But the rich won't be paying for this. The high-end systems applicable here are bought by companies with the processing need. As do all, these companies pay for all costs out of the revenue their particular business model generates. All sustained increases in overhead are passed down either directly through price increases or offset by cost reductions elsewhere. Reductions often are realized through staff and salary cuts. They are also realized through less money going out the door to other companies such as vendors and suppliers. In the end, the rich will still get their cake, and the rest will be left with an empty serving tray.
Costs are passed down through pricing. UPS will price accordingly, and Amazon will pay more. The buyer will, in turn, pay more for the "free" shipping since Amazon isn't going to eat increases longterm.
I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps delivery without receiver present isn't for everyone. These people can just go get the widget like people have done for centuries, have someone at home to or a trusted neighbor handle the delivery, or ship to alternate locations. The hassle of stolen packages will be replaced by burglaries once this device goes on the door. An entered home is a cased home. It doesn't have to be the courier. Bob, the honest and upstanding UPS guy, might just run his mouth about all the shit he sees on Happy Lane and do so around his shady nephew.
Humans keep putting humans out of work through automation, and there will never be a replacement job for all those displaced. We all really need to give a damn and consider the long term impact of this on society, not just those we care about. The wealthy will be the only ones earning money in the end will not spend enough to support employing everyone in other roles. As long as they prevent sufficient taxation of the Haves, the lives of the Have-Nots will not be supported by the economies of the world. Remember, the wealthy make their money with money and can do so anywhere in the world all while living where it remains most safe and comfortable.
I am not commenting on whether or not "DirectTV" is shitty or not. I am here only to share that AT&T is now also using the brand for non- satelite TV service just in case you and others don't know this. They recently rebranded their U-verse TV offerings as DirectTV, and these are provided over wire to the premises.
She's probably working on tasks many of us complete after the workday is done and before bed and/or not using the first hour of her paid workday to finish waking up.
Yep! The sad thing is that when all shakes out, it is the 1% that walks away with all the gains while leaving the 99% to eat all the losses. This is the purpose of the IPO. Go public and then trade your VC stake for other people's cash before the business model is known to be shit causing the supposed company value to drop back to zip.
Interesting! Surely they are tracking these connections as well to at least manage abusers. If they aren't policing these connections, it does look like a possible way to skirt, albeit with drawbacks for sure, the cap. I imagine a bridge could maybe be put in place to connect a person's router/firewall equipped LAN to Cox's public-side WiFi network provided by the person's own Cox-provided router. If Cox is paying close enough attention, one would need to distribute their usage in such a way that both the private and public routes are being used, and this can't be a switch once the cap has been reached. Such a switch would be a tell-tale sign of skirting. Instead, the person would have to maintain two networks where some devices hang off the private route network and the rest hang off the public route network.
These days a ton of people are watching all of their TV via Netflix, Youtube...
Plus, the cap applies to the account, and households with more than one person are having to share the monthly usage allotted by the account's service plan. I have one user in my house, me, as a general rule, so I am not likely to find an imposed cap to be a problem. If I had a wife and a couple of kids, I'd be in a different boat.
A big problem with software today and for years is that we don't concern ourselves with hardware specs to anywhere near the degree we should. Instead, resources are wasted left and right, because we're not limited by an 8Mhz processor and 64K RAM.
Hmmm... I wonder if there is anything available that will create a playable vinyl record without pressing. Think inscribing a vinyl blank according to a job based on an MP3 file or other format. Such a device would make possible the conversion of one's collection for playback with the record player experience in place of buying new albums. Obvious, many of these people have an old collection and/or built one by buying used records.
The bugs probably came to the house initially from someone's home. They likely will return to the office again if all employee homes aren't included in the kill approach.
So what happens when the federal government adapts a "screw the citizen" attitude?
Special interests own politicians at all levels, and this will never change. It might just be the wealthy family on the hill that has in their pocket the supposedly elected by the people mayor of Tiny Town, USA. It may be a global conglomerate behometh that owns half the U.S. House. This might be less of a problem if politicians were not allowed to have consecutive terms, and terms were kept short enough. It would be harder to buy individuals with so many in play and when the person isn't to be in office long enough for something desired to be brought to fruition through corrupted mechanisms. By the way, that wealthy family probably owns your state and federal representatives as well since the ruling class is the wealthy class. Politicians are either wealthy or a puppet for the wealthy.
The constitution gave most of the power to the states. Every yahoo who wants to enshrine their special interest...
Just as with all bad situations, society would have to work to improve our goverment. We'd work to change a government that had adopted a "screw the citizen" attitude. We don't have to abandon the Federal system to do this. Now, independent of this, I'd advocate for further changes to the constitution through more amendments and shift more power from state governments to the Federal government. While our forefathers had great foresight, they could not anticipate all and planned entirely for what the country and society faces now and will face as it all continues to evolve. I'd also make a lot of other changes from top to bottom, government and otherwise.
A problem with leaving more up to the state or even local government entities is that what happens or doesn't happen in Gary, Indiana, does, at least indirectly, affect people living in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Even though we are a federation of states, people, products, and services move across borders. Polluted air and water, disease, and economic hardships do as well. So, the people of one state have a vested interest in how things are done in other states and should have the ability to affect this before becoming victims of short-sited agendas, weak regulations, and outright disinterest in what is best.
What makes you think humans are evolved enough to run a democratic system that large?
I actually have little faith in the general population's ability to do anything where self-interest isn't the highest priority. Individuals are selfish and would have to first think about the short-term and long-term needs of the group for any type of system to function effectively, and this includes thoughs elected as representatives. Individuals must consider how their decisions and actions are to affect the world, and they aren't good for this. Now, I do still believe we should not give up on this idea of working together and should try. We should then hold accountable those that work against this.
So, what is a person to do when all of the states supporting his or her real life needs adopt the same "screw the citizen" approach? This notion that a person can just move to a city or state that works for them or take their money to a business that is not trying to screw over the consumer in an endless pursuit of unreasonable profit is bullshit. Choice tends to not exist in the practical sense, because there is no alternative when all are the same. This is specifically true for profit driven businesses. What are you going to do when your state of choice creates a legal and regulatory environment not to your liking? Are you to insist that it be decided at the town/city level?
While I do not know the history of the owl species or airfield, it is possible the owl found sanctuary at the closed airfield and thrived after having been displaced by human encroachment elsewhere. We're great at fucking over other species.
I press [Tab] to indent for convenience. I configure editors to insert two spaces for each press of the [Tab] key and convert all existing TABs to spaces upon saving. I prefer spaces and like the indention increment set to two.
You'd still need to manually connect to the store's WiFI network for a phone not already configured to auto-connect to it as a known network and/or all open hotspots. I feel it is best to require manual connections.
Yep, and another problem with the notion that consumers can just take their business elsewhere is that most businesses selling at similar pricing have or will soon have the same practices. A for-profit business is going to do everything legally possible to increase margins and then everything illegal, unethical, and/or shitty they can get away with for the same goal.
It isn't for positions that aren't paid bonuses ever or received no bonus(es) for a particular time period. For those that are, bonuses probably are seldom based on individual performance across the company as a whole and are, instead, based on something larger such as department, line of business, and company-wide quarterly or annual performance. In this scenario, the bonus is paid equally across a given role or in a way that correlates to one's base. Still, the data is there, and the math can be done with a simple enough spreadsheet formula.
Slashdot Mirror
But the rich won't be paying for this. The high-end systems applicable here are bought by companies with the processing need. As do all, these companies pay for all costs out of the revenue their particular business model generates. All sustained increases in overhead are passed down either directly through price increases or offset by cost reductions elsewhere. Reductions often are realized through staff and salary cuts. They are also realized through less money going out the door to other companies such as vendors and suppliers. In the end, the rich will still get their cake, and the rest will be left with an empty serving tray.
Costs are passed down through pricing. UPS will price accordingly, and Amazon will pay more. The buyer will, in turn, pay more for the "free" shipping since Amazon isn't going to eat increases longterm.
I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps delivery without receiver present isn't for everyone. These people can just go get the widget like people have done for centuries, have someone at home to or a trusted neighbor handle the delivery, or ship to alternate locations. The hassle of stolen packages will be replaced by burglaries once this device goes on the door. An entered home is a cased home. It doesn't have to be the courier. Bob, the honest and upstanding UPS guy, might just run his mouth about all the shit he sees on Happy Lane and do so around his shady nephew.
This is a good idea, and the approach is low cost and subscription free.
Plus, in my opinion, Edge makes for horrible user-experience.
This is funny.
Humans keep putting humans out of work through automation, and there will never be a replacement job for all those displaced. We all really need to give a damn and consider the long term impact of this on society, not just those we care about. The wealthy will be the only ones earning money in the end will not spend enough to support employing everyone in other roles. As long as they prevent sufficient taxation of the Haves, the lives of the Have-Nots will not be supported by the economies of the world. Remember, the wealthy make their money with money and can do so anywhere in the world all while living where it remains most safe and comfortable.
I am not commenting on whether or not "DirectTV" is shitty or not. I am here only to share that AT&T is now also using the brand for non- satelite TV service just in case you and others don't know this. They recently rebranded their U-verse TV offerings as DirectTV, and these are provided over wire to the premises.
She's probably working on tasks many of us complete after the workday is done and before bed and/or not using the first hour of her paid workday to finish waking up.
While your statement is true, I was left wondering if you actually meant "swing" instead of "cheat".
Yep! The sad thing is that when all shakes out, it is the 1% that walks away with all the gains while leaving the 99% to eat all the losses. This is the purpose of the IPO. Go public and then trade your VC stake for other people's cash before the business model is known to be shit causing the supposed company value to drop back to zip.
Interesting! Surely they are tracking these connections as well to at least manage abusers. If they aren't policing these connections, it does look like a possible way to skirt, albeit with drawbacks for sure, the cap. I imagine a bridge could maybe be put in place to connect a person's router/firewall equipped LAN to Cox's public-side WiFi network provided by the person's own Cox-provided router. If Cox is paying close enough attention, one would need to distribute their usage in such a way that both the private and public routes are being used, and this can't be a switch once the cap has been reached. Such a switch would be a tell-tale sign of skirting. Instead, the person would have to maintain two networks where some devices hang off the private route network and the rest hang off the public route network.
These days a ton of people are watching all of their TV via Netflix, Youtube...
Plus, the cap applies to the account, and households with more than one person are having to share the monthly usage allotted by the account's service plan. I have one user in my house, me, as a general rule, so I am not likely to find an imposed cap to be a problem. If I had a wife and a couple of kids, I'd be in a different boat.
A big problem with software today and for years is that we don't concern ourselves with hardware specs to anywhere near the degree we should. Instead, resources are wasted left and right, because we're not limited by an 8Mhz processor and 64K RAM.
Hmmm... I wonder if there is anything available that will create a playable vinyl record without pressing. Think inscribing a vinyl blank according to a job based on an MP3 file or other format. Such a device would make possible the conversion of one's collection for playback with the record player experience in place of buying new albums. Obvious, many of these people have an old collection and/or built one by buying used records.
many of the employees now have them at home
The bugs probably came to the house initially from someone's home. They likely will return to the office again if all employee homes aren't included in the kill approach.
So what happens when the federal government adapts a "screw the citizen" attitude?
Special interests own politicians at all levels, and this will never change. It might just be the wealthy family on the hill that has in their pocket the supposedly elected by the people mayor of Tiny Town, USA. It may be a global conglomerate behometh that owns half the U.S. House. This might be less of a problem if politicians were not allowed to have consecutive terms, and terms were kept short enough. It would be harder to buy individuals with so many in play and when the person isn't to be in office long enough for something desired to be brought to fruition through corrupted mechanisms. By the way, that wealthy family probably owns your state and federal representatives as well since the ruling class is the wealthy class. Politicians are either wealthy or a puppet for the wealthy.
The constitution gave most of the power to the states. Every yahoo who wants to enshrine their special interest...
Just as with all bad situations, society would have to work to improve our goverment. We'd work to change a government that had adopted a "screw the citizen" attitude. We don't have to abandon the Federal system to do this. Now, independent of this, I'd advocate for further changes to the constitution through more amendments and shift more power from state governments to the Federal government. While our forefathers had great foresight, they could not anticipate all and planned entirely for what the country and society faces now and will face as it all continues to evolve. I'd also make a lot of other changes from top to bottom, government and otherwise. A problem with leaving more up to the state or even local government entities is that what happens or doesn't happen in Gary, Indiana, does, at least indirectly, affect people living in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Even though we are a federation of states, people, products, and services move across borders. Polluted air and water, disease, and economic hardships do as well. So, the people of one state have a vested interest in how things are done in other states and should have the ability to affect this before becoming victims of short-sited agendas, weak regulations, and outright disinterest in what is best.
What makes you think humans are evolved enough to run a democratic system that large?
I actually have little faith in the general population's ability to do anything where self-interest isn't the highest priority. Individuals are selfish and would have to first think about the short-term and long-term needs of the group for any type of system to function effectively, and this includes thoughs elected as representatives. Individuals must consider how their decisions and actions are to affect the world, and they aren't good for this. Now, I do still believe we should not give up on this idea of working together and should try. We should then hold accountable those that work against this.
Let states decide what makes sense
So, what is a person to do when all of the states supporting his or her real life needs adopt the same "screw the citizen" approach? This notion that a person can just move to a city or state that works for them or take their money to a business that is not trying to screw over the consumer in an endless pursuit of unreasonable profit is bullshit. Choice tends to not exist in the practical sense, because there is no alternative when all are the same. This is specifically true for profit driven businesses. What are you going to do when your state of choice creates a legal and regulatory environment not to your liking? Are you to insist that it be decided at the town/city level?
While I do not know the history of the owl species or airfield, it is possible the owl found sanctuary at the closed airfield and thrived after having been displaced by human encroachment elsewhere. We're great at fucking over other species.
I press [Tab] to indent for convenience. I configure editors to insert two spaces for each press of the [Tab] key and convert all existing TABs to spaces upon saving. I prefer spaces and like the indention increment set to two.
You'd still need to manually connect to the store's WiFI network for a phone not already configured to auto-connect to it as a known network and/or all open hotspots. I feel it is best to require manual connections.
Yep, and another problem with the notion that consumers can just take their business elsewhere is that most businesses selling at similar pricing have or will soon have the same practices. A for-profit business is going to do everything legally possible to increase margins and then everything illegal, unethical, and/or shitty they can get away with for the same goal.
It isn't for positions that aren't paid bonuses ever or received no bonus(es) for a particular time period. For those that are, bonuses probably are seldom based on individual performance across the company as a whole and are, instead, based on something larger such as department, line of business, and company-wide quarterly or annual performance. In this scenario, the bonus is paid equally across a given role or in a way that correlates to one's base. Still, the data is there, and the math can be done with a simple enough spreadsheet formula.
Well, a disconnected camera and microphone can't be reconnected by software. A device disabled within the OS can be reenabled by software.
I believe the person is referring to Windows Server Core.