrastructure (e.g. graduates from schools), then they should bear some of the costs. That does not mean that a majority of the population is trying to get a minority of the population to pay for things that they "want." We can argue all day about what would be considered fair, but you get the idea.
From your previous comment about monopolies, you are missing the point. The poster was talking about competition between states to get corporations to operate there. Companies can legally 'dodge' taxes by playing games described in the OP. The burden then falls on other taxpayers, while often times most of the taxes that are paid by the employer and their employees end up somewhere else. Some states win and others lose. Yes, you can say that corporations might move out of the country if their tax rate is too high. But that doesn't negate the issue.
It's all about fairness. You can have two people who each makes $1M, one by running a small business and the other's income is mostly from capital gains. Guess who pay more? Often times a lot more. We can argue that we should raise the taxes on the capital gains, or adjust the taxes on both so that they both pay the same amount and the total taxes paid is revenue-neutral. Again, who benefits and what's fair?
Well, TSMC is a foundry. Wikipedia says GDSII is the industry-standard way of exchanging data for PCB and IC layout.--I should have known that since I've worked in the IC industry. No reason for most software and IT people to know those terms. Technical writers generally know that you define the acronym the first time they use it and then use the acronym afterwards./. articles don't follow that rule. I guess so the people who know those terms can flame those who don't.
I'm guessing you could end up writing a lot of code to define how you want input and output to flow from the SoC.
The best thing we can do is to eliminate religions. All of them. Religions have been responsible for stoping progress, scientific discoveries, medical improvements, etc., while at the same time being responsible for the deaths of millions.
"Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings."
Interesting that you should say that, considering that Protestant groups were instrumental in setting up universities in the US.
I think physics is going to limit charging times to way longer than that. IIRC, 1HP is roughly equivalent to 770 watts. So drive for 5 hours using 1HP. Now replace that energy. As a comparison, imagine placing you hand on a 100W incandescent bulb (which converts all but a fraction of its power input into heat). See how long you can hold your hand on that bulb. Now think about the heat produced by 770W, multiplied by the actual number of HP that your electric car needs to use to actually drive at reasonable speeds. No way that you can convert all of that energy into a chemical reaction without serious heating. Unless you can get 99%+ electrical to chemical conversion efficiencies.
Nuclear power is great, just it demands that people running it not be money-grubbing profit-seekers. Maybe they should be run like non-profits and forced to spend the excess money they have on improvements and new technology.
I'd argue that even as a non-profit/government entity, operation of nuclear power plants will degenerate to what takes the least effort. Profit is not the only goal that can cause problems. It certainly wasn't the issue for the Challenger.
So again, he took the position he did because the Constitution, as understood by Libertarians, specifically prohibits the federal government from taking the right to decide what is and isn't legal marriage away from the states, as the Constitution does not specifically enumerate it as a federal power.
Couldn't you use the same argument that when women couldn't vote, there shouldn't have been an amendment, but that it should have gone through the courts? How many amendments would fail RP's test? Is this saying that the Federal Government, or the people via an amendment, cannot proactively say something is a Constitutionally protected right that cannot be taken away by any state?
That's exactly my point. I know a lot of Christians who believe that we are caretakers of the earth. The Christians I know are liberal, libertarian, and conservative. Lots of those last, but I live in North Texas, so the data is skewed. And I'm really afraid of the radical right in the Republican party, the same party that claims to have a strong Christian base. But I suspect that the leaders of the radical right are mainly a bunch of sociopaths, and yes, they probably do get the support of the conservative Christians by playing to their fears. That sort of manipulation has no doubt gone on for centuries, and is not limited to Republicans/Christians. Blame a lot of Christians for being easily manipulated, sure. But evil? Pushing to accelerate the end of the world? Not so much.
That is why the Christians don't see any point in conservation for the future because they pray for their evil god to destroy the world, so it does not matter if they leave nothing for the next generation.
What it seems to boil down to is that: 1. The residents of each state owe the sales tax on the taxable items they buy, regardless of the source. 2. The states collect this tax from the in-state merchants for their (the state's) convenience--it's easier to verify compliance on a small group rather than a large one. 3. They want to apply the same collection method to out of state merchants.
Ignoring constitutional issues, then to reduce the burden on those collecting the tax, it needs to be just the base tax that's collected by the state. A local merchant knows exactly what tax rate to apply because that rate is based upon the physical location of the store, not the address of the buyer. So you use the base tax rate, and apply it only to the items that the state requires the tax be paid on.
If the states want this to happen, then they'll need to get the federal government on board somehow. I'd say that's not likely to happen, but then we've got legislators who'd like to tax imputed income on things like living in a home that you own free and clear.
Maybe something like this could be added to new comm satellites. Use an ion engine from LEO to GSO with enough fuel to bring it to re-entry at end of life. Or, maybe put back into LEO to refit and use again. As far as the Van Allen belt is concerned, shielding of sensitive components would be required.
Interesting. The report http://thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/hughes-windpower.pdf states "...would require a total investment of some £120 billion in wind turbines and back-up. The same amount of electricity could be generated by gas-fired power plants that would only cost £13 billion..." OK, fine. But that's the cost of the hardware. How much is the cost of fuel to run those gas-fired power plants? Wind turbines and gas-fired plants both require maintenance and overhaul/replacement, but wind is free, however intermittent. They are also claiming pretty low capacity (10-20% of theoretical). Based on just that one section, it looks to me like they are intentionally playing games with the numbers to make wind power look much more expensive than it really is.
Reading the excerpt sec 5, it looks like the act only allows the FCC to adopt/amend a rule protecting online privacy. The act does not require that the FCC do so. If I'm reading that correctly, then Walden is correct that there is no such protection in the act.
I suspect that because your FB account may contain information that prospective employers cannot ask about, it would probably be found to be illegal for them to access your account by the courts. However, lawsuits are public record, so if you sue a prospective employer over this, you'll probably never be hired by any firm that does a background check.
Slashdot Mirror
The very USPS page that is linked to from this summary says that batteries that are in devices are generally exempt from this. Essentially you can ship all the iPods/iPads/iPhones you want. It is external (ie not built-in) batteries that have additional restrictions, though those are not very severe.
Read it again. It says that the USPS is prohibiting international shipments of lithium cells this year. They anticipate that the UPU and ICAO will allow lithium cells that are enclosed within personal electronic devices, starting 2013. Right now, you are not allowed to ship either the bare cells or cells contained within electronic devices.
IIRC, there have been several incidences in years past where fires have occurred after containers of bulk cells have been damaged by forklifts at airport terminals. Between that and some other isolated cases of consumer devices having problems on aircraft, plus some crashes of cargo planes that may be linked to fires from lithium cells, they've become a bit reluctant to allow lithium cells on passenger aircraft.
IMO, it is not a mission of government to 'encourage' higher education. The federal government doesn't even have a Constitutional mandate to do so. What's best for the country is for the government to get out of markets where their involvement produces negative outcomes for the consumer. Higher education, healthcare and housing being the prime examples.
So if better education usually (not always) results in better wages, resulting in more taxable income (regardless of the tax level), the government shouldn't have a mission to encourage higher education?
When society is bent on harming your industry by any means, then why hire people
lets sort this in the right order:
"when industry is bent on harming OUR society by any means, then why subsidize/support them?"
big oil is clearly a "me, Me, ME! gimme gimme gimme!!" green fest. nothing matters to them but profits and the right to keep doing what they are doing, unless supplies do finally run out OR we've ruined our environment so bad its unlivable here.
of couse, those that make decisions wont' be alive for the fallout (so to speak). they are fat (literally) dumb and happy to keep on keepin' on.
there should be zero respect for any industry that works that way.
of course, this is the US, backwards-land as it is, these days ;(
A recent PBS show noted that until recent years, Wall Street workers made about the same amount of money as doctors and lawyers. Now many of them make salaries and bonuses that boggle the minds of regular people. They went on to say that this happened once before--just before the great depression. How is it in my best interest, with my 401K in the market, if Wall Street is more concerned about their checking account than mine?
Then let's talk about about the flap over a major bank instituting a $5/month fee for their debit card holders because, well, they weren't making enough money. In years past when the economy was down, businesses tightened their belts, realized that their customers were having a hard time too, and waited it out. Now it's, screw our customers, we need more revenue.
It's also been commented on /. how the wireless companies, which are near monopolies, keep trying to maximize profits by any means. This, I think, is at least partially because the early growth they enjoyed (and Wall Street loved) has gone away as new customers have dwindled due to market saturation. This "growth at any cost" mentality ships jobs offshore, shrinking the very market most of these companies are targeting.
Looking for more and more tax breaks/subsidies and expecting the poor and middle class to have fewer breaks/higher taxes is an example of industry bent on harming our society.
Wish I could mod this up.
It's a shame that the FCC doesn't make the carriers divest the network, regulate the network operators, and let the carriers buy airtime/data from the network. Kind of like the power companies in some states.
Doesn't LTE actually converge these 2 standards - CDMA and GSM into one?
Well, you could potentially use VoIP on LTE, but where you don't have LTE, you still have to fall back on GSM or CDMA. IIRC, LTE also uses spectrum more efficiently than 3G, so all of the carriers with LTE would like to migrate their users over to 4G phones.
The sad part is that if the developers had chosen a name that would be acceptable in professional and school environments, and if it had a well-designed user's group, GIMP could possibly have made a sizable dent in Photo Shop's market share. It's a powerful image manipulation program, but if users are put off by the name, they won't try it. If they try it but can't resolve issues they have using it, via a user's group in this case. And the UI needs to be at least somewhat intuitive/logical or they won't use it.
I hate it when someone does a better job of making a point I was trying to make.
We can argue all day about what a fair amount for each person is, and of course some people are going to deny that they gain any benefit, direct or indirect, from public systems. In the end, pretty much everyone who pays taxes is going to think that they are paying too much and some other group is paying too little.
Check it again. For 100+ you click the "quote" button to get quantity pricing.
Well, this is a single data point, but the only outdoor sign I've seen contains an x86-based MB and drives the two LED displays as a single QVGA 'monitor.' This could work, except that in an outdoor environment, enclosed within the sign, the temperature extremes are not going to be friendly to a densely-packed system.
If someone (people/companies) benefit from an infrastructure (e.g. graduates from schools), then they should bear some of the costs. That does not mean that a majority of the population is trying to get a minority of the population to pay for things that they "want." We can argue all day about what would be considered fair, but you get the idea.
From your previous comment about monopolies, you are missing the point. The poster was talking about competition between states to get corporations to operate there. Companies can legally 'dodge' taxes by playing games described in the OP. The burden then falls on other taxpayers, while often times most of the taxes that are paid by the employer and their employees end up somewhere else. Some states win and others lose. Yes, you can say that corporations might move out of the country if their tax rate is too high. But that doesn't negate the issue.
It's all about fairness. You can have two people who each makes $1M, one by running a small business and the other's income is mostly from capital gains. Guess who pay more? Often times a lot more. We can argue that we should raise the taxes on the capital gains, or adjust the taxes on both so that they both pay the same amount and the total taxes paid is revenue-neutral. Again, who benefits and what's fair?
Well, TSMC is a foundry. Wikipedia says GDSII is the industry-standard way of exchanging data for PCB and IC layout.--I should have known that since I've worked in the IC industry. No reason for most software and IT people to know those terms. Technical writers generally know that you define the acronym the first time they use it and then use the acronym afterwards. /. articles don't follow that rule. I guess so the people who know those terms can flame those who don't.
I'm guessing you could end up writing a lot of code to define how you want input and output to flow from the SoC.
Don't elect anyone.
Simplified that for ya.
The best thing we can do is to eliminate religions. All of them. Religions have been responsible for stoping progress, scientific discoveries, medical improvements, etc., while at the same time being responsible for the deaths of millions.
"Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings."
Interesting that you should say that, considering that Protestant groups were instrumental in setting up universities in the US.
You forgot Mac vs. Windows.
I think physics is going to limit charging times to way longer than that. IIRC, 1HP is roughly equivalent to 770 watts. So drive for 5 hours using 1HP. Now replace that energy. As a comparison, imagine placing you hand on a 100W incandescent bulb (which converts all but a fraction of its power input into heat). See how long you can hold your hand on that bulb. Now think about the heat produced by 770W, multiplied by the actual number of HP that your electric car needs to use to actually drive at reasonable speeds. No way that you can convert all of that energy into a chemical reaction without serious heating. Unless you can get 99%+ electrical to chemical conversion efficiencies.
Nuclear power is great, just it demands that people running it not be money-grubbing profit-seekers. Maybe they should be run like non-profits and forced to spend the excess money they have on improvements and new technology.
I'd argue that even as a non-profit/government entity, operation of nuclear power plants will degenerate to what takes the least effort. Profit is not the only goal that can cause problems. It certainly wasn't the issue for the Challenger.
So again, he took the position he did because the Constitution, as understood by Libertarians, specifically prohibits the federal government from taking the right to decide what is and isn't legal marriage away from the states, as the Constitution does not specifically enumerate it as a federal power.
Couldn't you use the same argument that when women couldn't vote, there shouldn't have been an amendment, but that it should have gone through the courts? How many amendments would fail RP's test? Is this saying that the Federal Government, or the people via an amendment, cannot proactively say something is a Constitutionally protected right that cannot be taken away by any state?
That's exactly my point. I know a lot of Christians who believe that we are caretakers of the earth. The Christians I know are liberal, libertarian, and conservative. Lots of those last, but I live in North Texas, so the data is skewed. And I'm really afraid of the radical right in the Republican party, the same party that claims to have a strong Christian base. But I suspect that the leaders of the radical right are mainly a bunch of sociopaths, and yes, they probably do get the support of the conservative Christians by playing to their fears. That sort of manipulation has no doubt gone on for centuries, and is not limited to Republicans/Christians. Blame a lot of Christians for being easily manipulated, sure. But evil? Pushing to accelerate the end of the world? Not so much.
That is why the Christians don't see any point in conservation for the future because they pray for their evil god to destroy the world, so it does not matter if they leave nothing for the next generation.
Wow. Massive generalization much?
What it seems to boil down to is that: 1. The residents of each state owe the sales tax on the taxable items they buy, regardless of the source. 2. The states collect this tax from the in-state merchants for their (the state's) convenience--it's easier to verify compliance on a small group rather than a large one. 3. They want to apply the same collection method to out of state merchants.
Ignoring constitutional issues, then to reduce the burden on those collecting the tax, it needs to be just the base tax that's collected by the state. A local merchant knows exactly what tax rate to apply because that rate is based upon the physical location of the store, not the address of the buyer. So you use the base tax rate, and apply it only to the items that the state requires the tax be paid on.
If the states want this to happen, then they'll need to get the federal government on board somehow. I'd say that's not likely to happen, but then we've got legislators who'd like to tax imputed income on things like living in a home that you own free and clear.
Maybe something like this could be added to new comm satellites. Use an ion engine from LEO to GSO with enough fuel to bring it to re-entry at end of life. Or, maybe put back into LEO to refit and use again. As far as the Van Allen belt is concerned, shielding of sensitive components would be required.
Interesting. The report http://thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/hughes-windpower.pdf states "...would require a total investment of some £120 billion in wind turbines and back-up. The same amount of electricity could be generated by gas-fired power plants that would only cost £13 billion..." OK, fine. But that's the cost of the hardware. How much is the cost of fuel to run those gas-fired power plants? Wind turbines and gas-fired plants both require maintenance and overhaul/replacement, but wind is free, however intermittent. They are also claiming pretty low capacity (10-20% of theoretical). Based on just that one section, it looks to me like they are intentionally playing games with the numbers to make wind power look much more expensive than it really is.
God, where are my mod +1 points when I need them?
Reading the excerpt sec 5, it looks like the act only allows the FCC to adopt/amend a rule protecting online privacy. The act does not require that the FCC do so. If I'm reading that correctly, then Walden is correct that there is no such protection in the act.
I suspect that because your FB account may contain information that prospective employers cannot ask about, it would probably be found to be illegal for them to access your account by the courts. However, lawsuits are public record, so if you sue a prospective employer over this, you'll probably never be hired by any firm that does a background check.