You just made my decision for me - I will never buy anything associated with Blu-Ray, as you have just indicated that it is a stop-gap for a diskless content delivery system in approx. 5 years but no more than 10.
I guess I'll just hold on to my "plain old" DVD's and non-HD TV until then, or show patronage to another company's products/standards.
No, because ask slashdot is used for submitters asking the slashdot member base a question, not a call for slashdot to ask questions to an interview guest.
Are you an investment professional? I would guess not, because whether young or old, investment timeframe is a factor that needs to be considered, and unless you are extremely investment savvy, stocks would be an inappropriate investment for one who has a timeframe of 5 years. It's akin to gambling.
Note - the below does not constitute financial advice, past performance does not guarantee future returns, etc. etc.
While an index fund is certainly a great core component of a retirement plan (I prefer actively managed funds myself, or at least index funds not tied to a cap-weighted index like the S&P 500), I don't necessarily think that it is where he should put his bank account savings while he is in college. It is definitely where he should put a large portion of his McDonald's (or whoever) 401(k) if that's available to him at this point.
Mid- to long-term bonds suck right now, and he's got 5 years, so he might as well get a CD or put it in a money market. This gives him access to it for a rainy day if necessary, and should hopefully give him 5-6% returns if not more, depending on the world climate over the next few years. Maybe do some reasearch and take a flyer w/5% of it to be invested in some penny stock that could potentially turn him into a multi-millionaire, but if he loses it won't put him out on the street.
You still haven't explain why you refuse to accept that Photoshop MIGHT ACTUALLY BE more intuitive than the GIMP!
I don't use either more than casually, and don't have an opinion either way, but it seems strange that you can believe that people like PS better ONLY if they're used to it as opposed to the GIMP.
Adobe has made PS for a long time and geared it toward professional users. I'd have to believe there's AT LEAST A CHANCE that it's superior to the GIMP in the area of user interface, if not others.
If it becomes #3, why not place a notice in your auction "Popular online payment methods accepted. Please contact for details." Should be blatantly obvious to anyone that you're referring to the google method without actually mentioning it.
The problem is that this has nothing to do with copywright infringement - it is shutting off PC's without WGA installed, whether it's a legal install or not.
It's just like how investing works in general. You can have the instant gratification of that $1 million, or if you wait 35 years, you can have anywhere from 3-8x that amount in the current day's dollars. People like yourself would probably pick the $1 million now for the good it will do, without looking at the big picture. Most people think like you, and that's why a lot of the middle class will be just as dependant as the poor on Social Security and other such governmental programs when they retire, because they're spending their excess cash on plasma TV's and SUV's instead of investing it for their retirement like the rich (or those who will turn out to be rich who might not be at the present moment).
Fortunately for the unfortunate, Warren Buffet does NOT think like you. He was not worth $40+ billion 35 years ago. There are always unfortunate people to help, and he has done the greater deed by holding out so that he could provide the largest contribution he possibly could in the scope of his years on this earth.
So your argument in favor of the death tax is to prevent a parent from passing their wealth to their children, yet you use the example of people like GWB who has benefitted from "dynastic" money and power despite it (remember he is a 3rd generation politician, not 2nd).
I would say that, based on your example, it doesn't work because it's either ineffectual or avoided for the super rich and/or influential, meaning it's only the working stiffs and upper middle class who die earlier than anticipated or planned the most effectively for retirement that are afflicted by this tax. I think the idea that the recepients of this money did nothing to earn it is preposterous; neither did the beneficiaries of charities, welfare, etc. do anything to "deserve" the money. The person obtained the money and it should be theirs to do as they choose, no matter to what socialistic utopian ideal you subscribe. This is whether they do give it to charity, or give it to their children, or blow it on coke and hookers when that terminal illness is announced. If you have a problem with it, YOU make your own money and do what YOU want with it, and be happy. Don't tell me or anybody else how to live my life.
Bingo. It's just like grocery stores saying they're not responsible for cart damage to your car (they are) or the bowling alley not being responsible for damage to your ball (they are, within reason). Disclaimers like these are an attempt to prevent frivilous lawsuits. As seen by this article, it doesn't always work.
1. I'd be ok with this ALL tickets were auctioned, bringing the very real possibility that the last row of the 3rd bowl tickets could go for $5 (just as front row goes for $1000). The average price would still probably go up for the popular stuff AND Ticketmaster and the artist/sporting event retain a higher amount of the profits for the premium tickets. Plus average bums who would be happy just to be there finally could afford to do so on a more frequent basis. Everybody wins (unless you're an unpopular event that nevertheless still sells a decent amount of tickets or even sells out above market value).
1a. However, the possibility of the $5 last row ticket is exactly why Ticketmaster DOESN'T do this. They would say that's unacceptable, cheats the artist by cheapening the "event", blah blah blah, ignoring all the other factors increasing revenue and profits listed above. Just like record companies pushing for "variable pricing" on iTunes is not about keeping the average at $0.99 or dropping some tracks below that point.
2. What surety do we have that Ticketmaster (or somebody, choose your villain) won't pump up these auctions if they find prices "lagging" below expectations, or no matter what? eBay has a lot more of a "neutral" stance to try to prevent this from occuring in my mind, because their profits are not positively affected by scamming brokers pumping up the price; at least, not to the direct effect it will have on Tickemaster's profits.
3. Wouldn't this make scalping laws irrelevant? Why would it be illegal to purchase a ticket in a publically accessable auction and then "flip it" at an even higher price? Or buy a bunch of those $5 tickets and sell them at $10. This happens every day on the stock market, which is essentially what Ticketmaster is aiming to become: The Charles Schwab of event tickets.
This is one of the most disturbing ideas I've heard about in a long time. They're limiting the number of fan club tickets sold (at least, according to Pearl Jam's fan club management), they're raising the price and number of fees for no discernable reason, and any reasonable person can see that they have a larger monopoly than Microsoft and are leveraging it even more with business practices like these.
There really needs to be an artists' revolt here. Most of their money comes from touring because they're already screwed by the RIAA.
I've experienced the same thing. I'm 24, occassional pain in my wrists, but keep a hand strengthener at my desk and use it throughout the day, never had a problem since.
Are you kidding me? Digital camera pics are ALREADY above 10 megapixels, and are not even a quarter of the resolution I can get from 35mm slide film in my home (let alone on a drum scanner). That's not even talking about medium or large (or XL) formats of film. No, it's not going to stop until 100 megapixels and even that is probably not enough to satisfy everyone.
Sure, 10 megapixels is overkill for 4x6. But if you're an artist (whether artistic or commercial) and need to make gallery size reproductions, 10 megapixels does not cut it.
Slashdot Mirror
Because Stone Cold....err, Microsoft, says so!!!
This, coming from the Beta/MD/etc. et al company? The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The only systems I know of that lasted 10 years were the Atari 2600 and original NES. It just doesn't work that way anymore.
You just made my decision for me - I will never buy anything associated with Blu-Ray, as you have just indicated that it is a stop-gap for a diskless content delivery system in approx. 5 years but no more than 10.
I guess I'll just hold on to my "plain old" DVD's and non-HD TV until then, or show patronage to another company's products/standards.
No, because ask slashdot is used for submitters asking the slashdot member base a question, not a call for slashdot to ask questions to an interview guest.
You're right on the second part, though.
I want to know how this could be patented anyway, as it's an idea or business plan? How can that be protected by patent?
Are you an investment professional? I would guess not, because whether young or old, investment timeframe is a factor that needs to be considered, and unless you are extremely investment savvy, stocks would be an inappropriate investment for one who has a timeframe of 5 years. It's akin to gambling.
Note - the below does not constitute financial advice, past performance does not guarantee future returns, etc. etc.
While an index fund is certainly a great core component of a retirement plan (I prefer actively managed funds myself, or at least index funds not tied to a cap-weighted index like the S&P 500), I don't necessarily think that it is where he should put his bank account savings while he is in college. It is definitely where he should put a large portion of his McDonald's (or whoever) 401(k) if that's available to him at this point.
Mid- to long-term bonds suck right now, and he's got 5 years, so he might as well get a CD or put it in a money market. This gives him access to it for a rainy day if necessary, and should hopefully give him 5-6% returns if not more, depending on the world climate over the next few years. Maybe do some reasearch and take a flyer w/5% of it to be invested in some penny stock that could potentially turn him into a multi-millionaire, but if he loses it won't put him out on the street.
Well, according to some religious sects, man and dinosaurs roamed the earth together at the beginning of earth about 6,000 years ago....
You still haven't explain why you refuse to accept that Photoshop MIGHT ACTUALLY BE more intuitive than the GIMP!
I don't use either more than casually, and don't have an opinion either way, but it seems strange that you can believe that people like PS better ONLY if they're used to it as opposed to the GIMP.
Adobe has made PS for a long time and geared it toward professional users. I'd have to believe there's AT LEAST A CHANCE that it's superior to the GIMP in the area of user interface, if not others.
If it becomes #3, why not place a notice in your auction "Popular online payment methods accepted. Please contact for details." Should be blatantly obvious to anyone that you're referring to the google method without actually mentioning it.
The problem is that this has nothing to do with copywright infringement - it is shutting off PC's without WGA installed, whether it's a legal install or not.
Make the bid amount double-blind and only allow buyers to place their maximum bid one time. Problem solved.
Let's assume that, properly invested, your wealth accumulation doubles every 7 years (avg 10% per year gain, which is about right).
O LLAR&use%5B%5D=GDPDEFLATION&use%5B%5D=UNSKILLED&us e%5B%5D=NOMGDPCP&use%5B%5D=NOMINALGDP&amount2=1&ye ar2=1970&year_result=&amount=&year_source=/.
Let's say I'm 55, and I have $1 million dollars in "excess wealth". If I donate everything to charity after I die and that is at age 80, that is $32 million. Based on the 35 years from 1970 - 2005, inflation only makes the original $1 million worth somewhere between $4 and $12 million, depending on how you look at it (see http://eh.net/hmit/compare/result.php?use%5B%5D=D
It's just like how investing works in general. You can have the instant gratification of that $1 million, or if you wait 35 years, you can have anywhere from 3-8x that amount in the current day's dollars. People like yourself would probably pick the $1 million now for the good it will do, without looking at the big picture. Most people think like you, and that's why a lot of the middle class will be just as dependant as the poor on Social Security and other such governmental programs when they retire, because they're spending their excess cash on plasma TV's and SUV's instead of investing it for their retirement like the rich (or those who will turn out to be rich who might not be at the present moment).
Fortunately for the unfortunate, Warren Buffet does NOT think like you. He was not worth $40+ billion 35 years ago. There are always unfortunate people to help, and he has done the greater deed by holding out so that he could provide the largest contribution he possibly could in the scope of his years on this earth.
So your argument in favor of the death tax is to prevent a parent from passing their wealth to their children, yet you use the example of people like GWB who has benefitted from "dynastic" money and power despite it (remember he is a 3rd generation politician, not 2nd).
I would say that, based on your example, it doesn't work because it's either ineffectual or avoided for the super rich and/or influential, meaning it's only the working stiffs and upper middle class who die earlier than anticipated or planned the most effectively for retirement that are afflicted by this tax. I think the idea that the recepients of this money did nothing to earn it is preposterous; neither did the beneficiaries of charities, welfare, etc. do anything to "deserve" the money. The person obtained the money and it should be theirs to do as they choose, no matter to what socialistic utopian ideal you subscribe. This is whether they do give it to charity, or give it to their children, or blow it on coke and hookers when that terminal illness is announced. If you have a problem with it, YOU make your own money and do what YOU want with it, and be happy. Don't tell me or anybody else how to live my life.
Welcome to 1998!
Seriously, I know you're not from the US, but this issue has been discussed here and many other places repeatedly.
Bingo. It's just like grocery stores saying they're not responsible for cart damage to your car (they are) or the bowling alley not being responsible for damage to your ball (they are, within reason). Disclaimers like these are an attempt to prevent frivilous lawsuits. As seen by this article, it doesn't always work.
What language is that?
You mean like the precidents allowing people to make copies of stuff they legally own (e.g. DVD to VHS)?
1. I'd be ok with this ALL tickets were auctioned, bringing the very real possibility that the last row of the 3rd bowl tickets could go for $5 (just as front row goes for $1000). The average price would still probably go up for the popular stuff AND Ticketmaster and the artist/sporting event retain a higher amount of the profits for the premium tickets. Plus average bums who would be happy just to be there finally could afford to do so on a more frequent basis. Everybody wins (unless you're an unpopular event that nevertheless still sells a decent amount of tickets or even sells out above market value).
1a. However, the possibility of the $5 last row ticket is exactly why Ticketmaster DOESN'T do this. They would say that's unacceptable, cheats the artist by cheapening the "event", blah blah blah, ignoring all the other factors increasing revenue and profits listed above. Just like record companies pushing for "variable pricing" on iTunes is not about keeping the average at $0.99 or dropping some tracks below that point.
2. What surety do we have that Ticketmaster (or somebody, choose your villain) won't pump up these auctions if they find prices "lagging" below expectations, or no matter what? eBay has a lot more of a "neutral" stance to try to prevent this from occuring in my mind, because their profits are not positively affected by scamming brokers pumping up the price; at least, not to the direct effect it will have on Tickemaster's profits.
3. Wouldn't this make scalping laws irrelevant? Why would it be illegal to purchase a ticket in a publically accessable auction and then "flip it" at an even higher price? Or buy a bunch of those $5 tickets and sell them at $10. This happens every day on the stock market, which is essentially what Ticketmaster is aiming to become: The Charles Schwab of event tickets.
This is one of the most disturbing ideas I've heard about in a long time. They're limiting the number of fan club tickets sold (at least, according to Pearl Jam's fan club management), they're raising the price and number of fees for no discernable reason, and any reasonable person can see that they have a larger monopoly than Microsoft and are leveraging it even more with business practices like these.
There really needs to be an artists' revolt here. Most of their money comes from touring because they're already screwed by the RIAA.
Monopolies suck.
Back it up to 30 and you could be talking about Led Zeppelin lyrics. There is more to lit than stuffy old novels.
I've experienced the same thing. I'm 24, occassional pain in my wrists, but keep a hand strengthener at my desk and use it throughout the day, never had a problem since.
Maybe the bottom 5% or even the bottom 1%, but the bottom 60%? Get real.
Are you kidding me? Digital camera pics are ALREADY above 10 megapixels, and are not even a quarter of the resolution I can get from 35mm slide film in my home (let alone on a drum scanner). That's not even talking about medium or large (or XL) formats of film. No, it's not going to stop until 100 megapixels and even that is probably not enough to satisfy everyone.
Sure, 10 megapixels is overkill for 4x6. But if you're an artist (whether artistic or commercial) and need to make gallery size reproductions, 10 megapixels does not cut it.
......these amps go to 11!